First time. Eneko Landaburu, Director General of external relations at the European Commission has gone beyond diplomatic niceties to express his deep concern at the situation in the Republic of Serbia Montenegro (including Kosovo). Replying to questions from MEPs from the EP competencies committee (see our bulletin yesterday p 3), he said, in substance, that the situation was very fragile and that several political forces sought to break with the current union and that recent events in Kosovo risked making the situation spiral out of control. “There are separatists”, he recognised, adding that the Commission remained loyal to the orientation “on which we all agree” (namely, that of a unitary, multi-ethnic state that respected minorities) but that at the same time “we are trying to reflect on other possibilities”. This is the first time, to my knowledge, that an official from the Union recognised the existence of a reflection on alternative formulas by calling for a “real debate”.
Fading dream. His position is all the more significant given that it follows on from the resounding paper by Giuliano Amato a few days ago (former Italian prime minister and former vice president of the Convention) who is currently presiding the current international committee consisting of fifteen figures (including Jean-Luc Dehaene), in charge of the Bertelsmann Foundation and the King Baudouin Foundation, which is examining EU accession prospects for Balkan countries. Mr Amato's conclusion, at the end of the first phase of work, which is accurately summed up in the title of this article (published in “Il Sole 24 ore” 18 July): “the multi-ethnic is fading in the Balkans”. After a visit to “what survives of the Republic of Serbia Montengro” and numerous contacts and meetings, Mr Amato bitterly points out that the arrangements put in place in Kosovo, with the intention (praiseworthy in itself) to put an end to the conflicts on the ground are based on the ethnic sharing of all responsibilities, with a double negative effect: a) an extremely low level of “decision-making capacity”, which destroys the possibility of the State providing citizens' expectations; b) the absence of any dynamic in the direction of integrating the different ethnicities. Everything that has been obtained has been the freezing of conflicts but it is fragile and temporary, as proved by the events of last March”. “We do not have the time to get upset at the former Serbian persecution of Albanians, we are confronted by Albanian cruelty towards Serbians”. According to Mr Amato, what is very serious is that for the authorities in Belgrade reagard the prospect of a “multi-ethnic paradise” as completely unrealistic and that the plans that they are elaborating are based on “the creation of a rigid system of apartheid”. One plan envisages the division of Kosovo into five cantons, an Albanian part and a Serbian part connected to each other by corridors. A more radically alternative plan, seeks to re-attach the northern zone to Serbia and leaving the southern part to the Albanians. Both would involve displacing local populations.
In Bosnia too. Giuliano Amato defines these plans as a “mad absurdity” and is calling on the EU to remain faithful to the multi-ethnic project. However, he is not afraid of asserting that such a project has failed in Bosnia-Herzegovina, where the system put in place survives “only and exclusively because of the intricate system of mono-ethnic enclaves”. A few days ago, during ceremonies inaugurating the rebuilt Mostar bridge, the EU authorities again defended the principle of a single Bosnian state founded on ethic co-existence and cultural diversity. But investigative reporting produced by the ceremony were not encouraging. A Muslim student delegate, Adnic Hasic (Croats and Serbians have set up separate universities, which are of obviously lower quality, according to the journalist) informed Christophe Lamfalussy, “We are hearing some nice words today. But how can we become a State when only 60% of the population wants to?”
The problem is one of understanding how “the tradition of multi-confessional and multinational co-existence which has characterised this part of the world for 500 years” (the words of Lord Paddy Ashdown, High Representative of the UN in Bosnia) is not working today. Without leaving out the fact that aid donors are getting tired of providing huge amounts of aid to a state that is refusing to emancipate itself.
In connection with Kosovo, Eneko Landaburu was right to call for a reflection on “other possibilities”, whereas Giuliano Amato is basing his convictions too much on abstract principles. It is a heavy responsibility to impose co-existence on an entity that rejects it, as one shares a responsibility for what follows. At the very least, it I necessary to listen to those who live there. And point out unceasingly that EU accession pre-supposes the end to conflict, and reconciliation, a principle that is at the very heart of the adventure of European integration. (FR)