ISSN 2330-717X

In The Trap Of Thucydides: The New Albanian-Serbian War? Regional Geopolitical Policy – OpEd

By

Introduction

The insistence on redefining (demarcation) with the Albanians shows that Belgrade does not recognize the political map of Southeast Europe. Even in Belgrade there are heads so hot that they do not hesitate to revive the aspiration of the XLX century for the transformation of Serbia into a Sardinia of the Balkans, ie to create a united superpower in the Balkans, under Serbian rule. Aleksandar Vučić, the Serbian president, is one of those fools of Serbian chauvinism, who sees Belgrade as the capital of this state, while the Berlin process is indirectly benefiting this idea!

Albania and the Albanians on one hand, and Serbia and the Serbs on the other, as they are today, divided into two or three state entities, or tomorrow united and structured in the respective federations, nevertheless continue to have balancing power for the region of Southeast Europe. Both nations, in the first half of this century, seem to be the gateway that will lead them either to the trap of Thucydides – the decisive war for space, or to the path of peace, which will guarantee them prosperity. and prosperity for the second half of the century XXI and beyond, which would turn the region into an oasis of peace and prosperity of the rule of law.

Albanian phoenix in front of steppe’s wolves

We the people living in both geographies and spaces (Albanian and Serbian) since the end of the war (June 12th, 1999) as well as the end of Kosova’s century-old colonialism, see that there is an attempt for a kind of political agreement that can contribute to end the status quo, respectively the frozen state, thus creating the necessary precondition for rapprochement and reconciliation between the two nations. With this, the move towards a prosperous inter-neighborly and European future, but unfortunately, taking more into account the strategic interests of the Serbs, to the detriment of the vital interests of the Albanians! Warning about the possibility of Serbia’s accession with Montenegro to the EU in 2025, further intensifying the non-recognition of Kosova’s independence by the five EU (Greece, Cyprus, Romania, Slovakia and Spain) and, thus, even keeping it (ie Kosova) further as a closed ghetto, speaks volumes about the lack of an EU geopolitical agenda for the region and the undignified treatment of Albanians. 

On 15 July 2009, the European Commission approved a proposal to abolish the visa regime for citizens of Serbia, Montenegro and North Macedonia and to maintain the visa regime for citizens of Albania, Kosova and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

One year ago, EU Commissioner for Home Affairs Anna Cecilia Malmström proposed the abolition of visas, provided that travelers do not stay longer than 90 days and have a biometric passport. However Kosova remains a ghetto!

On 4 May 2016, the European Commission proposes to the Council of the EU and the European Parliament the abolition of visas for Kosova citizens, transferring Kosova to the list of visa-free countries for short-term stay in the Schengen area. The proposal was made together with the positive assessment of the Commission which confirms that Kosova has met the criteria of the roadmap for visa liberalization. Kosova remains a ghetto!

Two years later, the European Commission reacts again, stating that it “maintains the assessment made in 2018 that Kosova has met all the criteria for visa liberalization with the European Union and asks member states to follow the Commission’s recommendation to implement this process, from which Kosova is the only country in the Balkan region that remains excluded.”1)

Kosova still two years after this reaction of the European Commission remains a ghetto, respectively the only mass prison on the continent!

Rightly, my colleague, political scientist Bardhyl Mahmuti, asks the question that still remains unanswered: “What are the reasons for the citizens of Kosova, who have experienced genocide from Serbia, to remain isolated?”

EU spokespersons can say whatever they want and endure the letter. But no one can say that Serbia, Montenegro and North Macedonia were deprived of visas for reasons of “functioning as rule of law”, or for the “small” size of corruption and crime. “The criteria for refusing visa liberalization to the citizens of Kosova are political and ideological and as such, in the current context of pampering Serbia, it poses a risk to Kosova’s future.”2 )

In Serbia, as evidenced by weeks of protests everywhere in major Serbian cities, but also the composition of the parliament, the forces of the extreme right dominate. Their attitude towards Kosova proves how much they are charged with negative energy. Meanwhile, the explosion of these negative energies was noticed worldwide, especially after the decision of the Government of Kosova related to tariffs for Serbian products and the intention to end the era of neocolonialism, which dominated these two decades after the war.

We should understand why the alarm bells are ringing in Belgrade today, but we cannot understand the reaction of Brussels!

Whenever the Albanians have taken serious steps to revive and strengthen their positions, being factored in the region, as is happening in these last two decades with Albania and the Albanians, on the other side, namely Serbia, as a power that has dominated the former Yugoslavia, but which also played a dominant role in Southeast Europe, automatically awakens a sense of unease and insecurity.

Resolving this historic knot could be quite similar to the case of Great Britain and America in the postcolonial era, but the situation could easily precipitate towards a new war, as happened after 1900 between Great Britain and the German Reich, or as Theo Sommer puts it about China-US relations, something similar, “as happened 2,500 years ago between Sparta and Athens.”[3]

The Greek historian Thucydides has described in detail how both Hellenic city-states, in an almost numb state of somnambulism, had fallen into the trap of debauchery. In his work entitled “Destined For War”, the well-known Harvard University political scientist Graham Allison goes back 2400 years in history and quotes from Thucydides’ work on the Peloponnesian War: “It was the rise of Athens and the concern and concern that this rise caused to Sparta, which made war inevitable “, [4] following the situation created in the meantime between Serbia and Kosova, especially the reactions of the leaders of Serbia, who do not take the trouble to hide their muscles. threatening through the positioning of entire army divisions on the border with Kosova, and now, most recently, even with the military parade, which was rather a confrontation, the question logically arises:

– Will the rise and prosperity of the second Albanian Republic (Kosova), and thus the factorization of the Albanian nation, have the same effect in Serbia?

In the case of Athens and Sparta, Thucydides pointed out two factors that were driving the chariot of war in motion: on the one hand, the growing appetites of Athens, which were the product of a kind of uplifting feeling and which marked that kind of superior self-esteem; on the other hand there is a kind of insecurity, fear, even a kind of determination to maintain the status quo on the part of the already stabilized power of Sparta. In Thucydides ‘judgment, Athens’ position was irrevocable. In proportion, as her power was on the rise, feelings also grew that she was being treated badly, forcing the conviction that the old power would now have to adapt to the new reality.

The Greek historian had also noted that Sparta described Athens’ behavior and attitude as unreasonable, but also that its dominant role and position had been jeopardized from the moment Athens began its rise and recovery. The model of how the two city-states entered the long 30-year war, the longest in Antiquity, and how both of them finally suffered great losses, becoming so weak that they could not withstand the Persian invasion. history has proved it well to us.

This kind of dynamics of the historical notion, has in the meantime set in motion the chariot of war of Serbia (and thus of the Serbian nation) and Kosova (and thus of the Albanian nation), preceding this clash with an onslaught of Serbia’s fury over the annexation of northern Kosova, counting more on a “flashback”?

Allison’s research in this area has this result: “In eleven of the sixteen cases dealt with in the last 500 years, cases in which we are dealing with a rapid shift of power between a rising force and the previous occupying nation, war it was as a conclusion, a result “. [5]

In these types of wars for hegemony, towards the preventive war, the established power slipped, from the rising power, while there were contradictions, when the de facto forces were more or less the same. In this case, of course, Kosova’s military strength is embryonic, incomparably weaker than that of Serbia, but it is this fact that could prompt Serbia, in the name of prevention, to attack the action for the annexation of Northern Kosova. Two of the twelve cases handled by Allison dealt with the rivalry between Britain and Germany before World War I, as well as the Japanese challenge to the US, which came to the LDB with bloody proportions for the entire globe. 

However, this does not mean that a new war between Kosova and Serbia is inevitable. History proves that the Albanian phoenix only in the years 1878-1999 faced the steppe wolves, not less than seven times in a row. Initially losing Toplica [1878]; then losing the Sandzak of the New Bazaar and all of Kosova and part of the vilayet of Manastir (1912). Further during the First and Second Balkan War (1912-1914), then during the First World War and which will continue with the War of the Kreshniks (Kaçaks, as it is popularly known, the war of 1918-1924); further during the Second World War, especially in its epilogue (1944-’45) to end with the KLA war (1998-99), when Kosova was liberated, but without the New Bazaar Sandzak and without Presheva, Bujanovci and Medvegja. In four of the sixteen cases handled by Allison and his team, the rivalry between the rising power and the established one had not ended in war. The reason was: restraint and veneration of strategic strategic interests that had avoided war. Why not the case of Kosova and that of Serbia the fifth case in this series, which does not slide towards war? Mutual strategic reasons and interests lean towards peace and prosperity.

Taiwan “Community” and the Serbian myth of the “cradle of the nation”

The preamble to the constitution of the Republic of China states precisely: “Taiwan is part of the sacred territory of the People’s Republic of China.” The state and constitutional obligation continues to be emphasized: “It is a sacred obligation of all the Chinese people, including the citizens of the country in Taiwan, to fulfill the major task of reunifying the homeland.”

Kosova is treated somewhat similarly, of course completely contrary to the historical, demographic and logical reality in the current Serbian constitution. In its preamble, but also in the normative parts, it is emphasized clearly, that Kosova is part of Serbia, while the church monuments, together with the spaces around them are treated as ostensibly evidence of history, formulating a pseudo-argument that it represents the “cradle of Serbia”!

Even in history textbooks, this definition of Kosova as “Serbian land” has already been established. Here is what is written in the preamble of the Serbian constitution: “Based on the state tradition of the Serbian people and equality… citizens and ethnic communities in Serbia; based on the fact that the Autonomous Province of Kosova and Metohija is an integral part of Serbia, ie has a position as an integral part of the sovereign state of Serbia and that from this position the Autonomous Province of Kosova, its bodies, as well as all constitutional state bodies have obligations and duties to protect the state interests of Serbia in Kosova and Metohija in all political relations. internal and external “. [6]

Meanwhile, in the seventh chapter of the Serbian constitution, Kosova is treated as an organic part of it in seven separate articles.

If China’s economic and military potential, along with its political will, speaks in favor of Taiwan’s reunification with China in the not-too-distant future, even despite strong US opposition, that bloodshed could become a reality.  The case of Crimea, but also the other procedures being created by the Russian geopolitical agenda, also benefits China’s political agenda.

– If the pressure on Taipei (the capital of Taiwan, SR) from China, but also from the citizens increases every day, the reaction of the traditional Chinese right (Koumintang), which has turned Taiwan into a strong military base from the most dangerous to plans, can easily be handed over, what will be the US reaction then?

Taiwan’s two parliamentary parties are active in favor of reunification with China. Chinese propaganda that guarantees economic facilities and welfare for the island’s 23 million citizens is permanent. This island could easily be turned into the flames of the Third World War.

– Can parallels be drawn between this Chinese island and the Serbian “Zajednica” tomorrow in Kosova? The comparison lags anyway and seems utterly slanderous. But this is not how Belgrade judges, as it de facto treats the whole of Kosova as a “Serbian community”, as “the cradle of Serbia, that is, as the” cradle of the Serbian nation “, etc. In this strategic field, according to Belgrade, changes of a geopolitical nature expected to take place in Ukraine, Taiwan, etc., could produce a spectacular action of the return of the Serbian Army to Kosova, or at least to the “Northern Island” of Kosova. Currently, through the dialogue in Brussels and secret meetings, these illusions of the Serbian dream, already set on the official political agenda, are being nurtured. Europe, headed by Ms. Mogherini, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, before this echelon of pro-Serbian diplomacy, it seems that individuals and circles of Albanian politics from Pristina have already left. here in Tirana! Serbia’s attempt to annex the North of Kosova, even with an “Agreement”, proves once again how predisposed Serbia is to fall into the trap of Thucydides with both feet.

From the moment Donald Trump entered the White House, but really bothered me, from the moment Zuo Yiping promoted the so-called “strategy on the role of superpowers” (2012), the geopolitical position of Southeast Europe had begun to suffer. significant changes. This change was expressed by the Security Advisor to the President of the United States, John Bolton, in his speech delivered in Kiev (2018). [7]

This new position, automatically, influenced the relationship between the two rival nations in the Balkans (the Albanian and the Serbian nation), to mark new collision quotas. The Serbs, taking advantage of the political momentum, are trying to expand their spheres of interest, even imposing the correction of Kosova’s border, which de facto means the annexation of the North. The statement of the Serbian president Aleksandar Vucic about the redefining (razgraničenje) with the Albanians, clearly shows that Serbia has already fallen within the opposite perimeter of Thucydides. In this case, a few ordinary provocations would be enough, which know how to improvise the Serbian intelligence services (remember the “Russian Train”, the assassination of Oliver Ivanovi)), for the conflict to become inevitable, although the war hawks now they are not absent in Prishtina either.

The Serbian president in his shift in the cities near the border with Kosova, starting with Vraja, once one of the ethnically purest Albanian cities (1877), up to Kurshumli and my Medica (Medvedja), clearly proves that he is the one who was during the wars in the former Yugoslavia (1991-1999), as Milosevic’s spokesman, further nurturing the “fighting spirit” of his Chetniks who now dominate the Serbian Parliament.

Chinese expansion towards the Balkans – a geopolitical act

Why did I emphasize at the beginning of this essay the case of Taiwan and then the insistence of Serbia to keep the case of Northern Kosova “frozen” for so long, an example of similar models in Turkish Cyprus, Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, etc.?

For some time now, in Serbian academic circles, but also at the highest levels of politics, in addition to Russia’s rising role, special attention has been paid to China’s rise. The most serious media did not pass without commenting on D. Trump’s statement after the meeting with the Chinese president who speaks in favor of the thesis for a review of reciprocal policies, which favor a kind of cooperation for the benefit of the Sino-US relations of the G2- shit. “I think we can solve almost every problem in the world,” Trump once said.

In this possible new rearrangement, Belgrade is trying to take the plunge, opening all the gates to Chinese investors. The Chinese state-owned bank “EXIM” is already present with its investments in several areas. It has started building highways in Macedonia, Montenegro and claims to conclude this network with Serbia. In Belgrade, the Chinese consortium “China Road And Bridge Construction” has built a long bridge over the Danube, totaling 170m euros, 85% of which is credit. Some 700m euros are being invested in a thermal power plant and the country’s largest steel processing plant in Smederevo, which is expected to pass into Chinese hands. [9]

Another project of special importance that China is investing in the interest of Serbia, is the high-speed railway between Budapest and Belgrade, which is about 350 km, and where about 3.2 billion euros are expected to be invested. The modernization of this railway is expected to be completed in 2023, where the connection time of these two centers will be reduced from 8 hours, as it is now, to 3 hours. In addition, the possibility of modernizing the entire railway network from Athens to Budapest is left open.

These and other projects that the Chinese plan to fund in the region, with a particular emphasis on Serbia, come as a result of the reluctance of investors from the EU and the West in general. This hesitation and this space is being exploited by China, but always rivaled by Russia and Turkey.

These and other projects that the Chinese plan to fund in the region, with a particular emphasis on Serbia, come as a result of the reluctance of investors from the EU and the West in general. This hesitation and this space is being exploited by China, but always rivaled by Russia and Turkey.

In a lengthy article published in Hamburg’s Die Zeit, Ulrich Ladurner and Steffen Richter hit the mark, stressing that China, through these investments, “first and foremost” aims to increase political influence in Europe. wants to influence EU decision – making in the future, even indirectly. ” [10]

Northern Kosova and Sandzak in the light of Serbian geopolitics

The Brussels-mediated dialogue with Serbia, which started as a technique in 2011 and ended as a policy in 2015 (sic), has gradually been subordinated to Serbia’s political agenda with the EU and is benefiting Serbian geopolitics. The increasingly open insistence on the annexation of Northern Kosova, as once that of Toplica (1878), must be seen in the function of isolating the Sandzak from Kosova. Serbia bears in mind that, despite the success of assimilation policies, the indigenous inhabitants of the Sandzak, who remain in the majority, even though they declare themselves Bosniaks, despite the Slavic substratum and the decline of the language (especially from the younger generation), they still feel it. Albanians themselves and, consequently, the connection with Mitrovica and Kosova are considered vital. In the light of fulfilling the political agenda, which will be in line with geopolitical interests and for the benefit of Serbian geopolitics, we must see the occupation of the peak of Pancic under the noses of the French KFOR, but also the intentions to capture the peaks of Shala e Bajgore, Lake Ujman and exploited segments of Trepça in the north.

The geostrategic interests of Serbia (and of course Russia) have been jeopardized by the failure of the coups in Podgorica and Skopje and, above all, by the accession of these two countries to NATO. In this regard, in line with these interests, we must see the categorical refusal of Serbia to join NATO, even in the distant future, despite its participation in various military missions of partnership with the United States.

Meanwhile, in the light of Serbian geopolitics, one should see the success it has achieved within the Berlin process, being imposed as an attractive locomotive of the region (!) However, both Berlin and Brussels are already clear that Belgrade’s goal for domination of the region, by not recognizing Kosova further, is dangerous for the sovereignty, not only of Kosova, but also of Bosnia. The north of Kosova is seen from Belgrade connected with Sandzak, and even with the future of Bosnia, respectively with Republika Srpska.

On the eve of the First Balkan War, in that general picture of international relations, the war in Tripoli (modern-day Libya) will serve Russia’s satellites in Southeast Europe (Serbia, Montenegro and Bulgaria) to whet the appetite for territorial expansion to the detriment of the Ottoman Empire, which meant de facto new annexation of Albanian territories. The Sandzak of the New Bazaar, which was part of the vilayet of Kosova with Skopje as its center, but which in the geostrategic plane was considered a “wedge of territory” between Serbia and Montenegro, serving as a natural bridge between Northern Albania (ie, at that time the vilayet of Kosova) and Bosnia, was extremely important in the geopolitical plane to connect Serbia with Montenegro. The Russians then constantly urged their satellites to form military alliances for coordinated anti-Ottoman action. “Encouraged by Russian diplomats and agents,” writes Norman Rich, “Slavic states, plus Greece, entered into negotiations, which resulted in the formation of an anti-Turkish coalition.” [11]

“The first link in this coalition,” Rich continues, “was an alliance agreement between Bulgaria and Serbia, signed on March 13, 1912.” “Well, this is a miracle,” Russian Foreign Minister Sazanov said when he heard of the alliance: “500,000 bayonets to defend the Balkans.” This should permanently block the way for German penetration and Austrian occupation.” [12]

The annexation of Kosova, meanwhile (1912) and Sandzak (1912) and the division of the latter with Montenegro, is a product of this pan-Slavic strategy. The annexation of the North today, whether through an agreement, where the firm from the Albanian side could put any of the puppets imposed by the settlement centers that during the war, or through a “flash chair” previously awarded, is just an addition to that which was realized in 1912! [18]. The irrational Serbian nationalist discussion in relation to Kosova, with its focus on the North, has a clear strategic background. If in the era of the Balkan Wars the Serbs tried to have access to the sea, they already feel completely incompetent and partly isolated! Serbia’s primary geostrategic interest at the time was projected in favor of taking control of the North-South axis, which means the Morava-Vardar gorge, providing access to Thessaloniki and through the occupation of Kosova, creating the precondition for the occupation of Albania and, thus, also access to the port of Durres.

But for almost nine decades (1912-1999), Serbia failed to undo the Albanian presence in Kosova, although it enjoyed the once open, more tacit support of some Western and Turkish powers. Let us recall here the Tito agreement of 1953 (in Rijeka) with the Turkish Foreign Minister, Ismet Idonu, which was de facto a continuation of the projects of the Serbian academician Cubriloviiq (1936 and 1944) for the displacement of Albanians from Kosova, Sandzak and Macedonia to Turkey, up to the Serbian General Staff project codenamed “Patkoi” (1999), which was offered to the Germans, and then made public by the Bulgarian Secret Service.

Meanwhile, the creation of two independent states (Northern Macedonia and Kosova) has permanently buried Serbia’s aforementioned cruise projects. Meanwhile, the insistence on the partition of Kosova (annexation of the North), seems to have to do with the Serbian geostrategic interest, which was considered closed and which is exclusively related to Sandzak as “Serbian land”, or the former Raska. Its conservation as a vital Serbian interest seems to further nurture Belgrade’s hopes for the return of Montenegro within Serbia and Russian spheres of interest in the not-too-distant future, as the pan-Slavic circles in Moscow and Belgrade estimate.

The alarm bells for the revival of the Thucydides trap are meanwhile ringing again. “An open issue (which awaits Brussels) is at the door. Europe has badly neglected the last six decades of the six Balkan countries. The EU offers them the full prospect of accession, even to Serbia and Montenegro, promising them that this prospect should become a reality by 2025. However, talks with these countries are just beginning: Clashes between “Serbia and Kosova continue to have their influence, the internal situation in Bosnia is hopeless and chaotic, while in Kosova the legal order is under the influence of MAFIAS”, [13] concludes Theo Sommer, in a long study.

For some nuances, the political momentum and table of diplomacy around the Kosova-Serbia dialogue, especially after the imposition of tariffs on Serbian (Bosnian) products by the Haradinaj government, takes us back to the first weeks before the outbreak of World War I and the dilemmas it had Berlin for the situation created. This dilemma of Germany is presented in more detail by Gotlib von Jagov, the head of the German Foreign Service, in a July 18 letter to Linkowski, the German ambassador to Britain, to explain why the Germans consider it important to first-hand support for Austria.

“If the Austrians do not take action now, they will lose the last chance for political rehabilitation and their stay in the Balkans would be destroyed forever. The result would be the establishment of Russian hegemony in the Balkans, an impermissible expansion of Russian power and influence.” for both Germany and Austria. ” [14]

Russia’s attempt for long-term accommodation in Serbia (base in Nis, agency spread over 3,000 people throughout Serbia, even in northern Kosova under the guise of humanitarian organizations and specialists in various fields) and still in Republika Srpska in Bosnia, supporting the annexation of northern Kosova and the complete subjugation of the Sandzak, by today’s Berlin, if not by Brussels, should be considered an inadmissible and, in any case, intolerable act. In this spirit, perhaps we should look at the recent proceedings of the Berlin summit, a while ago, where Angela Merkel’s determination seemed to repel for a moment all those who dreamed of a new redefinition in the region, which would be at the expense of Kosova and Albanian interests in general. It should be made clear to Belgrade that the boundaries set by the Dayton Conference (1995) to Serbia in the West, creating a Serb state entity within Bosnia (Republika Srpska) and those marked on 17 February 2008 by the proclamation of Kosova’s independence in southern Serbia, are inviolable.

The insistence on redefining (demarcation) with the Albanians shows that Belgrade does not recognize the political map of Southeast Europe. Even in Belgrade there are heads so hot that they do not hesitate to revive the aspiration of the XLX century for the transformation of Serbia into a Sardinia of the Balkans, ie to create a united superpower in the Balkans under Serbian rule. Aleksandar Vuiqii, the Serbian president, is one of those suckers of Serbian chauvinism, who sees Belgrade as the capital of this state, while the Berlin process is in indirect benefit of this idea!

The repeated argument that is heard in diplomatic circles everywhere, especially in Brussels, with emphasis during these 8 years of dialogue between Kosova and Serbia (2011-203), which seems to find a kind of satisfaction in the legal discourse of the International Court in The Hague, i applied especially during the trial of Hitler of the Balkans, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, is that the KLA war for the freedom of Kosova was conducted not against the Serbian people. So, it is not described as a war between the two nations, but against the Milosevic regime, which turns out to be not entirely correct. The Serbian people, especially those in Kosova, which is known as a column embedded everywhere in the most strategic areas, mainly within the period 1918-1966, but also the vast majority of the nation everywhere in Serbia and Bosnia, within the Serbian space, was enthusiastically associated with the cause. of Milosevic, which was equated in two theses:

– first, the grand solution: Yugoslavia under Serbian hegemony;

– second, the small seelction, the creation of a Greater Serbia.

Both of these theses have their source in the very nature of Serbian nationalism, which focuses on territorial expansion. Under normal circumstances, as claimed by the most prominent figure among those who made peace in 1814 (in Vienna), Wilhelm von Humbold (considered one of the greatest philosophers and erudites of his time), the French people supported with so much fire Napoleon’s cause for the conquest of Europe, “had lost all right to a generous peace.” [16] Also on this line of judgment is the relationship that will keep the German people with Hitler’s cause for the conquest of Europe and the world during World War II.

In this respect, the Serbian people and its elite are no exception. This is confirmed again, after two decades, by the Serbian President himself, A. Vuiqi vetë, in his speech at a rally with Serbian citizens in North Mitrovica (2018), returning to the myth of the “Serbian cradle”!

Of course, the insistence on Kosova as a “Serbian cradle” has to do with the truth, as much as his malice has to do with Raska as a “Serbian cradle”, Shumadia or Timok as a “Serbian cradle”, etc. Let us remember that Serbia, since the settlement of Serbs in the Balkans (Vll century), respectively since the creation of the state (1844), have changed not less than 10 capitals, from Prizren, Krushevci, Smederevo, Nis to Belgrade, typical of nomadic and non-indigenous peoples.

Of course, history is on the Albanian side. It is exactly Kosova, ancient Dardania, where the Albanians started the political and military battle as a nation (Albanian League of Prizren, 1878) for the formation of the modern Albanian state.

But what are the political motives that the Serbian elite restores the inappropriate articulation of the Serbian myth about Kosova?

The Serbian myth of Kosova “includes religious elements, which means that after Golgotha comes the resurrection, thus taking elements of the New Testament, namely the symbol of suffering (ordeal and resurrection). [A. Xhaferi: 2004] Introducing the nation Serbs in the role of the victim, while others, Albanians and Westerners (NATO), as an aggressor, and in the name of Serbian myth, the Serbian elite once and for all today seeks permission, respectively is preparing the alibi for the annexation of the North. of Thucydides, but this time this bloodshed of Serbia seems to be nurtured by Brussels, respectively the states that are tumultuous the partition of Kosova, even under the platform agreed between Thaqi and Vucic for the change of borders!

But, by annexing the North of Kosova to Serbia, Brussels should be clear that it is entering into complex obligations: that of maintaining the impossible peace in the region! Circles of diplomats from traditionally friendly countries of Serbia seem to aim at the restoration of Greater Serbia, ie the realization of Milosevic’s second thesis, with which he operated on the eve of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, treating it as a joint partner tomorrow and The EU. However, this action is by no means and can not be a guarantee of lasting peace and security in Southeast Europe.

Conclusion

Karl Popper, the well-known American sociologist, examining postcolonial societies and the great needs for cooperation, rightly insists that modern societies must be open, not only in the current context, but also in relation to the future. Based on the continuous policy of creating balances between the great powers, ie in realpolitik itself, the partition of Kosova today can be imposed as a decision-making act by the powerful, similar to the granting of 2500 ha of land to Northern Macedonia and 8200 ha of pastures , strategic water resources and mountain peaks of Montenegro (2018), but the decision imposed on the slandered ethnic bases for the partition of Kosova clearly hinder the opening of the perspective of long-term peace and prosperous future.

There are a number of strong arguments that speak in favor of preserving the territorial integrity of Kosova and the process of inter-Albanian integration.

Current Kosova, within these boundaries set by the Slavic political-military elites (Serbian, Montenegrin and Macedonian) does not even represent approximately the space that the Vilayet of Kosova had in the last decades of the Ottoman Empire. So, these borders that Kosova has today, are to the detriment of the demographic, historical, geographical, economic reality. Therefore, emphasizing the re-alignment of these borders to the detriment of Kosova, as it insists, is completely unacceptable. After all, this argument has not been applied to any federal units of the former Yugoslavia, which are already independent.

Arguments of a geopolitical nature also speak against the partition of Kosova. The Republic of Kosova aspires to be a natural and active part of the free democratic world, as an integral part of the world values, such as NATO and the EU.

The arguments put forward by the Serbian side for the partition of Kosova are completely unstable for the modern era, precisely for the values on which the EU is built. Meanwhile, Belgrade can not put forward solid arguments of a geostrategic nature, as Kosova’s current borders do not impede Serbia’s communication with Montenegro and, thus, the Adriatic Sea, as well as with Northern Macedonia, Greece and the Aegean Sea.

On the contrary, the violation of Kosova’s borders provokes a new Albanian-Serbian war.

To conclude this analysis of current developments full of twists and turns, I am also highlighting an excerpt from Theo Sommer’s latest study.

“An open issue (which awaits Brussels) is at the door. Europe has neglected the last six Balkan countries in recent decades. The EU offers them the full prospect of accession, even to Serbia and Montenegro.” promising that this perspective should become a reality by 2025. However, talks with these countries are in the beginning: clashes (quarrels) between Serbia and Kosova have their impact; the internal situation in Bosnia is hopeless and chaotic, while in Kosova the legal order is under the influence of the mafia “[15].

And when the legal order is under the influence of the mafia, democracy and individual freedoms are trampled without mercy, while the possibilities for the recovery of the Republic are seriously questioned.
_______________

Notes and footnotes

1. ttps://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/sq/IP_16_1626

2. Bardhyl Mahmuti, burimi: lajmi.net/bardhyl-mahmuti-ti-themi-stop- hipokrizise-se-be-se- ndaj-kosoves/? fbclid=IwAR0FrNCCySgRiAAgamUt9xjDF3BhHuyu3cbwYIxv63D0e3QeZ8oEmNWOBPI

3. Theo Sommer, Cina FIRST — Die Welt auf dem Weg ins chinesische Jahrhundert’, Hamburg/München 2019, f.353

4. Graham Allison, “Destined For War”, Londër 2016

5. Th.Sommer, po aty, f. 355

6. http://cdn1.vol.at/2006/10/Serbien.pdf

7. https://abcnews.al/bolton-shba-nuk-do-te-nderhyje-ne-ceshtjen-e-territorit-mes-serbise-dhe-kosoves/

8. https://www.t-online.de/nachrichten/ausland/usa/id_82664902/trump-und-xi-us-praesident-will-mit-china-welt-probleme-loesen.html

9. Th. Sommer, po aty

10. https://www.zeit.de/zustimmung?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zeit.de%2F2017%2F39%2Fchina-investitionen-einfluss-europa

11.Norman Rich, Diplomacia e fusqive të mëdha, Tiranë 2006, f.426

12. Po aty

13. Theo Sommer, po aty, f. 439

14. N.Rich, po aty, f 464

15. Theo Sommer, “China First: Die Welt auf dem Weg ins chinesische Jahrhundert), Hamburg

      2019, f. 439    

____________________________________

* Dr. Sadri Ramabaja, Universiteti ILIRIA, Prishtinë /Republic of Kosova

Click here to have Eurasia Review's newsletter delivered via RSS, as an email newsletter, via mobile or on your personal news page.

5 thoughts on “In The Trap Of Thucydides: The New Albanian-Serbian War? Regional Geopolitical Policy – OpEd

  • June 20, 2021 at 12:52 pm
    Permalink

    Completely delusional article

    Reply
  • June 22, 2021 at 3:50 am
    Permalink

    I agree with Steven…Completely delusional article

    Reply
  • June 22, 2021 at 7:22 am
    Permalink

    Interesting article, in regards to the below extract this is the equivalent of North Macedonians claiming that Macedonia was partitioned during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire when “Macedonia” did not exist as a single political, religious or ethnic entity. In fact, Macedonia aka the salad was a mixed bag of Ethnic, language and religious groups. As for the Albanians, more so Muslim Albanians had elevated political, social and commercial status due to faith hence the disproportionate number of Muslim v Christian Albanians in the Kosovo Vilayet in comparison to Albania proper today. Hence no one lost anything, simply the ottoman administration left and the Serb administration took over. Perhaps this prevailing attitude amongst both sides will drive them to any future wars. Hopefully not, for an outsider these groups are culturally very similar.

    “Initially losing Toplica [1878]; then losing the Sandzak of the New Bazaar and all of Kosova and part of the vilayet of Manastir (1912). “

    Reply
  • June 23, 2021 at 8:28 am
    Permalink

    How does this drivel get published?

    Reply
  • July 7, 2021 at 5:57 am
    Permalink

    It’s Kosovo not Kosova

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Étienne de Vignolles Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.