United States Institute of Peace • www.usip.org • Tel. 202.457.1700 • Fax. 202.429.6063

UNITED STates institute of peace

© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

“I propose a simple but 

dramatic move: Kosovo 

President Fatmir Sejdiu should 

invite Serbian President Boris 

Tadic to Pristina. A courtesy 

call requires no nameplates, 

no table, no intermediaries, 

and no formalities beyond a 

handshake . . . The EU requirement, which Belgrade has 

to meet sooner and Pristina 

later, is to establish good 

neighborly relations. A Tadic 

visit to Pristina would be a big 

step in the right direction.”

June 3, 2010 

A New Kind of Balkans Drama

Summary

•	 The Balkans face more trouble in Kosovo as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina unless the 

United States and European Union take dramatic steps to get both back on track towards EU 

membership.

•	 In Bosnia, the international community needs to reconstitute itself as well as support an effort 

to reform the country’s constitution.

•	 In Kosovo, Pristina and Belgrade need to break through the barriers to direct communication 

and begin discussions on a wide range of issues.

•	 This brief proposes specific diplomatic measures to meet these needs.

The Balkans fly well below the radar of high government officials today, but the problems there are 

still real, and risk recreating serious instability. As the U.S. hands the region off to the EU, Brussels 

and Washington need to take a few dramatic diplomatic steps to prevent future trouble. 

There are two obvious foci for trouble: Bosnia and Kosovo. 

Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Two Constitutional Problems

The problems in Bosnia and Herzegovina are constitutional, in two senses. First, the Bosnian 

Constitution, as written at Dayton in 1995, does not meet European standards and will hold Bosnia 

back from joining the EU. This has been recognized both in a 2009 European Court of Human 

Rights’ decision on discriminatory provisions in the constitution and more comprehensively in 

a 2005 Venice Commission report, but no progress has been made in adopting amendments to 

correct the deficiencies. 

Second, the international community is no longer constituted for best effect in Bosnia. The High 

Representative responsible for Dayton agreement implementation has lost the capacity to enforce 

his almost dictatorial “Bonn” powers. Two dozen European embassies communicate a cacophony 

of different views to the government in Sarajevo, where the Americans have as many political officers stationed as in major West European capitals at the height of the Cold War. The international 

proposals for reforming the Bosnian Constitution have changed dramatically from one negotiating 

session to the next, depending on whether Americans or Europeans were preparing the draft. 

The solution to the second problem leads to the solution of the first. The international community needs to unify its voice. My proposal is this: all bilateral embassies of EU member states in 

Sarajevo should be closed, with half the personnel returned to their capitals and half transferred 

to a newly constituted EU representative, who would be given the residual Bonn powers and 

Daniel Serwer

E-mail: dserwer@usip.org

Phone: 202.429.3840

peaceBrieF35
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

A New Kind of Balkans Drama

page 2 • PB 35 • June 3, 2010

responsibilities of the High Representative (until the agreed conditions are met). This would give 

real meaning to the EU’s efforts to unify its foreign and security policy. The U.S. should follow suit, 

reducing its embassy by two-thirds, returning one-third to Washington and assigning one-third to 

the Sarajevo office of the EU representative. 

More consolidated and streamlined, the EU and U.S. would at the same time unify their voices 

on the Bosnian constitutional issues. This process should start now by creating a small expert 

group—two Europeans and two Americans would be more than sufficient—to come to agreement on constitutional criteria Bosnia will need to meet before it can even begin the EU accession 

process. At a minimum, this will have to include the elimination of ethnic discrimination in 

accordance with the European Court’s decision. Furthermore, it will also need to solve the question 

of the clause in the constitution specifying how EU accession issues will be handled within the 

Bosnian government. 

Instead of taking these criteria back to Butmir—where two intense U.S./EU efforts to get top 

Bosnian leaders to agree to constitutional changes failed last year—the EU and U.S. should 

together take them to the Bosnian people, by sponsoring four months of grassroots meetings 

after October’s elections to discuss how to meet the criteria. This would generate not only new 

ideas but a wave of support for the next government—whoever leads it—to put forward serious 

proposals and get them passed in parliament. 

Good Neighborly Relations Between Belgrade and Pristina

The problems in Kosovo are not constitutional but territorial. Serbia, recognizing that it will never 

again govern all of Kosovo, is imploring whoever will listen for partition, which Belgrade prefers 

to call “border correction.” This is an urgent matter from Serbia’s perspective, as Belgrade cannot 

even begin the EU accession process without being able to state clearly where its borders lie. There 

are some in Pristina who might be willing to discuss border correction, but only if the discussion includes the Albanian-majority areas in southern Serbia. The international community—in particular 

the EU and U.S.—oppose raising the issue, for fear that it will have knock-on effects in Macedonia 

and in Bosnia.

To start on a solution of this and the many other problems that Serbia and Kosovo need to 

resolve will first require breaking the ice between Belgrade and Pristina, which have so far refused 

to meet with each other bilaterally at a political level. Wanting to turn the clock back on independence, Belgrade insists that any meeting occur under the aegis of the United Nations, which 

is unacceptable to Pristina. Diplomats nearly burst their pinstripes trying to figure out a formula 

for attendance of both Belgrade and Pristina at a meeting in Sarajevo this week. The formula that 

worked was the simplest: everyone attended without explicit identification. 

I propose a comparably simple but dramatic move for the first bilateral contact: Kosovo President Fatmir Sejdiu should invite Serbian President Boris Tadic to Pristina. A courtesy call requires 

no nameplates, no table, no intermediaries, and no formalities beyond a handshake. Belgrade 

can pretend, if it so wishes, that its president is calling on the president of an autonomous region 

(Kosovo’s nominal status within the Serbian state according to Belgrade), while Pristina will claim 

that this handshake represents an acknowledgement of Kosovo’s sovereignty. The EU requirement, 

which Belgrade has to meet sooner and Pristina later, is to establish good neighborly relations. A 

Tadic visit to Pristina would be a big step in the right direction. 

Having met, Serbia and Kosovo can discuss their own territorial concerns. That is the rule 

between any two sovereign states, and there really is no way for Belgrade to open this subject for 

discussion without acknowledging Kosovo’s existence as a sovereign state. 
© USIP 2010 • All rights reserved.

United States 

Institute of Peace

1200 17th Street NW

Washington, DC 20036

202.457.1700

www.usip.org

They can even discuss border correction, if they want. The conversation could go something 

like this: Belgrade says, “give us the territory north of the Ibar River and Belgrade will allow Kosovo 

to enter the U.N. General Assembly” (thus avoiding for the moment a bilateral act of recognition). 

Pristina responds, “give us the Presevo Valley area where Albanians are the majority.” Belgrade ends 

the conversation, “no, it is too close to our main north/south route leading to our outlet to the sea 

at Thessaloniki.” End of conversation. 

Lest anyone misinterpret what I am writing here: I don’t think Belgrade and Pristina will come to 

an agreement on partition. In the unlikely event they do, they would have to give absolute guarantees to ensure that their agreement would have no knock-on effects in Bosnia or Macedonia. 

Conclusions

Here then is what I propose, in a nutshell, for positive drama in the Balkans:

•	 Eliminate EU bilateral embassies in Sarajevo, drastically reduce the U.S. embassy, and establish a strong EU representative there, with American participation.

•	 Create a small EU/U.S. expert group to develop minimum criteria that the Bosnian Constitution will have to meet in order for Sarajevo to begin the process of EU accession, followed 

by a broad popular consultation in Bosnia on how to meet those criteria.

•	 A direct invitation by Kosovo President Sedjiu to Serbian President Tadic to visit Pristina, 

followed by intense discussion of how Pristina and Belgrade intend to meet the EU requirement of good neighborly relations, which will require resolution of a host of territorial, 

security, citizenship, trade, financial and property issues. 

About This Brief

Daniel Serwer is vice president of 

USIP’s Centers of Innovation. He 

has worked on the Balkans since 

1994 and chairs USIP’s Balkans 

Working Group. These ideas, 

derived in part from discussions in 

the working group, are his own. 

USIP provides the analysis, training and 

tools that prevent and end conflicts, 

promotes stability and professionalizes 

the field of peacebuilding.

For media inquiries, contact the office 

of Public Affairs and Communications, 

202.429.4725

A New Kind of Balkans Drama

page 3 • PB 35 • June 3, 2010