What can be expected from the Sarajevo conference
by
Hajrudin Somun*

However, there are very optimistic expectations from such a conference.

First, it was intended to be “a meeting at the summit” -- that means the highest level of government officials, heads of state or government. Then, due to the dispute surrounding Kosovo’s participation, it was reduced to a level that was acceptable to all: an informal ministerial meeting of foreign ministers. And if it is informal -- without state and national symbols, without joint statements and joint photographing, only with the names of participants, but again without their function -- what kind of a summit is it expected to be?

Serbia and Kosovo

That reduction in level and contents was caused by stubborn Serbia’s refusal to attend any meeting together with representatives of Kosovo as an independent state as it still considers it part of its territory. A similar situation was at hand in March at the regional conference on the European future of the Western Balkans in Brdo, Slovenia, when Serbian President Boris Tadic boycotted the meeting due to the presence of Kosovar Prime Minister Hashim Thaci. To be fair, the highest EU officials also boycotted that conference, though theirs was a different concern. Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic was ready to come to the next conference only if representatives from Kosovo are part of an UNMIK delegation, and “by no means as a sovereign state.” A compromise formula was finally achieved through the efforts of Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, who used the so-called “Gymnich” format, introduced in 1974 by the European Community for informal meetings without formal conclusions.

It seemed everyone was happy that the fiasco surrounding the meeting in Slovenia was not to be repeated in Sarajevo. “Considering that we are aware of how important regional cooperation is in the context of European integration,” Kosovar government spokesman Memli Krasniqi said, “we are happy things have gotten better with Serbia’s consent.” However, less than two weeks before the conference, its successful preparations were again undermined by Kosovar President Fatmir Sejdiu, who said his country will only take part if every nation is represented by a symbol of statehood.

Thus, I too have been dragged in by such a seemingly procedural issue, as well as almost all officials, non-officials and the media, into speaking about the Sarajevo conference mostly in terms of the attendance or non-attendance of Serbia and Kosovo, not in terms of its aims and substance.

The new EU leadership was right in considering any discussion about the Balkans without Serbia worthless. And so it is also difficult to imagine the Sarajevo conference without Serbia -- but, I would add, without Kosovo as well.

Whether one likes it or not, Serbia is the main Balkan geopolitical factor. Sometimes it was a factor of stability, and sometimes of destabilization -- as was the case during the wars in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Today, Serbia is being given a role that it has not done enough to deserve. With regard to the EU accession process, it was given preference over other countries in the region despite having an equally difficult internal situation, despite the unsolved Kosovo issue and despite unrealized obligations toward the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague. My impression is that a “Serbia first” strategy for joining Euro-Atlantic integrations is also part of an undisclosed agenda to keep it more distant from Russia, which especially does not want NATO including all of Southeast Europe. Another impression, expressed recently in the Slovenian daily Delo, is that Serbia “is not in a hurry to join the EU” because, among other things, it must answer one of its most pressing questions: How much territory does Serbia posses and what is the size of its population? In other words, it must exclude Kosovo if wants to be included in the EU.

It is, thus, almost equally unfortunate to have a Balkan conference without Kosovo as an independent participant and not as part of Serbia. Apart from Bosnia and Herzegovina, it is the most volatile regional issue to be discussed and resolved. Kosovo is in an even worse situation, being a kind of UN protectorate but still not having its flag in front of the UN headquarters and unrecognized by two-thirds of the world’s countries, including five EU member states. Nevertheless, Kosovo leaders derive their comfort from the fact that their country has been recognized and is fully supported by the US and other major Western powers.

Enhancing cooperation in the Balkans

Very little has been said so far about the goals of the Sarajevo conference, except that the EU wants it to enhance cooperation in the Western Balkans and confirm the entire region’s European perspective. Regarding the first point, some recent encouraging moves have been seen in relations between Serbia and Croatia. Serbia acknowledged its involvement in the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina through a parliamentary resolution on genocide in Srebrenica, and President Boris Tadic expressed unwavering support for Bosnia’s integrity and sovereignty, discouraging the radical Bosnian Serbs’ ambitions of secession. Even the name dispute between Macedonia and Greece is closer to a final resolution. There are also some improvements in fighting corruption and police cooperation against organized crime.

With regard to the second aim, the current chairman of the EU Council of Ministers, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos, was certainly -- unless he knew something we didn’t -- excessively optimistic in saying that he expects the “Sarajevo summit” to be a “turning point in the EU integration of Western Balkan countries.” Allow me to remind you, six countries belong to the hazy term “the Western Balkans” that are still waiting in line to join the EU: Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Kosovo. Those more intimate with the regional situation were unable to find a “turning point” in Minister Moratinos’ vague evaluation, country by country: “Progress has been made,” he said, “with Croatia proceeding toward membership.” He spoke about the FYR of Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro, noting that all have their own rhythm. Serbia, Bosnia and Kosovo might, if they want, find themselves in their “own rhythm,” which could be understood over the years. Or, as Kosovar political analyst Veton Surroi put it, “There is no real possibility that a majority of the Western Balkan countries will join the EU before 2020.”

There is another clearer announcement that the Sarajevo conference will be attended not only by the EU countries, but also by Russia, the US and Turkey, “thus jointly securing the stability and prosperity of the entire region.” What is particularly significant in such and some other statements is that Turkey is being recognized more and more as an unavoidable factor in Balkan political developments. In spite of opposition by some important European countries, especially France, Turkey is seen as an inevitable part of the future EU. Speaking at the University of Sarajevo in April, Italian Foreign Minister Frattini said, “The Euro-Atlantic integration of Central/Eastern European countries has been a success, but our mission cannot be considered accomplished until all the countries in the Western Balkans, and Turkey, have joined the European family,” and that goal “must remain an absolute priority for the EU.” In his inspiring lecture, Minister Frattini evaluated three dimensions of redefining the relationship between Europe and the Balkans: economic competitiveness and energy security; the geopolitical framework and EU aspirations that will be achieved by enlargement to the Balkans and Turkey; and inter-cultural and inter-religious dialogue.

There is, at the end, one more impression regarding the upcoming Sarajevo conference: that “enlargement fatigue” still prevails among EU member states, but that each of them, rotating in chairmanship, wishes to put to its credit significant moves or spectacular conference, regardless of their results. Today it is Spain, yesterday it was Sweden, tomorrow it will be someone else. However, I still believe Minister Moratinos has good intentions and that his efforts to organize, together with the host country, a good conference in Sarajevo will bring encouraging, although informal, conclusions. If not a summit by level, let it be a summit in spirit.