Like many people here, I have an interest in the Balkans. I visited the region a few years ago and really liked it. I think there could be a lot of tourism and investment potential there, but just because there hasn't been outright military hostility since the Kosovo conflict doesn't mean that everyone holds hands and sings Kumbaya. A lot of tension still seethes below the surface.
Recently there's been some media coverage about the proposed border swap between Kosovo and Serbia. While I read about the region I'm not extremely knowledgeable about it and I'm not sure what it all means. I started this thread to see what opinions forum members have, especially those that may have a better understanding of the situation.
Here's a summary of what has been reported so far:
- Serbia and Kosovo are both interested in EU membership, but this idea will not be entertained by the EU until the two countries "normalize" relations which presumably includes official recognition of Kosovo by Serbia.
- The two countries proposed swapping regions - Kosovo would take an area of Serbia that is predominantly ethnic Albanian and vice versa.
- The heads of state for the two nations had agreed to meet in Brussels yesterday (Sep 7 2018). Opposition politicians in Kosovo organized mass protests with the reason given being that the proposed deal threatens Kosovo's "territorial integrity"
- Bolton released a statement saying the US would not interfere in the process and would go along with whatever they decide:
The Guardian now refers to it as "the US backed plan" which seems like a weird interpretation to me.
- As it turns out, the italicized part of the Bolton quote is not true, and several European actors have spoken out against the idea. Most notably Merkel:
Her reasoning is that pushing for the existence of states based on ethnicity sets a dangerous precedent.
- Merkel's stance has been criticized by the European Commission and the EU's Enlargement Commissioner (great job title).
- Various parties also oppose the idea arguing that it could reignite ethnic tensions in the regions and lead to similar movements not just in the Balkans but also in Ukraine.
The UK also opposes the plan. Russia has only given vague statements.
However RT reports "Kosovo-Seriva land swap could send whole region into turmoil."
https://www.rt.com/news/437583-kosovo-serbia-land-swap/
- The proposed meeting between the two presidents did not take place yesterday. The following article reports that the Serbian president wanted to visit Gazivode Lake in Northern Kosovo but was not given permission whereas other sources such as Reuters say both presidents called off the talks or the talks "fell through".
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/...09-07-2018
Here's another interpretation:
---
As usual it seems there's a lot going on below the surface that isn't being reported, but in many of these cases it's difficult to understand the motivations. It seems that the US/UK's desire has always been to integrate Serbia into the Western economic system (hence the "humanitarian intervention" by "NATO" in 1999), and therefore integration into the EU would be their top priority, so I'm not understanding why the US and UK are diverging here unless post-Brexit UK prefers to limit EU expansion. As for Germany, Merkel's motivations seem pretty transparent in light of her domestic policy of actively eroding ethnic homogeneity.
Austria and Luxembourg oppose the border swap while Belgium and Romania echo Bolton's sentiment that it's up to the two sides to work it out.
So what is really going on here? It seemed there was a lot of momentum for the talks and then they fall apart at the last minute. Did they really intend to meet or was it all a big game of chicken? If so what was the purpose of all the posturing?
This is where my understanding of the situation reaches its limits so what are your thoughts?
Recently there's been some media coverage about the proposed border swap between Kosovo and Serbia. While I read about the region I'm not extremely knowledgeable about it and I'm not sure what it all means. I started this thread to see what opinions forum members have, especially those that may have a better understanding of the situation.
Here's a summary of what has been reported so far:
- Serbia and Kosovo are both interested in EU membership, but this idea will not be entertained by the EU until the two countries "normalize" relations which presumably includes official recognition of Kosovo by Serbia.
- The two countries proposed swapping regions - Kosovo would take an area of Serbia that is predominantly ethnic Albanian and vice versa.
- The heads of state for the two nations had agreed to meet in Brussels yesterday (Sep 7 2018). Opposition politicians in Kosovo organized mass protests with the reason given being that the proposed deal threatens Kosovo's "territorial integrity"
- Bolton released a statement saying the US would not interfere in the process and would go along with whatever they decide:
Quote:Quote:.
Our policy, the U.S. policy, is that if the two parties can work it out between themselves and reach agreement, we don’t exclude territorial adjustments. It’s really not for us to say...We would not stand in the way, and I don’t think anybody in Europe would stand in the way if the two parties to the dispute reached a mutually satisfactory settlement
Quote:Quote:
According to two sources familiar with Trump administration’s thinking, the new policy is “no red lines but no blank cheques”, meaning the US is willing to look at any solution, including border changes, but will not necessarily endorse it in the end. Some EU officials have hinted they may also be willing to back a deal that involves border changes.
The Guardian now refers to it as "the US backed plan" which seems like a weird interpretation to me.
- As it turns out, the italicized part of the Bolton quote is not true, and several European actors have spoken out against the idea. Most notably Merkel:
Quote:Quote:
The territorial integrity of the states of the Western Balkans has been established and is inviolable...This has to be said again and again because again and again there are attempts to perhaps talk about borders and we can't do that
Her reasoning is that pushing for the existence of states based on ethnicity sets a dangerous precedent.
- Merkel's stance has been criticized by the European Commission and the EU's Enlargement Commissioner (great job title).
- Various parties also oppose the idea arguing that it could reignite ethnic tensions in the regions and lead to similar movements not just in the Balkans but also in Ukraine.
Quote:Quote:
The idea to partition Kosovo [is] just a reboot of Milosevic’s ‘Greater Serbia’ project, and as then, the ultimate target is not Kosovo but Bosnia and Herzegovina,” Jasmin Mujanovic, an analyst of the Balkans, told Newsweek. “If the international community agrees to a ‘land swap’ in Kosovo, Vucic [president of Serbia] will next insist — as he and his underlings already do — that Bosnia and Herzegovina is a non-functional state and that its eastern territories, those ethnically cleansed by the Milosevic regime in the 1990s and now known as the ‘Republika Srpska,’ are better off with Serbia
The UK also opposes the plan. Russia has only given vague statements.
Quote:Quote:
Maria Zakharova, spokeswoman for the Russian foreign ministry, said it was down to Belgrade and Pristina to agree a deal, but pointedly said “the deal has to reflect the interests of the Serb people” if Russia is to back it. She declined to clarify how Russia would assess these interests.
However RT reports "Kosovo-Seriva land swap could send whole region into turmoil."
https://www.rt.com/news/437583-kosovo-serbia-land-swap/
- The proposed meeting between the two presidents did not take place yesterday. The following article reports that the Serbian president wanted to visit Gazivode Lake in Northern Kosovo but was not given permission whereas other sources such as Reuters say both presidents called off the talks or the talks "fell through".
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/...09-07-2018
Here's another interpretation:
Quote:Quote:
[Serbian government official] Djuric added that "there are not minimum conditions to talk to the representatives of Pristina today." Djuric cited "all the threats and deceits" from Kosovo that he says have made the meeting impossible
---
As usual it seems there's a lot going on below the surface that isn't being reported, but in many of these cases it's difficult to understand the motivations. It seems that the US/UK's desire has always been to integrate Serbia into the Western economic system (hence the "humanitarian intervention" by "NATO" in 1999), and therefore integration into the EU would be their top priority, so I'm not understanding why the US and UK are diverging here unless post-Brexit UK prefers to limit EU expansion. As for Germany, Merkel's motivations seem pretty transparent in light of her domestic policy of actively eroding ethnic homogeneity.
Austria and Luxembourg oppose the border swap while Belgium and Romania echo Bolton's sentiment that it's up to the two sides to work it out.
So what is really going on here? It seemed there was a lot of momentum for the talks and then they fall apart at the last minute. Did they really intend to meet or was it all a big game of chicken? If so what was the purpose of all the posturing?
This is where my understanding of the situation reaches its limits so what are your thoughts?
![[Image: 45189842_1801866133195675_86480278128395...e=5C7A894F]](https://scontent.fbeg4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45189842_1801866133195675_8648027812839555072_n.png?_nc_cat=101&_nc_ht=scontent.fbeg4-1.fna&oh=d6f09a103e0b589406705226af451fb3&oe=5C7A894F)
![[Image: camp-bondsteel-Mcclure3.jpg]](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/images/camp-bondsteel-Mcclure3.jpg)