Conjufca's statements that a good deal was reached in Ohrid, Agon Maliqi: Why was the front of the U.S. confrontation opened?

Political analyst Agon Maliqi said Chief Parliamentary Glauk Konjufca has said something important when last night he declared that in Brussels they made a good deal with Serbia.

Maliqi asks if a good deal was made why a confrontational front with the US was opened then.

“Glauk Konjufca yesterday said something important and accurate. He said he seemed to be a good “deal” agreement that, in exchange for the association signed by past governments (without executive competence) be won recognition de facto, or international unblocking. Absolutely, under the current circumstances this is “deal” best possible and Konjufca deserves respect for the courage to accept this publicly. But there's a problem here. Let's put aside the fact that online militia massacred as traitors anyone who proposed this “deal” as good. Many questions remain: why on the road to this “deal <x9x8> opened a confrontational front and was decided to enter into negotiations, not with Serbia, but with the US, which were offered as guarantors of this good “deal” (Remember Choll and Escobar letter)? What was thought to be won with access to the north that conflicted with NATO's interests, and now we're getting boomerang back? Who inside the VV blew their trust on the only actors who can apply this fine deal?

Maliqi has concluded by saying that this contingent has to be resolved because “to say something is good and working against it does not go against”.