September 30, 2018

Former CIA chief says U.S. would accept Balkan border changes

Former CIA chief says U.S. would accept Balkan border changes

Belgrade, 30 September 2018 (MIA) – Steven Meyer, former CIA deputy chief of the Balkan Task Force, told Belgrade newspaper Novosti that he believed U.S. policy towards Kosovo and the region had significantly changed and that, in his opinion, Washington was unlikely to oppose border changes in the Balkans.

"If the local leadership wants to change borders," Meyer said, "I don't believe that Washington would oppose it."

According to him, Germany was in favor of the changes but was afraid this would threaten stability; Britain was "fifty-fifty," whereas the EU would accept such a solution if it were reached.

Mayer noted he has been saying this for twenty years and that border changes should be made.

"I told my Serbian friends they need to understand they cannot take back a large part of Kosovo," Mayer said, "because it would mean war. But, the region north of the Ibar is a different story."

Regarding southern Kosovo, Mayer said that the Serbian population could either stay there or move out.

He also noted that Republika Srpska should hold a referendum with three choices: to stay within Bosnia and Herzegovina, to be independent, or to join Serbia. In Meyer's opinion, this would make the countries more homogenous.mr/15:02

 

September 28, 2018

Breaking old habits in the Balkans

ecfr.eu

Breaking old habits in the Balkans

5-6 minutes


Opinions cost nothing, but it is not our opinions that matter - let's not take sides before we know what has been proposed

"An intellectual hatred is the worst", says W B Yeats, "So let her think opinions are accursed." That's what I used to think when I was involved in diplomacy myself, in a small way. It's easier to have an opinion than to make a decision, or to take responsibility for proposing something new. Opinions cost nothing, but if you are a political leader who is making a proposal, then you are in some way betting your future on it.

The commentariat – and, I guess, I have to confess to being a commentator now (also in a small way) – seems to have taken to the Serbia-Kosovo question in a very polarising fashion: everyone is taking sides. In Pristina last week on a study trip led by ECFR, I found that everyone identifies with one side or the other. Pluralism is the essence of democracy – but so is unity when it comes to big national issues.

We ought not to allow old habits to shape our approach to Balkans issues

Twenty years after the end of the last war in the Balkans, the conflict between Serbia and Kosovo has found its way back into international headlines. The leaders of Serbia's and Kosovo's governments began in August discussions to find a compromise on the long-disputed border between their countries.

This is a question that has lots to recommend it if you want to take sides: it's about war and peace – some say changing borders will bring war, and others say it's a way of making peace; it's about our history in the Balkans too, the mistakes we made, the successes we had, the lessons we learned. It's true also that geopolitical deals don't solve the big problems of the Balkans. These are, as they always have been, bad politics and bad government. But it's difficult to govern well if you are not sure where your borders are, and if you have non-relations with your neighbours.

My plea is that we ought not to allow old habits to shape our approach to Balkans issues. We ought not to take sides too quickly and too definitively.

The European solution has been to keep borders as they are, and make them irrelevant. That has worked brilliantly for us. But we should also admit that we did quite a lot of moving borders around before we got there. Then there is the Helsinki Final Act: it is clear on territorial integrity and the inviolability of frontiers; but it also includes an exception for peaceful change in accordance with international law.

Politics ought to be about bringing people together, not dividing them. So, let's not dig in prematurely. Why not wait and see if someone has a proposal to make, listen to it carefully, examine it seriously: not just what is proposed, but also how it might be done, and what measures might accompany it, where the balance between the parties' is, how it would affect the region.

Decisions should be primarily taken for those who will be most affected by them. That is, first of all, those directly affected, and their neighbours.

So far, no one has proposed anything concrete. We hear of ideas, but they are rather vague. Before ideas can become a plan, they need to be given a precise shape. Usually, the more you go into detail, the more difficult it becomes – but there's no avoiding detail; policy is not about principles or generalisations. ("I like principles", said Napoleon to Talleyrand in Erfurt, "They don't commit me to anything".) Detail takes time; if several parties are involved, that means there will be compromises; so, the parties will have to ask if the package is balanced, if both sides gain.

Decisions should be primarily taken for those who will be most affected by them

So, let's break old habits in the Balkans for once, and not take sides before we know what has been proposed. Give those concerned time to work their ideas into proposals, give them time to explain them, maybe even to adapt them. Let's hear opinions from all sides, especially those on the ground, and only then make our minds up – but bearing in mind that, in the end, it's not our opinions that matter.

And then, according to what those concerned want – let's get back to the serious business of making Kosovo work. There are lots of clever, creative, determined people in Kosovo; they do brilliantly in other people's countries. Given the right sort of chance, there must be a way they can do brilliantly in their own too.

Robert Cooper is an ECFR council member and a European diplomat who facilitated the dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo.

Read more on: ECFR Council,Wider Europe,Western Balkans

 

September 26, 2018

"Trump told Brnabic - Serbs are good people"

b92.net

"Trump told Brnabic - Serbs are good people" - PoliticsEnglish

5-6 minutes


According to the Belgrade press, in a brief conversation with Prime Minister Ana Brnabic, US President Donald Trump has referred to the Serbs as "good people."

Source: Tanjug Wednesday, September 26, 2018 | 10:15

 

(Tanjug/AP)

Namely, Brnabic thanked the US president for the changing of the stance of the current administration in Washington toward Serbia, and for understanding the position of our country on the issue of Kosovo, and, according to media reports, he replied by saying that "Serbs are good people."

On Monday evening in New York City, where she has traveled for the UN General Assembly meetings, the prime minister attended a traditional reception hosted by the US president ahead of the General Debate, and on Thursday she will address representatives of UN's member states.

As Belgrade daily Vecernje Novosti writes, America is ready to have the Kosovo issue "reexamined" and if Belgrade and Pristina reach an agreement, they will accept it. Blic also reports that Trump personally confirmed a change in the US policy towards the Kosovo issue and a relaxation of relations with the Serbian side.

The newspaper writes that in a short and cordial conversation, Brnabic thanked Trump for the change of the US administration's stance towards Kosovo, to which he briefly replied: "Good people."

 

September 15, 2018

Ex-KLA commanders indicted of faking war veterans' lists

gazetaexpress.com

Ex-KLA commanders indicted of faking war veterans' lists

GazetaExpress

2-3 minutes


Special Prosecution of Kosovo has filed on Friday an indictment against 11 former members of the Government's commission on verification of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) veterans' status. The indictment which was filed in August by ex-prosecutor Elez Blakaj, who resigned citing threats and intimidation for investigating alleged wrongdoings during this process and fled to the US, has been filed today at the Basic Court of Pristina. The eleven indicted are former top commanders of the KLA, including former KLA General Commander, Agim Ceku.

The Prosecution Office also asked the Government to stop paying a state pension to all people who are suspected of forging documents. According to the indictment because of the illegal pensions for fake KLA veterans, the budget of the Republic of Kosovo has been damaged up to 68.153.14 Euro. Former prosecutor Blakaj has shocked public opinion in Kosovo after he resigned and fled to the US, saying that he was threatened and intimidated during the investigation of this case. After the resignation Blakaj was criticised by Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj calling him "thief". Gazeta Express has learned that the indicted persons are: Agim Çeku, Nuredin Lushtaku, Sadik Halitjaha, Shkumbin Demaliaj, Qelë Gashi, Shukri Buja, Ahmet Daku, Rrustem Berisha, Faik Fazliu, Smajl Elezaj, Fadil Shurdhaj and Xhavit Jashari. "All these individuals, as members of the Government commission on recognising and verification of the KLA status, in the capacity of official persons, have exceeded their competencies intentionally, and failed to fulfil official duties, by enabling other persons to illegally benefit by damaging the budget of the Republic of Kosovo," it is stated in the indictment signed by the Chief State Prosecutor, Aleksander Lumezi. Also in the indictment it was proposed the Court to issue a measure stopping payment of pensions obtained illegally by fake veterans until the conclusion of proceedings.

 

September 13, 2018

'The world is sleepwalking into a financial crisis' - Gordon Brown

theguardian.com

'The world is sleepwalking into a financial crisis' – Gordon Brown | Politics

Larry Elliott

8-10 minutes


A leaderless world is sleepwalking towards a repeat of its near meltdown in late 2008 and early 2009 because it has failed to remedy the causes of the financial crash of a decade ago, former prime minister Gordon Brown has warned.

Britain’s leader during the period when the collapse of the US investment bank Lehman Brothers put every major bank at risk, said that after a decade of stagnation the global economy was now moving into a decade of vulnerability.

Speaking to the Guardian at his home in Scotland, Brown delivered a scathing analysis of how the big problems of 2009 remained unresolved and said that much tougher action was needed to prevent wrongdoing by bankers.

Brown was instrumental in creating the G20 – a body made of the world’s leading developed and developing nations – but said the cooperation that helped avoid a second Great Depression had been replaced by a world in which countries had retreated into nationalist silos.

“We are in danger of sleepwalking into a future crisis,” Brown said when asked to assess the risks of a repeat of 2008. “There is going to have to be a severe awakening to the escalation of risks, but we are in a leaderless world.”

The former prime minister, who lost the 2010 election following Britain’s longest and deepest recession of the post-war era, said there was less scope to reduce interest rates than was the case a decade ago, no evidence that finance ministries would be allowed to cut taxes or increase public spending, and no guarantee that China would be as active in providing stimulus.

“The cooperation that was seen in 2008 would not be possible in a post-2018 crisis both in terms of central banks and governments working together. We would have a blame-sharing exercise rather than solving the problem.

In the light of the trade war launched against Beijing by the US, Brown doubted that China would be as cooperative a second time. “Trump’s protectionism is the biggest barrier to building international cooperation,” he said.

After taking over from Tony Blair as prime minister in June 2007, Brown had only a short honeymoon before the first signs of trouble emerged later in the summer. He said the global economy still lacked an early warning system and a system for monitoring financial flows so that it was possible to tell what had been lent to whom and on what terms. “We have dealt with the small things but not the big things,” he said.

Brown admitted that Labour should have been tougher on the City in the boom years leading up to the crisis. “Yes, we did not know what was going on in some of the institutions, some of it illegal, and which was being covered up.”

But he insisted that the mood at the time was for even greater deregulation of the City. “I was being criticised for being too tough in terms of regulation and tax.”

Since the crisis, banks have been forced to hold more capital to protect them against possible losses, and a system of bonus clawbacks has been introduced to dissuade bankers from taking too many risks.

But Brown said action against financial malpractice had not been tough enough and that banks would expect to be bailed out again in the event of a future crisis.

“The penalties for wrong-doing have not been increased sufficiently. The fear that bankers will be imprisoned for bad behaviour is not there. There has not been a strong enough message sent out that government won’t rescue institutions that haven’t put their houses in order.”

The crisis of 2008 had its roots in the US housing market, with the losses sustained on subprime mortgages cascading through the global financial system in the months leading up to the collapse of Lehmans. Brown said there would be a different cause next time.

“It is very difficult to say what will trigger it [the next crisis] but we are at the latter end of the economic cycle where people take greater risks. There are problems in emerging markets.”

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

Brown said one area of concern should be heavy commercial and industrial lending by lightly or unregulated shadow banks at a time when US interest rates are rising. “It could arise in Asia because of the amount of lending through the shadow banking system.”

He added: “In an interconnected world there is an escalation of risks. We have had a decade of stagnation and we are now about to have a decade of vulnerability.”

Recalling the freezing up of the financial markets a decade ago, Brown said governments had sought to compensate for the lack of trust between banks by cooperating more closely.

“In the next crisis a breakdown of trust in the financial sector would be mirrored by breakdown in trust between governments. There wouldn’t be the same willingness to cooperate but rather a tendency to blame each other for what’s gone wrong.

“Countries have retreated into nationalist silos and that has brought us protectionism and populism. Problems that are global as well as national and local are not being addressed. Countries are at war with each other on trade, climate change and nuclear proliferation.”

Brown was scathing about the austerity policies pursued by the coalition government that came to power after he lost the 2010 election.

“Austerity was based on an analysis that what had caused the global recession was the high level of public debt rather than the reckless action of the financial sector. Nobody who has looked at it seriously would come to that conclusion but the Conservatives dined out on it for five years.”

The problem, Brown added, was not that governments borrowed more to boost growth but that the stimulus had not been big enough.

“We have underestimated the power of fiscal policy because of an aversion to deficits and debt. We got back to growth quickly but couldn’t sustain it because of over-rapid fiscal consolidation.

“We were out of recession in 2009 but back in it by 2011. Why? The withdrawal of government support cost us jobs and prosperity but also cost us our ability to cut the deficit in the long term.”

Asked if Theresa May agreed with Brown’s analysis, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said on Thursday: “No. Since 2008 we have built one of the most robust regulatory systems in the world, designed specifically to ensure financial stability, and protect taxpayers.”

Questioned on whether the UK would not suffer any adverse consequences even with a potential loosening of regulations in the US, the spokeswoman said: “In recent years we have reformed regulation of the city, and put in place an incredibly robust system, one of the most robust in the world, at the same time making sure it’s global competitive. We’ve taken action ourselves to make sure that our system is resilient and robust.”

 

 

September 10, 2018

Vucic says Milosevic was "great leader"; what does EU say?

b92.net

Vucic says Milosevic was "great leader"; what does EU say? - WorldEnglish

4-5 minutes


Reconciliation, normalization and good neighborly relations will only be possible if policies of the past are rejected and overcome.

Source: Beta Monday, September 10, 2018 | 15:25

 

(Tanjug, file)

This was said by European Commission spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic, who added that these policies, "as it is well known, have caused decades of misery and suffering to the Western Balkans and the people there.

Kocijancic was responding when asked by a journalist in Brussels about the European Union's position on Sunday's statement made by Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, who said that "(former Serbian President Slobodan) Milosevic was a great leader who had the best intentions."

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini's spokeswoman said that "there must be no space, ambiguity, or respect for those who have conducted those policies or actions."

"The rules for international and domestic forces are clear here," Kocijancic said, highlighting that "reconciliation and good neighborly relations are the essence on which the European Union rests."

She added that "all partners in the region have a clear European perspective and therefore are required to respect these principles."

Kocijancic pointed out to European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker saying this past weekend that "nationalism has never produced solutions, but only problems."