Over at Kurir in Serbia a few days they kindly ran an interview with me about current ex-Yugoslav goings-on.

Here’s the original (Serbian). And Here’s the full transcript in English as I sent it to them.

Note that the opening questions are getting to the assertion that the UK-sponsored UNSC resolution on Srebrenica is somehow intended to get at Republika Srpska leader Dodik. It appears that the Serbian tendency is asking Russia to veto this resolution.

In practice this will boil down to a ‘drafting question’. How does the text refer to Serbian victims of Bosniac attacks near Srebrenica or more generally during the Bosnia conflict? And how precisely will the word ‘genocide’ be used to describe what happened at Srebrenica? Despite various verdicts by the ICTY defining the many war crimes committed at Srebrenica, the application of the G-word to the Srebrenica massacre is hotly contested by many Serbs including Dodik on various not always consistent grounds: it paints ‘Serbs’ en masse as war criminals; it downplays Serb victims of Bosniac atrocities; it does not reflect honestly what actually happened; and so on.

All points worth considering carefully, especially the grimly cynical abuse by the Bosniac leadership of the Srebrenica ‘safe zone’ to attack Serbian targets in the neighbourhood. But (a) Serbian forces massacred several thousand prisoners in cold blood, and (b) Serbia itself then hid the villainous Mladic and Karadzic for years afterwards. Best to start by accepting frankly that that was not good?

Whether the Russians veto this UNSC text in whatever form it emerges will have almost nothing to do with Srebrenica/Bosnians/Serbs a but instead largely depend on how grumpy or conciliatory Moscow is currently feeling about many other issues (Ukraine above all), and how far if at all it wants to annoy wider world Muslim opinion by deploying a veto on this essentially symbolic resolution.

My interview:

CRAWFORD KURIR INTERVIEW JUNE 2015

Great Britain has passed on to Security Council of United Nations demand for adoption Resolution about Srebrenica. Similar demand has been sent to European parliament. Do you think that this action of Great Britain has political background?

No. Plus the British-sponsored draft resolutions are not ‘demands’ but ‘proposals’.

The key thing to understand is that the Srebrenica massacre was something far beyond the ‘usual’ sordid atrocities of the Bosnian conflict. Military officers and soldiers with professional careers and training in the JNA captured thousands of their fellow citizens – and systematically murdered them.

Successive political leaderships in Belgrade insisted that neither the Serbian people as a whole nor the Belgrade high command should be held responsible for these murders, and also pointed out that the Srebrenica enclave had been used by the Bosnian Muslims as a base for attacking nearby Serbian areas. But they have undermined and discredited their case by not cooperating fully with the Hague Tribunal, and above all by allowing the top officer responsible, General Mladic, to hide in Serbia for many years under their active or passive protection.

This was the probably the worst atrocity in Europe in some 50 years, a front-rank war crime with its eerie echoes of the massacre of Serbs by the Nazis in Kragujevac. It is right to remember and acknowledge this horrible event on its 20th anniversary. Serbia’s leaders and the RS leadership in Banja Luka will do well to accept that without any ambiguity, and to reflect on how badly how their equivocations on different aspects of the Srebrenica issue look beyond their borders.

Are you sharing opinion that western countries want to use adoption of Resolution about Srebrenica for displacing President of Republic of Srpska Milorad Dodik?

No. The idea’s ridiculous.

European and other western leaders have simple expectations. Namely that all leaders in the former Yugoslav region accept their political and moral responsibilities as leaders and work to improve difficult situations, not play games with them.

Today’s Europe and modern life as a whole have worrying ‘contradictions’ and tensions (see eg the Eurozone, Ukraine, African migrants, and so on). We need leaders who work hard and well to improve intelligent cooperation, not leaders who play on divisions for banal selfish short-term advantage.

Do you expect Serbian Prime minister Aleksandar Vucic to show up on a 20th anniversary from Srebrenica crime? Would that be good message from Serbia to international community?

I would advise Prime Minister Vucic not to focus on sending a message, good or otherwise, to the ‘international community’. Rather he should decide to do what is right and principled as a gesture of respect to the victims of these war crimes and their families. Honourable, gracious behaviour is never unwise. On the contrary, it shows confidence and projects leadership.

On the other hand, Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic has canceled his visit to Sarajevo with an explanation that it will have to wait better times. How different is actually his politic from Prime Minister’s, in your opinion?

I don’t follow your politics closely enough these days to give a view on that! But it’s always tempting to wait for ‘better times’ to have such high-level meetings. As a former diplomat I’d say that sometimes leaders need to talk to each other face to face because things are difficult. That’s what they’re paid to do.

Serbian relationship with Russia in context of Ukrainian crisis is one of the main subjects last months. Prime minister Aleksandar Vucic announced that we will seek for alternative sources of gas.  Is that move announce of Serbian turning back from Russia?

I doubt it. Any sane government will want to have some flexibility in key energy supplies such as gas. But it also needs to keep good relations with existing suppliers.

Gas has a tendency to come to your house only through complex networks of pipes, so diversifying energy sources is slow and expensive. Serbia will enjoy Russia’s gas supplies for a long time to come, I expect.

Will United States and European Union strictly demand Serbian sanctions for Russia?

Russia’s policies towards Ukraine are in my view a strategic mistake. The human cost is appalling. But more generally Moscow is calling into question different aspects of the political settlement that ended the Cold War and brought a surge of prosperity across the continent including for Russia itself!

Have ‘western’ governments made mistakes too? Of course. But the way Moscow is responding to such mistakes is (in my view) unnecessarily dangerous for all of us.

Serbia knows all about bring the victim of imperialism and aggression. It should have no problem in using its friendly relations with Moscow to insist on Ukraine’s territorial integrity and Ukraine’s right to pursue its own European course on its own terms.

Serbia wants to join the European Union and benefit from general European integration programmes. This is why Washington and EU capitals reasonably look to Serbia to support policies designed to help Ukraine, a major European partner, by raising the cost to Moscow of its policies. Ambivalence in Belgrade on Ukraine looks awful and opportunistic. It undermines Serbia’s credibility as a serious country.

Another important subject is Kosovo status. Serbia has signed Brussels agreement, but there are still many unsolved matters. Will EU eventually insist Serbia to recognize independence of Kosovo or there will be another compromise solution?

 The weight of EU opinion lies in expecting Serbia and Kosovo to sort out their differences as a condition for joining the European union. This is fair – why should EU members bring into their union two members who can’t agree between themselves on many basic questions?

In any case, it will be some years before Serbia is ready for EU membership, and the EU itself may have plenty of changes or upheavals in the meantime! That might create new possibilities for imaginative solutions.

Will solutions of similar crisis around the world be applicable in our case? There is opinion that solution of crisis between two Germanies during the Cold War could be applicable?

There are plenty of options and precedents. Depending on how things go, cunning diplomats might be able to identify language that somehow gives enough reassurance to all concerned. Maybe it would be enough that Serbia agrees formally that it accepts de facto Kosovo’s independence but does not accept it de iure.

The key thing is that both Kosovo and Serbia need to focus on what they have in common, not what divides them. Part of the problem is that Pristina sees no real need to retreat from ‘maximalist’ positions. So you have a stupid deadlock. Serbia effectively blocks Kosovo joining the UN. Kosovo effectively blocks Serbia from joining the EU. Result? Both Serbia and Kosovo are notably poorer.

Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic is first Serbian politician who officially visited Albania. Can this kind of action improve relationship between our two countries?

Of course. Serbia is one of the largest countries in the region. The more it reaches out to its neighbours in a positive, inclusive spirit, the better for everyone including for Serbia itself.

Did this Serbian move show that we can be regional leader in spreading conciliation and pacification in Balkans?

Yes. Serbia of course has the weight to be in principle a serious force for stability and growth. But to achieve that in practice means being serious. That means accepting responsibility for leadership, including on issues such as Srebrenica and Kosovo and indeed Ukraine.

Serbia expects opening of EU negotiations chapters before the end of the year. Do you think that we are realistic in our expectations?

I’m too far away from the detail to give a reliable view. But remember that these great boring packages of EU reforms are in fact things Serbia needs to do in its own interests! The faster you work through them, the better placed you’ll be to grow and prosper.

Do you agree, considering everything we passed, that Serbia has the most difficult way to EU association?

Who cares who has had the easiest or hardest? Serbia had huge advantages when the Cold War ended, and utterly wasted them. The compounding ‘cost of Milosevicism’ to Serbia (ie the wealth you’ve lost by not growing at a modest 2% for 25 years) runs into hundreds of billions of dollars. The numbers are staggering.

Every day wasted in not getting richer is a day invested in getting poorer. As we say in England, if you want to get out of a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging! Sometimes I conclude that too many Balkan leaders and experts prefer to be in a hole and argue loudly about the shared injustice of holes and who ‘deserves’ the biggest darkest nastiest hole, rather than work hard to get out of the hole. See https://charlescrawford.biz/2011/06/10/a-serbia-story/

Serbian Prime minister said during Economic forum in Vienna last week that EU blackmailing us with Kosovo issue. As a well experiences diplomat, do you think that this kind of statement can harm Serbia?

What do you think?

Do you think that relationship between Serbia and Croatia has been truly improved for the last few years? 

There is an underlying regional trend of ‘normalisation’ and perhaps even some shared new sense of Yugosphere opportunity. But both countries have badly underperformed.

Global terrorism is important subject. Considering many of Islamic State members is originally from Balkans, is that a reason to expect certain incidents in this region? How to deal with this threat?

Plenty of Islamic State recruits alas come from my own country too. No easy answer. Patient police work, and policies emphasizing mutual respect but firmly ruling out extremist behavior all make a difference.

How much Serbia prospered since your diplomatic mission in Belgrade?

The murder of Zoran Djindjic was a shocking and tragically successful attack on Serbia’s reform momentum. Most people I know who work in or with Serbia enjoy the society but are disappointed with what has happened in the economy since then. I go quite often to Warsaw. The sense of energy and purpose and confidence there is remarkable. From what I hear, Belgrade is nothing like this: too much bureaucracy and oppressive over-taxation to support badly organized state structures that Serbia cannot afford.

Is it realistic to expect Great Britain Prime minister’s visit of Serbia in succeeding period?

Ask the British Embassy! I suspect that at the moment David Cameron would not see such a visit as a priority, given everything else that’s going on.

Charles Crawford served as UK Ambassador to Sarajevo (1996-98), to Belgrade (2001-2003) and to Warsaw (2003-2007). He now works as a writer and consultant in diplomatic technique.

The witty comments below the article are all elegant variations on the theme of Genocide at Srebrenica? What genocide!? And anyway what about all those British genocides around the planet since for ever, eh? Eh?