"Kosovo will remain frozen conflict"

Washington-based political analyst Obrad Kesić spoke for B92 TV and said that he believed the ICJ ruling would not solve the Kosovo status problem, which would, according to him, remain a “frozen conflict".

"Kosovo will remain frozen conflict"

Washington-based political analyst Obrad Kesić spoke for B92 TV and said that he believed the ICJ ruling would not solve the Kosovo status problem, which would, according to him, remain a “frozen conflict".

Close the entire text of the article here

B92: What are your expectations from the ICJ decision and can we expect the opinion to be decisive?

Kesić: I have not changed my opinion on that. I think that there will definitely be dissenting opinions and those differences will be interpreted in different ways.

Of course, everybody will interpret it the way it suits their side and everybody will declare victory after the decision has been announced. Simply put, a marketing machinery will be put in motion then – to present that it is Priština’s success as far as Albanians are concerned, Belgrade’s success as far as Serbs are concerned,and Washington’s success as far as the international community is concerned.

After that, we go into the second phase. It must be said first that I do not believe that something will suddenly change here. Everybody will stick to their already dug-in positions and there is not much room for change there.

But there is a consensus that new negotiations should begin. Of course, interpretations differ about the kind of the negotiations, but the consensus that there should be new negotiations exists. Americans, Japanese and a part of the EU reject the possibility that the negotiations will be related to the status, and Serbia and those countries that support Serbia reject the possibility that these negotiations are about anything else but the status.

In other words, there are different opinions about the negotiations, but there were also different opinions before, and then the agreement to ignore the differences, and then one side is saying what they would like (to have), while the other side is saying that they got what they wanted.

B92: You mentioned marketing. Is Hashim Thaci’s stay in the U.S. in the last several days some sort of marketing or lobbying ahead of the ICJ decision?

Kesić: I do not believe that it is lobbying, I think it is marketing, in the sense to show that America is determined in its policy to support the independence of Kosovo, and that it is determined that it will not change anything in its position about the independence.

It means that Thaci’s visit is to show that the issue of the status was solved and that there was nothing to be changed now, regardless of what the (ICJ) opinion will be. Simply put, Americans are positioning themselves to present that what will happen on Thursday does not mean anything.

B92: Could it be interpreted as a preparation of a strategy for what will come after the ICJ ruling?

Kesić: I don't think so, I think it is more about boosting Priština's morale, to prepare the ground so that there are no uncertainties. So that (ethnic) Albanians generally realize that even if a part of the decision is not in their favor, or if it can be interpreted against their interests, that it simply won’t change anything and that Americans are determined to support the independence of Kosovo and Metohija and that, with this support, it is simply irrelevant what Belgrade and those who do not recognize that independence will do.

So, it is a message primarily for Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija, in the sense of stabilizing the situation. Because the biggest threat - it has been like that since the very beginning of the debate about the future status of Kosovo - was that if (ethnic) Albanians were unsatisfied or if they were nervous, then new conflicts and new violence could break out.

That is why it is very important that America makes an effort to show that there is nothing unknown there, that there is no uncertainty, and that it is just a new moment which essentially does not change anything.

B92: How much has Belgrade's behavior changed, for example, in the last several days ahead of the court’s decision, considering that there has not been any important visit with the goal to prepare a strategy regarding the decision of the ICJ?

Kesić: Belgrade has been sending contradictory signals for a long time. On the one hand, it says that Kosovo is the most important issue and that the policy regarding Kosovo absolutely will not change. There have always been signals that this is not exactly like that.

National interests, and what is most important for national interests, have always been defined in very simple terms - whether a country is ready to use violence to defend from a threat to its national interests. Belgrade has ruled that out from the very beginning.

Like I said, one of the most important factors in relations between Priština (Kosovo Albanians) and America and Europe is that it has been assessed in America and Brussels that Albanians are ready to use violence to defend their national interests.

B92: Does it mean then that Belgrade would not use violence and that is why there are no such moves?

Kesić: Of course. Not only it is being interpreted in that way, but it's been used as the main argument from the beginning, (to explain why) it is possible to make a decision (regarding Kosovo) where the Serbian side is unsatisfied and the Albanian side is satisfied. And, (that is ) why there cannot be a scenario where Albanians too are unsatisfied, when it comes to an idea that has been talked about lately, about some sort of partition (of Kosovo).

That’s maybe both rough and simple, but unfortunately it is like that, and it has been from the very beginning, as far as the status of Kosovo and Metohija is concerned; Americans and a part of the European community assessed, and still think, that as far as peace and stability in the Balkans are concerned, that unsatisfied Albanians are a much bigger threat than unsatisfied Serbs.

B92: In your opinion, will there be winners and losers in the ICJ decision, or will there be a status quo, in a way?

Kesić: I think that this dispute will simply “freeze”. Expectations are different and differences that are dividing the positions between America and Serbia, and Priština and Belgrade, are too big to overcome through the (ICJ) decision.

As I said, everybody will interpret the decision as some sort of success and in a way that suits their arguments. Very soon we will come arrive at a phase where expectations are very important – Americans expect that Serbs will go into negotiations with Albanians and that those negotiations will be related to some practical, technical issues.

Americans won't be much bothered if Serbia says it is the winner, and possibly moves toward new negotiations about the status. What is important to them, essentially, is that these negotiations begin now on the foundations of some practical issues and solve these issues, and to come to some sort of a normalization of relations between Priština and Belgrade based on that.

There is room there for all sides to claim that they are the winner, and for negotiations to start, and for interpretations about what those negotiations mean to be completely different. Of course, in the short term, it will mean that there will be no big turbulence, especially between Belgrade and Washington, but we must eventually come to a serious dispute, because the position where the issue of the status is not mentioned can only survive for so long. Otherwise, it will be expected from Belgrade to accept the status of an independent Kosovo – it does not mean a recognition, but it does mean acceptance, or Serbia will have to worsen its relations with Washington and a part of the EU.

B92: How much will the court’s decision influence the countries that have not recognized Kosovo, and those which have so far? Will it have any implications regarding their position?

Kesić: I do not believe so. I think that even if that happened, it would be in the context of marketing, because Americans have already prepared a new wave of recognitions, even though at the moment it is unknown what the decision will look like and what the details of the decisions will be. So of course, they will say that the new wave came as a result of a new interpretation that the independence was legal, and of course, a majority of countries will not recognize (Kosovo), and there is a question here, at least as far as I am concerned: how they will solve this, so it does not become a precedent, and how will they solve it so that whatever the decision will be, it does not give a new momentum to some separatist movements in other parts of the world.

This is very sensitive. If Americans and the side which supports the legality of the independence go too far while interpreting the (ICJ) decision as a success, and if they try to declare it as some new legal moment, then they are risking opening up a new series of such similar movements, and attempts by various threatened people, and those with ambition of having their own state.