Pressure on Belgrade

Serbia, located in the heart of the Balkans and representing the cornerstone of the stabilization of the entire region, is an important condition for the normalization of ethnic and international relations and has a crucial function for the economic development and political pacification of this geographical region. Serbian civilization, which originated during the rise of the Byzantine Empire, grew from the 7th century AD in the region of Rashi, Kosovo, and Metohija and expanded in the subsequent centuries thanks to the Nemanjic royal dynasty, until it reached its peak of splendor in the mid-14th century, during the time of King Stefan Dušan. In those centuries, the development of a deep Christian faith among Serbian monarchs and people was manifested in the construction of an extraordinary series of monasteries, which became a refuge and protection for documents and art works of priceless value and which even today represent a cultural heritage for all mankind. The monasteries of Gračanica, Visoki Dečan, Peć Patriarchate, Our Lady of Leviška, as well as the works in Koriš, Hvosno, Prizren, Banjska, Zvečan, Ubožac, Ainovac, and hundreds of other archaeological and religious monuments are direct and tangible evidence over these centuries of the growth of the Serbian nation and its strong cultural and religious identity.

The rising power of the Ottoman Empire in the second half of the 14th century threatened the survival of Serbian civilization: the decisive battle of Kosovo (June 28, 1389) became a turning point in the history of the nation, which agreed to fight under the leadership of its king, Lazar Hrebeljanovic, in conditions of huge numerical superiority to the army of Sultan Murad. Defeated and destroyed in the holy place that represented the geographical heart of their civilization, the Serbs retreated to the north of the Balkan region until the 15th century, when they gradually disappeared as a state for more than four centuries. The revival in the 19th century, with a series of uprisings started by George Petrovic (Karadjordje) on February 15, 1804 and followed, thirty years later, by the Constitution of Sretenje Kragujevac of February 15, 1835, allowed the Serbs to begin the process of regaining their independence, recognized in 1878, which marked the beginning of the restoration of the monarchy.

A further series of Balkan conflicts led Serbia to expand southward to reclaim the region of Kosovo and Metohija in 1913. Overwhelmed by military operations during World War I, Serbia eventually emerged victorious and took advantage of the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire to form a new kingdom with the Croats and Slovenes (the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, later defined as the Kingdom of Yugoslavia from 1929), placed under the Serbian crown of Karadjordjevic. World War II again engulfed Yugoslavia, which, however, again emerged victorious thanks to the communist resistance led by Josip Broz Tito. After Tito’s death in 1980, Yugoslavia was headed for a catastrophic process of political instability that preceded the breakup of the state: the conflicts that arose between 1991 and 1999 inflicted a deep wound in Serbia’s memory, the most painful part of which was the NATO bombing in 1999 and the prospect of losing sovereignty over the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija.

February 17, 2024, just a few days ago, marked the 16th anniversary of Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence by representatives of the local Kosovo Albanian community. From 2008 until today, this act has been an unresolved source of problems and instability for the Balkan region and for Serbia. The territory of Kosovo, which became a land of neo-colonial conquest by the United States after the NATO bombing in 1999, is essentially a non-state. Recognized as an independent state by only a minority of the world’s countries (only 84 out of 193 UN member states have recognized its independence), the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo lacks the legitimacy of a sovereign state and thus has no administrative jurisdiction over the territory of Kosovo and Metohija. But over the past 16 years, the Western community has tried to treat Kosovo as a sovereign state, influenced other countries to follow the same line, and put widespread pressure on Belgrade to relinquish its sovereignty over Kosovo and Metohija in favor of independence.

But Belgrade will never give up its sovereignty over Kosovo and Metohija, even though it may push back Serbia’s EU accession date. In a statement issued on February 17, 2024, Ivica Dačić, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Serbian government, specifies that February 17 is the date when “the international legal order was destroyed,” recalling “the ethnic cleansing, the victims of which for centuries were the Serbian people, whose state was established in Kosovo and Metohija,” he concludes by saying that Serbia “will never recognize the unilateral declaration of independence of the so-called Kosovo.”

Elements of tension between Serbs and Kosovo Albanians have increased significantly over the past two years, mainly because representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo have attempted to impose the legitimacy of their administration throughout Kosovo and Metohija using persistent and normative violence. Representing a state that is not universally recognized, the political class of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo should have no administrative legitimacy in that territory, especially in a territory populated predominantly by Serbs (Serb enclaves and northern Kosovo).

In fact, forceful action manifested itself, causing huge tensions and clashes. On December 8, 2022, in the Serbian enclave of Velika Hoča, near Orahevac, police of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo seized 42,000 liters of wine from Vinica Petrovic, claiming that the sale of this wine in previous periods had taken place without authorization. What permission should be granted to a Serbian company that does not recognize the Pristina administration and had the right not to recognize it until the latter gets recognized by all? The second act of administrative force occurred in 2023, when, on April 23, representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo attempted to hold new municipal elections in the municipalities of northern Kosovo and Metohija (Kosovska Mitrovica, Leposavic, Zubin Potol, and Zvecan). The overwhelming majority of those eligible to vote were Serbian citizens who, not recognizing the legitimacy of the administration of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo, systematically failed to go to the polls. Very few Kosovo Albanian voters (3.47% of eligible voters) elected the four Kosovo Albanian candidates. When in May 2023 the police forces of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo, supported by international KFOR military forces, attempted to bring four elected officials to power, there were serious clashes with the local population, who felt that their rights were being violated by an unjustified and illegal act of abuse.

Also on that occasion, representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo attempted an in-depth action to establish their jurisdiction over the entire territory of Kosovo and Metohija. The next act of force occurred most recently, in early February 2024, when representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo announced that the Serbian currency, the dinar, would be abolished in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija, including the north of the province, populated almost exclusively by Serbian citizens. This measure had not only financial implications (4 banks and 15 financial institutions in the north of Kosovo work with the Serbian dinar), but also moral and cultural implications: for example, is the aim to ignore the moral and cultural value that the traditional currency has for its citizens? Some consider it their flag, as well as Serbian license plates, which have also been banned by Pristina in the northern part of the region since autumn of 2022, creating huge tensions among the local population.

What elements can be extracted from these recent events and how can they be interpreted? Given the particular international situation, it is primarily the representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo who are trying to accelerate the timeline for the political and administrative normalization they hope for, given the general trend. The number of countries that have recognized Kosovo’s independence is actually decreasing, as some countries that recognized that unilateral declaration of independence have backtracked. Moreover, the conflict in Ukraine, as well as in the Middle East, may become a source of inspiration for Belgrade to conduct a military operation in Kosovo and Metohija in order to regain control over the territory.

Secondly, along with the Balkan issue, there is the question of the behavior of the European Union and the United States. The European Union seems utterly incapable of leading a peace process at the regional level, since the European Union’s lack of credibility lies in its inability to act as a neutral and impartial interlocutor. Clumsy in its actions and arguments, the EU, despite the five of its members not having recognized Kosovo’s independence (Spain, Romania, Slovakia, Greece, and Cyprus), has always behaved like a biased interlocutor who is only waiting for a possible solution, namely Belgrade’s recognition of the independence of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo. Be it the Berlin Process for the Western Balkans, negotiations on accession to the European Union, or promises of financial aid, the EU authorities constantly put pressure on Belgrade in an attempt – objectively in a very wrong way – to confront Serbia with a done deal. Support in Serbian public opinion for Belgrade’s accession to the European Union has actually declined over the past few months (just over 40% of Serbian citizens now support Belgrade’s accession to the European Union).

The recent legislative, provincial, and municipal elections in Serbia, held on December 17, 2023, confirmed a substantial popular consensus in favor of the party of the President of the Republic, but voices of hostility towards Belgrade have been heard from many sides in Europe about alleged irregularities or fraud: these rumors seem to be of false origin and aimed more at delegitimizing the Serbian ruling class than at shedding real light on the rightness or wrongness of the elections. Moreover, the United States seems to be playing the game ambiguously, both as supporters and critics of Pristina.

Being the first supporters of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo, having recognized Kosovo’s independence for the first time, on February 17, 2008, by stationing the largest military base in the Balkans (Camp Bondsteel, near Urosevac), the United States of America has always acted in favor of the representatives of the Kosovo-Albanian side, to the detriment of the Serbian side. It is no coincidence that many observers believe that the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo is in fact a United States protectorate in the heart of the Balkans, despite the fact that Washington has always advocated a process of decolonization throughout the 20th century. It is obvious that every step, every action, every initiative of Pristina’s representatives has always been coordinated with Washington in advance, with caution, weighing all possible implications and all possible benefits for the cause of independence. It is therefore unlikely that all of the most recent initiatives by representatives of the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo are the result of a unilateral Kosovo decision; indeed, there is reason to believe that they are the result of a preliminary proposal from Washington.

We are all the more amazed when we witness what is happening today at the official level, when the US political class is sluggishly trying to distance itself from what Pristina decides to do: it is likely that Washington is actually inclined to negotiate with Pristina, to protect its respectability before the international community, to play a double game, suggesting in a private forum to the Kosovo-Albanian side how to act politically, and then publicly disassociating itself from Pristina’s actions. This behavior is not much different from what is probably going on today between the United States and Israel over the Middle East crisis.

In conclusion, stabilization of the Balkan region is possible only through the respectful and fair participation of all parties involved and cannot be achieved in a lasting and effective way without the contribution of objective and transparent action by the international community in the name of that loyal “open diplomacy” inspired by the President of the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson, in January 1918, just over one hundred years ago.