Statement by Miroslav LAJČÁK, European Union Special Representative (EUSR) for the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue and other Western Balkan regional issues, following the second high level meeting of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue, taking place on 7 September 2020, in Brussels.
[ Ссылка ] #eudebates #eudebate #Belgrade #Pristina #Brussels #Serbia #Kosovo
We just finished our second in person high-level meeting of the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue with President [of Serbia, Aleksandar] Vučić and Prime Minister [of Kosovo, Avdullah] Hoti in Brussels.
It is important that both leaders this morning, coming from the meeting in the White House and ahead of our Dialogue session, confirmed that they attach the highest priority to the EU integration and to continuing the work on the EU-facilitated Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue. Having this clear joint commitment and understanding of priorities is essential for progress in their respective European paths.
In our meetings today, we spoke about economic cooperation and missing and displaced persons – the topics which were opened in our last high-level meeting. And I am happy to announce that we made full progress on the discussions.
We also discussed for the first time, as part of the negotiations of a legally binding comprehensive agreement, arrangements for non-majority communities and also the settlement of mutual financial claims and property. This was a first exchange that allowed us to define the next steps in our discussions. Our next meeting will be dedicated to these two topics.
Our negotiations today were intense, as usually, and not always easy, but what prevailed was the will of both sides to advance the discussions despite the painful and complex issues at hand.
We agreed to follow-up on our discussions at expert level next week and to re-convene at the level of leaders later this month.
Things got better with Lajčák
Notwithstanding all abovementioned structural issues with the Serbia-Kosovo dialogue, it would be unfair to say that nothing has changed with the renewed EU-led dialogue.
Primarily, the level of transparency has increased, as the exact items on the agenda are now published in advance. Since the June restart, the topics covered have included missing and displaced persons as well as the economy, while this week’s meeting saw the discussion on the non-majority community arrangements (implementation of the Association/Community of Serb municipalities), the settlement of mutual financial claims and property.
Furthermore, the dialogue is now split into two tracks – technical and political, where the latter serves to set the main lines of discussion and to break through the potential stalemates reached at technical level.
Finally, the dialogue has once again become more dynamic (as was the case during the 2011-2013 period) with several rounds already being held. Yet, no deadline for concluding the talks has been set.
Despite the intention to have talks on several different “technical” issues – although one may argue that everything regarding Serbia-Kosovo relations is, by definition, political – that will ultimately lead to a comprehensive agreement encompassing all substantial topics, such an approach could lead to a vicious circle.
Recognition Rashomon
Even if all technical topics are discussed and a compromise is reached, there will still be an issue hanging over it like a sword of Damocles, namely the question of Kosovo’s international status or, to put it differently, the question of Serbia’s recognition. It seems that the Serbian government is ready to cooperate and negotiate on everything except for conceding on the issue of formal recognition. On the other hand, this is Kosovo’s main demand and, presumably, the only way to continue its Euro-Atlantic integration.
Recognition is in fact the issue where the proclaimed “creative ambiguity” of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue – that allows for different interpretations of reached deals – will eventually hit the wall. To put it bluntly, there is no way around it: either Serbia formally recognises Kosovo or it does not. No legal roller coaster can provide for a creative and legally ambiguous interpretation of recognition.
Another potential possibility for Kosovo is to join the EU without having previously obtained a UN seat. However, when it comes to the question of whether UN membership is a precondition for joining the EU, the answer is far from straightforward. In principle, there is no provision in EU Treaties explicitly setting out such a requirement.
Yet, the Treaties contain several references to legal obligations related to UN membership, not least the respect of UN principles and adherence to the UN Charter. Hence, these provisions raise the challenging question of how a non-UN member can be required to “comply with the commitments and take account of the objectives … approved in the context of the United Nations”.
