VZCZCXRO0156
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN
RUEHLZ RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHBW #0053/01 0111747
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 111747Z JAN 08
FM AMEMBASSY BELGRADE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2049
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BELGRADE 000053 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PREF PGOV PHUM KV SR
SUBJECT: Serbia's Kosovo Minister Pledges No Violence and No 
Recognition 
 
Ref:  Schroeder-Brush 01/04/2008 Fax 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Serbia's Kosovo Minister Samardzic told UK, US, French, 
German and Italian COMs on January 11 that Serbia was committed both 
to no-violence and no-recognition of Kosovo.  In response to a 
UK-headed "Quint" demarche, Samardzic said EU and U.S. policy toward 
Serbia was stuck in a Milosevic-era time warp, but nevertheless 
Serbia was committed to a negotiated Kosovo settlement.  Until that 
time, which he estimated would take one to four more years, Serbia 
would continue to treat the "loyal Serbian citizen" population 
(which includes Gorani and Roma), as Serbian citizens and attend to 
their needs as a responsible government should.  End Summary. 
 
UK Demarche 
----------- 
 
¶2.  (SBU) On January 11, UK Ambassador Wordsworth led a Quint (UK, 
U.S., Italy, France and Germany) demarche to Serbia's Kosovo 
Minister Samardzic protesting the opening of the Kosovo Ministry 
Office in North Mitrovica without UNMIK approval.  Wordsworth 
introduced the demarche requesting that the contents not be made 
public and that Samardzic understand the demarche as an effort to 
cooperate with Serbia on Kosovo status.  Text of UK Demarche 
follows: 
 
Begin Text: 
 
-- We recognise your objections to the whole idea of independence. 
But be clear: it is going to happen.  This is not about 'punishing 
Serbia', or 'taking territory away' from Serbia.  It is, in our 
view, the only possible way forward now, after the unprecedented 
crimes of the Milosevic regime in 1998/99 which, by their scale and 
because they were undertaken by the Serbian state, created a wholly 
new situation; 
 
-- You may not agree with our view - but you should not publicly 
cast aspersions on our motives, or doubt our seriousness to see this 
through; 
 
-- Despite our differences, we assume that we share some common 
objectives: 
 
* we want to avoid any step, by either side, which would escalate 
tension, putting livelihoods or even lives at risk; 
* we want minority communities to stay, and flourish; 
* we want the whole region to make progress towards the EU, to bring 
lasting stability and prosperity; 
 
-- Supervising Kosovo's independence, in the interests of Kosovo's 
minority communities and wider regional stability, is a substantial 
contribution on the part of the EU and US, which will last many 
years at great cost to our taxpayers.  The December 2007 European 
Council confirmed the EU's readiness to launch the ESDP mission, and 
to contribute to the ICO; 
 
-- Serbia, as a country that sees its future as a member of the EU, 
will have to come to terms with this.  Serbia cannot simultaneously 
seek rapid progress towards EU membership, including the early 
granting of candidate status, yet impose bilateral sanctions on 
trade, power supplies etc to Kosovo which will be destabilising 
regionally.  You cannot simply refuse to cooperate with the EU's 
efforts.  Your economic future, in particular your ability to 
attract investment from EU countries and the US, depends on your 
continuing to move towards integration; 
 
-- For our part, we recognise that domestic political realities 
might place some restraints on the ability of the Government of 
Serbia to cooperate with the international community over Kosovo. 
Given some good will on your part, we are willing to develop 'work 
arounds' that will make it possible for day-to-day cooperation to 
continue; 
 
-- Specifically, we are willing to work with you to support the 
co-ordinated and transparent development of links between Serbia and 
K-Serb municipalities in the areas of their competencies, which 
would help to reassure those communities and encourage them to stay, 
including the provision by Serbia of financial and technical 
assistance, expert personnel and equipment; 
 
-- In return we expect cooperation from you in avoiding steps to 
which we would have to respond - e.g. the uncoordinated creation of 
Serbian Government presences on Kosovo territory, specific actions 
that would publicly challenge our view of status, challenges to the 
freedom of movement of international presences in Kosovo, including 
KFOR, the EU Mission and the ICO, or unilateral attempts to conduct 
local elections. 
 
-- Existing Serbian presences - such as the Kosovo Ministry office 
 
BELGRADE 00000053  002 OF 003 
 
 
in Kosovska Mitrovica - must be re-established on a mutually agreed 
footing as a matter of urgency.  UNMIK has already made clear to you 
its concern that this office was not established in accordance with 
UNSCR 1244.  The Government of Serbia needs to formally request a 
change with UNMIK.  The office should be closed if it does not have 
UNMIK permission to operate, and Serbia should not open further such 
offices elsewhere in Kosovo without UNMIK's approval. 
 
End Text. 
 
Time Warp Politics 
------------------ 
 
¶3.  (SBU) While keeping his tone cordial, Samardzic accused the 
United States and the EU of "time-warp" politics -- treating Serbia 
as if it were still in the Milosevic era.  "In spite of all our 
advances in democratic and economic reform and good-neighborly 
relations, you treat us the same way you did pre-1999."  In 
contrast, Samardzic countered, Kosovo under UNMIK had stagnated and 
was now ineptly governed by a criminal elite, assisted by UNMIK. 
Serbia was not the problem, Samardzic insisted, the problem was the 
inertia of bad policies. 
 
No Recognition, Ever (for now) 
----------------------------- 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Samardzic said the Serbian Government would never, ever, 
recognize Kosovo's independence and that the Troika process had not 
been a real negotiation since one side - the Albanians - already had 
been promised their desired result.  Since there was no real 
negotiated settlement, Serbia would continue to consider Kosovo a 
constituent part of Serbia and attend to its citizens accordingly. 
Serbia would be practical in this approach, however, and attend to 
the needs of those who considered themselves Serbian citizens, which 
in addition to Serbs, included Gorani (a small Muslim/Slav group of 
less than 100,000 living in the mountains on the 
Albanian/Kosovo/Macedonia border) and Roma.  As a practical matter, 
Serbia would not attempt to impose its citizens' services on the 
Albanian population.  "The Albanians will be the first to understand 
Serbia's actions, they have lived 10 years under parallel 
institutions, and it's better for them that way." 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The North Mitrovica Office of the Kosovo Ministry, 
Samardzic said, was the legal heir to the Coordination Center 
established in 2001 with UNMIK consent.  This office was now 
subordinate to the Kosovo Ministry but its legal status had not 
changed, he said, therefore there was no need to request permission 
from UNMIK to establish the office. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) In response to the Italian Ambassador's question about 
whether Serbia's goal was a hard partition, Samardzic responded that 
the current situation was not the end of the story.  "We couldn't 
negotiate when the other side already knew it would get what it 
wanted."  Samardzic said Serbia remained interested in a negotiated 
settlement and would continue to negotiate with the Kosovar 
Albanians to obtain a mutually acceptable result, which could take 
"anywhere for one to four years." 
 
Punitive Actions 
---------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) In response to the demarche's language on possible use of 
Serbian "sanctions" in the event of a declaration of independence, 
Samardzic said, "the only ones talking about punitive actions are 
the EU and the United States, we have no interest in punitive 
actions, they would only hurt us."  Specifically addressing concerns 
about trade, Samardzic countered, "we had free trade and open 
borders, until UNMIK arrived and established a customs regime." 
Samardzic reminded that maintaining free movement of goods and 
people was a centerpiece of Serbia's "substantial autonomy" model. 
The biggest challenge in the interim, Samardzic said was Kosovar 
participation in international organizations, which Serbia would not 
tolerate.  Serbia remained committed to non-violence in any case, 
Samardzic reiterated. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Though Samardzic, predictably, rejected both independence 
and criticism of the Northern Mitrovica office, he claimed he and 
the Serbian Government were committed to non-violence and were not 
considering punitive measures against Kosovo.  Samardzic said he 
welcomed future such discussions with the Quint.  End Comment. 
 
MUNTER 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BELGRADE 00000053  003 OF 003 
 
 
2