“The whole truth is that the EU Dialogue is dumb. Corrections only won’t suffice to change the current scenario. Rather, a drastic EU`s positioning in this respect is needed”
By Nicasia Picciano, PhD, @NicasiaPi ,
19 December 2023, dtt-net.com – At the recent EU-Western Balkans Summit held in Brussels on 13 December, following the Tirana meeting of last year, enlargement has been viewed as the EU`s most important foreign policy and its strongest geopolitical tool. Otherwise said, if it would fail, this will open the space to others and fuel instability.
As for the Dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo, this has been conceived as a continuous process. Optimism and never-ending promises have been “delivered” to the Kosovo-Serbia relations. The cruel reality, though, is that the EU-Facilitated Dialogue is dead with no exceptions.
Acknowledging this failure even though belated would be beneficial rather than procrastinating a de facto dysfunctional and biased format.
The summit has proclaimed once again the EU membership perspective of the Western Balkans. But, it must also have, right for this purpose, pushed for a crystal clear re-definition of the EU Facilitated Dialogue and sent an unambiguous warning to Serbia. Yet, nothing of this has happened. Rather, it has resembled many of past meetings of this kind reflecting more aspirations and “empty” reiterations than meaningful commitments.
At the summit the EU and Western Balkans leaders reiterated their expectation for a constructive engagement of both parties to make rapid progress in normalizing their relations being critical for the security and stability of the whole region, while ensuring their advancement towards the European Union. They also urged the two parties to fully implement the Agreement on the Path to Normalization and its Implementation Annex as well as past Agreements, without any further delays or preconditions. What`s more, they expected both sides to engage in de-escalation efforts and refrain from unilateral and uncoordinated actions likely to lead to further tensions and violence.
Yet, rightly when Serbia has been obstructing most any advancement in this format, the EU has not undertaken any meaningful action against it. This inaction tells all about the lack of credibility of the Dialogue process.
Also, what has been often referred to as a breakthrough agreement, the Brussels agreement of 27 February 2023, did not turn to be as such in the practice. Its purposes might sound nice on paper. For instance, the commitment of the parties to develop normal, good-neighbourly relations with each other on the basis of equal rights (art. 1); to be guided by the aims and principles laid down in the United Nations Charter, especially the respect of their independence, autonomy and territorial integrity, the right of self-determination, the protection of human rights (art. 2); to settle disputes, in conformity with the UN Charter, exclusively by peaceful means and refrain from the threat of the use of force (art. 3); to assume that neither of the two can represent the other in the international sphere or act on its behalf with Serbia nor objecting Kosovo`s membership in any international organization (art. 4); to continue with new impetus the EU-led Dialogue process leading to a legally binding agreement on comprehensive normalization of their relations (art. 6); to confirm their mutual obligation to implement all past Dialogue agreements remaining valid and binding (art. 10).
The Implementation Annex of March 18 in Ohrid constitutes an integral part of the agreement with the parties taking note that both the agreement and the Annex are inextricable pillars of the respective EU accession processes of Kosovo and Serbia. Besides that, both parties agree not to block the implementation of any of the articles. What`s more, Kosovo and Serbia acknowledge that any failure to honour their obligations from the Agreement and its Annex may have direct negative consequences for their respective EU accession processes and financial aid they might receive from Brussels.
Yet, by looking at the practice and Serbia`s continuous blackmail, culminating with the recent most serious terrorist attack of 24 September, the Ohrid agreement resembles anything than a good one. Following the attack, no measures have been imposed on Serbia so far and information in the Brussels`s circles have been that investigations are going on. Yet, there are proofs of Belgrade`s direct backing the orchestration and management of the heinous aggression. What waiting for?
Last but not least, the recent Ana Brnabić`s official statement is a demonstration that Serbia keeps looking at the Dialogue process in a unilateral way. The reality, though, is that it has been allowed to do so up to now with no restrictions.
Brnabić openly said that the Agreement on the Path to Normalization and its Implementation Annex, as referred to in the Brussels summit Declaration, is to be accepted provided that there won`t be a de facto and de jure recognition of Kosovo. What`s more, Serbia Prime Minister stated that such a document does not constitute a legally binding treaty under international law. Also, she argued that alignment with the Brussels Declaration of 13 December does not prejudice on that Kosovo remains an integral part of the territory of Serbia under international administration pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999).
Serbia government’s recent statement is a clear demonstration once again that it won`t change its position towards Kosovo. This shows how dubious is the frankness surrounding the Agreement and the whole Dialogue process. With such unstable pillars any building would collapse soon or later. In fact, what is in place through the EU-Facilitated Dialogue is a farce. In other words, it much resembles biased engineered modus operandi serving Serbia`s purposes only. A Dialogue should be among partners and on an equal basis. Yet, what it has materialized through this ill-conceived format is a dangerous one-way direction.
In the meantime, a firm positioning for more fairness in the Dialogue has been taken from 13 Chairs of Parliamentary Committees across Europe requesting that all negative measures in place against Kosovo should be reversed and full cooperation with the Kosovar government resumed.
Reference is to the boycott of municipal elections engineered by the Srpska Lista on 23 April, the attack on KFOR on 29 May, arbitrary detention of Kosovar police officers by Serbian authorities on 14 June and the most recent terrorist attack of Banjska on 24 September.
In the view of the 13 Chairs all these events show a pattern of aggression likely to undermine and destabilize Kosovo. The call is, therefore, for the international community’s rejection of irredentism and aggression, while reaffirming the support for Kosovo`s independence and sovereignty.
Last but not least, the request upon the EU, US and UK has been of undertaking a full investigation into the Banjska attack and to publish the results. Serbia must, thus, be accountable for its act of aggression.
The EU should not lose the momentum and urgently implement the requests above. Brussels has invested time and money on the EU Facilitated Dialogue since 2011. But up to now, even though viewed in the EU`s circles as a continuous process, it is not working at all. What`s more, no further meaningful changes are to be expected in the months or even years to come, if its unbalanced and unjust current format is kept alive.
There is, therefore, an urgent need for a paradigm shift and a change of its leadership instead. All in all, the EU`s appeasement policy towards Belgrade has been fatal. The EU has been keeping pleasing an autocratic regime mirroring the Milosevic`s era policies. And this is not acceptable. What`s more, such a way undermines the EU`s credibility as a regional and global actor defending democratic values. The whole truth is that the EU Dialogue is dumb. Corrections only won’t suffice to change the current scenario. Rather, a drastic EU`s positioning in this respect is needed.
———————————————————————————————————————————–
Nicasia Picciano holds a Phd on European Union state-building in Kosovo from the University of Flensburg, Germany. She is the author of the book the European Union State-Building in Kosovo. Challenges and Lessons Learned: An Assessment of EULEX, Dr. Kovač, Hamburg. She has previously worked as a researcher for Kosovo Foundation for Open Society, Prishtina, Group for Legal and Political Studies, Prishtina and Balkans Policy Research Group, Prishtina. Currently, she covers the Western Balkans for Sbunker (Prishtina) and Le Courrier des Balkans (Paris). Her research interests span from peace- and state-building, reconciliation and ethnic conflict, cultural tourism, green energy transition, the Berlin Process and the Connectivity Agenda in Kosovo and the Western Balkans.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of dtt-net.com
