It's the summer time and I have decided to make this blog more interesting and more frequently as I embark on a journey on the blog's sustainability.
As such, I will start publishing three time per week.
The first political topic will be the normalization of relations between Serbia and Macedonia.
What
would a “good enough” normalization of Serbian-Albanian relations
look like?
The
normalization of relations between various states is a norm in the
world of diplomacy characterized by ongoing efforts by government,
international institutions and civil society to overcome historical,
cultural and socio-economic grievances between nations.
From
countries like Sudan and Chad that in 2010 started the process of
normalizing relations via a UN accord to the ongoing and
unprecedented establishment of diplomatic relations between the
United States and Cuba, there are many precedents that Serbia and
Albania may look at in order to establish a road map for such
normalization of diplomatic relations.
The
basic question that anyone from the international community has to
ask him/herself is what we can do if Serbs and Albanians do not want
to live with each other in this region?
The
agreement on the ‘normalization of relations’ signed by the
Republic of Kosovo and the Republic of Serbia brought about by the
Thaçi-Dačič agreement has been praised by several diplomatic
actors (including the EU) as a ‘historical agreement’. From the
EU’s gaze and perception of the Balkans, everything that is not an
outburst of our primitive ethnic passions is indeed a historic
achievement. Peace
is almost considered a state of exception.
In this regard, the fact that the Kosovar and Serbian Prime Ministers
have met constitutes a major victory over the worrisome tendencies
keeping the Balkans as it is: a permanent state of ethnic tensions
and pre-war confrontation.
One
of the most crucial aspect that would assist in setting the state for
an enduring normalization of relations is the enhancement of economic
cooperation between Serbia and Albania (seen by many as the guarantor
of Kosovo's territorial integrity). As such, the business community
of these two countries would need to start off by discussing the
intensification of collaboration in the economic domain. Reviewing
the bilateral economic relations every semester by their respective
chambers of commerce would be a step in this direction.
At
the state level, there would need to be a a commitment from both
nations for the improvement of cooperation in the economic plan in
the short, medium and long term. The launch of obligatory educational
and cultural exchange programs a la Erasmus
would further facilitate decades of mistrust and antagonism between
the people. Such steps would emphasize the need for a multi-ethnic
life (with each other) of the communities and reduce the “national
interpretations” and manipulations by the politicians, the media
and some scholars who had in the past contributed to negative
stereotypes which have deepened the gap between the two communities.
These
Erasmus type programs would erode the current leading leitmotiv of
those stereotypes whose images of victimization and suffering caused
by unjust oppression by the “other side” deteriorates the
situation in an unnecessary fashion.
Another
important aspect towards normalization would involve the constant
participation by the EU, the USA, the Russian Federation and other
actors like UNASUR from Latin America. Involving UNASUR could prove
quite useful and an extraordinary alternative given the various
episodes in Latin America where tensions have flared up to the brink of military conflict (between Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia) or the facilitation
carried by Brazil in the Iranian nuclear talks with the US and the
UN.
Despite
such recommendations and following the example of Serbian-Croatian
relations where inter-ethnic distance and a level of distrust might
stay very high for the next 10-15 years, relations could gradually
improve and normalize if there are no open issues like Kosovo's
independence. Kosovo's future status is seen as a zero sum game by
both sides, one side will lose and there will always be the open or
hidden goal to return to the control of the side that lost it
straining relations between Serbia and Albania, regardless of the
political leadership sitting in Belgrade and Tirana.
Any
solution of the status of Kosovo will not bring complete stability to
the region. The Westphalian principle of sovereignty of the nation
state and self-determination are not compatible in the Kosovo case.
Both sides have legal and moral rights to insist on their arguments.
Therefore, the resolution has to be primarily based on a realistic
and impartial cost benefit analysis: which solution will bring less
instability? A zero sum game which would create total winners or
total losers would perpetuate the problems. The key issue is how to
separate Serbs and Albanians in a way that would avoid conflicts. The
proposed solutions thus far create either troubled population
exchange scenarios or a zero sum game. And even a bloodless partition
of Kosovo would be only one element of the overall solution.
Therefore,
the most important aspect of any normalization process is the
awareness of the blunt truth that in order to shape its future role
in policymaking, it needs to avoid the traps of wishful thinking. The
real dilemma for international actors like the EU (the de facto
government in such a situation), is that it has very little ability
to influence the core problem – the inability of Serbs and
Albanians live in peace in the short term. The normalization should
be regarded as a long term generational project.
Finally,
the normalization of the relations between Albania and Serbia does
not entirely depend on power games between the great powers but also
on the readiness Serbs and Albanians to put the past behind them and
turn to the future, accepting the right of “others” to live in
peace and prosperity. Once this cultural aspiration is realized, we
would entering the “good enough” territory posed by the original
question of this essay.
