Koštunica should have apologised

Are you surprised by the apology that the president of Serbia and Montenegro Svetozar Marović offered to Croatia? No, although I must admit that apologies are no longer an issue in our bilateral talks. We expected the apology to come in 2000, but the former president Vojislav Koštunica at the Zagreb Summit avoided to talk about what happened in Yugoslavia during the last decade. What do you think about the timing? A couple of months after president Koštunica avoided the apology, foreign minister Goran Svilanović tried to articulate something that sounded more like a regret that an apology. After that, our relations focused on trying to find solutions for the accumulated issues, and in the last three years, especially considering the “baggage” the new government brought with it to solving these issues, I think we have made considerable progress. President Marović’s apology would not have been possible had the relations between Zagreb, Belgrade, and Podgorica considerably changed for the better in the last three years. These changes created a favourable climate for Marović to say what he said in Belgrade. Does Marović’s apology reflect the political will of the Serbia and Montenegro government? Unfortunately, there is no precise answer to that question. Statements and apologies are usually given when they articulate or reflect a general situation in a country, but also as a means to an end. I am still a little sceptical as to whether president Marović’s apology is a position of a righteous man who is looking back on a historical process and trying to give his opinion about it, whether it is an isolated act, or whether, and if at all, his apology is an indication of the opinion of a majority of people in his country. Do you agree, then, with the view that this is in the first place a strategic move? Such a statement, in a time when Serbia and Montenegro is fighting, somewhat frantically, for its basic political identity is a favourable wind in its sails on the road to Brussels. The apology certainly cannot its international position, where the most important thing is the development of its relations with the EU. Therefore, I think it is unnecessary and even incorrect to relativise and demean Marović’s statement. The events in Serbia and Montenegro will be an indication of what Marović said, because he in a way made a pledge with his apology. It remains to be seen whether Serbia and Montenegro’s politicians and public will disprove Marović’s statement by their actions and show that it did not close a chapter in history because it cannot be closed. On the other hand, Marović’s statement might reopen the discussion in Serbia and Montenegro about the collective political responsibility for aggression against Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina under Milošević’s regime. Therefore, I think that Marović’s statement marks the beginning of a period when the people of Serbia and Montenegro will be able to openly discuss the openly malignant politics of a ten or so years ago. Return of refugees Both countries deal with bilateral issues in a knot of internal and foreign affairs, as these issues are the heritage of war and post-war period and present a danger to any government. Can this knot be untied and will this apology help? One has to be very precise here. Such gestures are a useful thing, but the next day they have to be turned into concrete actions. We must not give them the dimension they do not have. The discussion about Milošević’s aggression against Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina that might arise after Marović’s apology is important because it might have a positive effect on our relations. Unsolved issues, such as the visa regime, borders, and the return of refugees and their property, carry a very serious political, economic, moral, and psychological weight, and should be dealt with from the bottom, not from the top. These issues are of a bilateral character. As far as Croatia is concerned, the progress we have made in the last three years would not have been possible had we not changed some common misconceptions at home, such as that the return of Serbs and their property will somehow harm our country. We have signed a couple of agreements, such as the Prevlaka agreement that deals with borders, which is a particularly delicate issue for countries like ours that do not have a hundred-year history of independence and are burdened by war heritage. So, in order to do something bilaterally, we first have to change certain things within our own borders. Of course, Serbia and Montenegro have to familiarise its public with the scope and weight of these bilateral issues with Croatia, in order to smooth the progress of negotiations. The general opinion is that Croatia hesitated too much in solving key issues like the visa regime liberalisation, and that it want to chose where and when it will start to improve its relations with Serbia and Montenegro. In politics, timing is often the most critical variable. Marović’s apology could not have come three years ago, because at that time he was not in a position to make that apology. Mr. Koštunica was, but he did not do it. In these three years, a lot of things had to happen for president Marović to say what he said. So, timing is important. Haste and bad preparation can often compromise something that needs to be done. I think that Serbia and Montenegro politicians will agree that in these three years we have agreed on a lot of issues and that negotiations are going very well, bearing in mind that they revolve around processes, like the return of refugees, not events. I am moderately optimistic as far as that is concerned, because I know the burden we entered the year 2000 with, and what we have achieved since. On the other hand, it is dangerous to force situations that are supposed to result in a paper with both parties’ signatures on it. Stimulant Why only moderately optimistic? Because quality negotiations about such delicate issues require political and institutional stability. We are facing elections that I am sure cannot sidetrack Croatia from its road towards the EU or harm the position it has towards its neighbours. But I am not sure as to whether the stability of Serbia and Montenegro institutions is high enough for the relations to continue at this pace in the next few years. Is the EU aware of this, in view of the pressure it is putting on Croatia? I think it is. I always say that it is not easy to maintain stable relations with unstable neighbours. Our neighbours proclaim state of emergency, employ strong protective measures, and are still seeking full political identity. It is not easy to conduct foreign policy with neighbours where leading political figures are being assassinated. Therefore, every step forwards is welcome, like this Marović’s gesture. Croatia’s success in fulfilling its obligations in relations with its neighbours depends on the general stability in Southeastern Europe. Has the time come for the declaration between Zagreb and Belgrade about the common positions on entering the EU and stimulating the whole region, that has recently been announced by the Serbian Vice-Prime Minister Čedomir Jovanović? I must remind you that at the time of submitting the application we have offered Slovenia, BH, and SMN a document that contained the basic principles that all would have to adhere to on the road towards the EU. This is a unique period in the history of the Balkans, as all of the countries have democratically elected governments and almost identical foreign policy goals. We all want to enter the EU. Since Croatia, as an SAP country, had taken such a huge step as applying for the EU membership, we though why not offer a document to Belgrade and Sarajevo? Unfortunately, we did not succeed. We have run into reservedness on the other side that expressed support for Croatia, but did not sign the document. But we remain open and maybe it is precisely this apology that will lay the foundations for a document that will express our aspirations. Marović’s apology has a multilateral character, the EU leaders’ reactions are a proof of that, and it would be great if the capacity of this event was felt in BH as well, and served as a sort of a stimulant for the whole region.