(Statement by Nebojsa Covic, president of the Coordination Centre for Kosovo and Metohia, at International conference "Security in the Balkans after the 11th September" in Athens, may 25th)
Ladies and Gentleman, esteemed friends:
As we look back at the tragic performance of nationalistic leaders of Serbs, Croatians, Bosnian Muslims, and Albanians, we cannot but ask the following questions:
Can this bloodshed happen again?
Can the forces of disintegration in the Balkans threaten world peace and tranquility once again?
I regret that I must reply affirmatively. I will try to identify elements that may increase or diminish the risks we face today.
There are young democratic parties in power in Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, and Albania and this is definitely a risk-decreasing element. This fact increases my optimism.
Greece is already member of the European Union, and all other countries are on their way to joint it. Hopefully this means that the leaders of the Balkan countries will observe the rules of the game and, most likely, do nothing to put this objective in jeopardy.
The extremism of a few Kosovo Albanians, who have acted publicly and aggressively, represents the most severe threat for peace in the region as it denies both Serbian and Christian rights in Kosovo and Metohia. The nationalism and extremism of Kosovo Albanians is the only one that has, after all, survived in the conflicts fought over the wreckage of the former Yugoslavia. The international community unintentionally supported it in its legitimate opposition to the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, a regime that abused the human rights of all citizens of the FRY and Republic of Serbia. One never discards their allies easily and immediately after victory has been won.
Long-term sympathy toward such an ally, however, can strengthen the hard-line right wing among other nations, and among Serbs in particular, as their nationalistic front believes that the Serbs have been misunderstood and mistreated by the international community. They dream of revenge and reprisals.
I hope that you will allow me to say that the international community has to exercise prudence in resolving the Balkan riddle and finding a sustainable and a long-term solution.
We must not forget, though, that a part of the Serbian and Montenegrin public, out of historic reasons or out of a habit, has no confidence in mediators from the West, and has no more hopes in mediators from the East. Being xenophobic, they search the past for answers we need today. They write and think as if two universal empires, the Turkish and the Austro-Hungarian, still existed.
We, too, need to look back to the past, although we are neither infected by nationalism nor by xenophobia. We need to look back to the past, not to live in old animosities and hatred but to learn lessons from mistakes and failures of the past.
I want to draw your attention to an undeniable truth that all major events, both good ones and bad ones, required years of intentional or unintentional preparations, and ask the following question: What is the event that the Balkan nations are preparing for now, in 2002?
If we are to judge based on the official declaration of young Balkan democracies, they are preparing themselves for a perpetual peace within the European Union. If we are to judge based on territorial aspirations and secessionist plans of extremism of a few Kosovo Albanians that have not been suppressed yet, this great dream will not come true that easily and that fast, or to be more precise, creators of the new geographic maps consistently prevent this dream from coming true.
Coming from a position that it is too soon to address the issue of the final status of Kosovo, I reiterate that this issue can neither be addressed nor solved without Belgrade. The worst possible solution would be an ethnically clean Kosovo without any Serbs and with almost two million Kosovo Albanians who do not recognize Serbia and Yugoslavia. This solution cannot, by any means, be sustainable as it leaves a possibility for renewed breakout of old wars and conflicts in the future.
Our position is clear: We want a multiethnic Kosovo, with all the rights and responsibilities. We want integration, homogenization and harmonization, but we emphasize that this will not be possible without a triumph of democratic forces in Kosovo and Metohia. For it is only the democratic forces that will be willing and capable to build interethnic confidence.
As I have used the magic word, confidence, I would like to refer to the example of Kosovska Mitrovica, a town that has, rightly or wrongly, or perhaps as some wanted, become the symbol of Serbian antagonism to the international community. Any restrictions on freedom of movement are wrong, and we must keep in mind that this issue needs to be addressed and solved throughout Kosovo and Metohia, and not in Kosovska Mitrovica only.
Ladies and Gentleman, Serbian nationalism is being tried in the Hague today, as well as Croatian and Muslim nationalism and extremism. All Kosovo Albanian leaders have publicly committed themselves to an independent Kosovo. They are in a hurry to carry out their separatist project, to have independence before the international community gives up before legitimate initiatives against double standards in politics. If they succeed in these attempts, if they do not focus on building a genuinely multiethnic society instead, I am afraid it will be a Kosovo without Serbs.
Discarding separatism and extremism is both a short-term and a long-term prerequisite and a crucial precondition for peace in the Balkans. Therefore, it is necessary to bring to justice all those who have committed crimes in Kosovo and Metohia, regardless of their religious affiliation and ethnic background, in an energetic and intensive way and as soon as possible.
Solidarity of nations in the Balkans is also one of the ongoing needs. Any policy that would, commenting on the Yugoslav turmoil, say "it always happens to someone else - it can never happen to me" would be an unwise, shortsighted, and uncreative policy, which is dangerous too.
Furthermore, we have to address the issue of Kosovo and Metohia from the regional perspective, for only this kind of approach would lead to long-term stability. Any attempt to address the Kosovo issue in a vacuum, without taking into account regional concerns will be disastrous. The status of Kosovo and Metohia cannot be addressed without continuously taking into account the impact of any resolution on the preservation of an integral Bosnia and Herzegovina, and on peace in Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia. I repeat what I have already said: The solution to all regional problems should be sought in compromises, in self-sustainable stability, and therefore all parties to the conflict should renounce their maximal objectives. No party to the conflict should get it all and no party should lose it all. Meeting of all requests of one party to the conflict would only result in long-term confrontations with other parties. That is way I insist that it is necessary to eliminate the very possibility of a battle for territories, and to encourage a battle for rights. Dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina is the only way to a permanent solution and it must be based on the principles of sincerity, constructiveness, and realism, and be free from a "take-it-or-leave-it" policy. Any partiality and prejudice of international mediators would only aggravate the quest for a solution. the international community must maintain credibility with all parties. A mediator, who is trying to please only one party and listens to its lobbyists and sympathizers only, is no mediator.
I see this process as a series of long-term and short-term prerequisites and objectives.
One of them is also support and assistance to democracy in all countries of the region. I assure you that if the reforms fail in Serbia and Montenegro, if the transitions turn out to be too painful, if poverty continues to heavily impact a majority of the population, a Serbian Le Pen will come to power in Belgrade!
Let us delete the words Serbia and Montenegro from the previous sentence and talk briefly about conditions in Bulgaria, or in Macedonia, or in Croatia, or in Romania. For, in these countries as well, in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Croatia, and Romania, there are right-oriented parties, and there are hard-line right-oriented parties, that would grow significantly stronger if liberal and reformist ideas and concepts were discarded. The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is even more complex, where three villains would come to power, and all three ethnic groups, the Serbs, the Bosniaks, and the Croats, would have their own "great leader."
Copycats of Milosevic, Tudjman,... would, by all means, do their best to surpass the originals.
If this dark prophecy came true, the fate of the Balkans and the rest of Europe would be a gloomy one. I sense that those politicians, who are always confused and always dissatisfied, always in conflict with all and everyone, who are not receptive to dialogue and compromise, who insist on maximal objectives, would come to power.
That is why I insist that it is necessary for the international community to distance itself from such politicians who insist on maximum objectives. I repeat and emphasize: from all such politicians, regardless of their ethnic background. This too is another prerequisite of both a short-term and a long-term validity.
We have to solve the problem of refugees and internally displaced individuals, lonely people whose every day starts with nightmare. We have to manage to secure that they return to their homes in a speedy and secure way, that they have easy and safe access to their property and their homeland. We have to make sure that the FRY-UNMIK Common Document be implemented consistently and precisely.
There is, however, a goal that has to be identified as a short-term one: creation of an association that would deal with common regional problems. I will deliberately take the risk of wearying you out by repeating something that has been repeated many times so far and I reiterate today, too, that such an association would be our exercise and preparation for entry into and life within the European Union.
In response to those who might object to this idea commenting that there are so many European and world civil and military organizations that it is not necessary to create a new one in South Eastern Europe, I will say that it is never good to expect that all solutions and all answers are given in Brussels and by Brussels would not want that either.
Extending my apology for this polemic discourse opposing an opinion that might not be expressed at all, I thank you for your attention.
