VZCZCXRO5844
PP RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDBU RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA
RUEHLN RUEHLZ RUEHNP RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSK RUEHSL RUEHSR RUEHVK
RUEHYG
DE RUEHBW #0667/01 1941353
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P R 131355Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY BELGRADE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0062
INFO EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
RHMFISS/HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
RUEHBW/AMEMBASSY BELGRADE
RUZEJAA/JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BELGRADE 000667 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
DEPT FOR EUR/SCE (P. PETERSON) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL MARR SR
SUBJECT: SERBIA: PM PDAS COUNTRYMAN DISCUSSES SECURITY AND DEFENSE 
ISSUES 
 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1.  (SBU) PDAS Thomas Countryman's July 8 visit was the first 
high-level visit following Vice President Biden's May visit to 
Belgrade.  Though initial plans were for two meetings, the one day 
visit morphed into four ministerial level meetings, a TV interview in 
Serbian, and a small reception with NGOs and think tanks.  It appears 
that Serbia's leaders were anxious to learn from PDAS Countryman if 
the overall U.S. agenda for Serbia had changed since the Biden visit. 
 The results of each meeting showed the importance of the Biden visit 
and the yearning for additional visitors, as well as Serbian leaders 
testing the waters for potential U.S visits.  End summary. 
 
¶2.  (U) Tom Countryman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the 
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, met in Belgrade on July 8 with 
Minister of Interior Ivica Dacic, State Secretary of the Ministry of 
Defense Dusan Spasojevic, Presidential Foreign Policy Advisor Jovan 
Ratkovic, Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic, and representatives of the 
MFA's NATO Directorate and  NGOs dealing with security and defense 
issues. 
 
Serbia's Relations with NATO 
---------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (SBU) PDAS Countryman encouraged Serbia to appoint an ambassador 
and open a NATO mission as soon as possible, in order to demonstrate 
its open-mindedness toward cooperation with the Alliance.  FM Jeremic 
asserted that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was eager to open the 
office, and in fact already had someone on the payroll to run it, but 
was facing delays from the security establishment.  When questioned 
on the nature of the delay, Jeremic said that Serbia's Security 
Council had not yet issued the certificates required for full 
accreditation.  He claimed he had pushed Minister of Defense Dragan 
Sutanovac to move on the issue earlier that day.  Jeremic told 
Countryman that Serbia had "no illusions regarding our ultimate 
destination - geography is a powerful thing."  He added that the same 
held true for small states like Georgia, which was slow to understand 
its own geopolitical reality. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Countryman heard a very different version of the situation 
from the Ministry of Defense.  Spasojevic said that the MOD had 
decided not to wait any longer for the MFA to appoint an ambassador, 
but rather would appoint its own Special Envoy - likely a general - 
to run an office of five people.  Countryman and the Charge cautioned 
Spasojevic that such an approach might hinder rather than help 
Serbia's relations with NATO by sending a confusing message. 
Spasojevic reaffirmed MOD's desire to cooperate with NATO, saying 
that neutrality was not what Serbia needed.  The Charge emphasized 
that Serbia's leadership needed to do the hard job of speaking more 
openly to the public about the costs and benefits of eventual NATO 
membership. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Addressing the issue of defense cooperation more broadly, 
Spasojevic told Countryman that Serbia wanted full membership in the 
Southeast Europe Defense Ministerial (SEDM).  Countryman said that he 
would take this message back to Washington; both capitals should 
focus on a practical solution that does not view membership in a 
"reward/punishment" or "concession/favor" framework.  Spasojevic 
stressed that Serbia should not be "punished" now for what it may or 
may not do in five years when Kosovo would be ready for membership. 
 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Presidential Advisor Ratkovic provided yet a third version 
of the NATO office status.  He claimed that the GOS was ready "any 
day" to confirm an Ambassador, most likely the current special envoy, 
and there were no further obstacles to opening the office. 
 
Security Cooperation/Afghanistan 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (SBU) PDAS Countryman explained to his interlocutors that 
"getting Afghanistan right" was the Obama administration's top 
foreign policy priority and asked whether Serbia was prepared to make 
a security contribution to ISAF, perhaps under the auspices of 
another country.  MOI Minister Dacic, who has had discussions with 
the European Union about providing police for ESDP missions, said he 
very much wanted Serbia to participate but budget constraints 
prevented him from funding the approximately $5 million that it would 
cost to send a contingent of 100 officers.  He also said that it 
would be difficult to spare such a large group of police, but Serbia 
could provide a "small number" of officers, to be incorporated into 
another country's contingent, if financing could be found. 
Countryman pointed out that participation did not necessarily mean 
 
BELGRADE 00000667  002 OF 003 
 
 
sending such a large number. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) Zoran Vujic, MFA Assistant Minister for NATO and Defense 
Affairs, indicated that Serbia was close to reaching agreement with 
the European Union on the participation of police in certain ESDP 
missions. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) Spasojevic emphasized to Countryman that the MOD was 
dedicated to anti-terrorism work and had made significant gains in 
building up the capacity of its forces.  He nevertheless expressed 
skepticism that it would be possible to send Serbian military forces 
to Afghanistan, explaining how difficult it had been to obtain 
approval for a small medical unit to go to Chad as part of a 
Norwegian peacekeeping unit.  He blamed the MFA in part for not 
working to gain approval for the deployment.  (Note:  Deployment of 
armed forces requires parliamentary approval, whereas the 
participation of police does not.  End note.)  Spasojevic said that 
deploying to Afghanistan would be a hard sell to the Serbian people 
saying "it would be hard to explain why we send our young people to 
far flung places to defend others when our own people are endangered 
in Kosovo." 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Ratkovic was more bullish on Serbian participation, saying 
that the result of the VP Biden trip and his own recent consultations 
in Washington led him to believe that cooperation on military, 
security and intelligence issues was the best path forward for the 
U.S.-Serbian bilateral relationship. 
 
Attitudes toward the U.S. 
------------------------- 
 
¶11.  (SBU) In all of his meetings, Countryman expressed concern that 
frequent statements by Serbian officials criticizing the United 
States, combined with their absence of acknowledgement of the support 
we provide Serbia, contributed to widespread negative public opinion. 
 He mentioned a TNS Medium Gallup poll released July 6 in which 
Serbia and Pakistan shared first place on the list of countries where 
citizens hold negative opinions of the United States (61%).  U.S. 
cooperation with Serbia in the military, economic, development and 
other fields was minimized by leaders and the press, while the 
smaller contributions of Russia were exaggerated, he noted. 
Countryman urged his interlocutors to take on the responsibility of 
explaining the nuances of difficult issues to the public, and to 
recognize publicly areas of both agreement and disagreement.  Dacic 
did not respond directly, asserting that he understood what was 
important for relations with the United States and that those 
relations were important.  Jeremic was defensive, arguing that the 
poll numbers were the result of the "U.S. threat to Serbia's 
territorial integrity" and that the Serbian government was being as 
forward-leaning as possible given the difficulties in the bilateral 
relationship.  He asserted that his public rhetoric always matched 
his private comments.  Though Countryman raised this issue twice 
during his conversation with Ratkovic, the latter avoided responding 
and gave no explanation for the leadership's reluctance to mention 
the United States in a positive light. 
 
War Crimes 
---------- 
 
¶12. (SBU) Countryman raised the possibility of providing U.S. 
assistance in the search for ICTY indictee Ratko Mladic, as Vice 
President Biden had discussed with President Tadic during their May 
20 meeting in Belgrade.  Ratkovic welcomed the gesture and said the 
government was looking forward to the assistance.  Jeremic indicated 
that such assistance would be welcome, emphasizing Serbia's firm 
commitment to completing ICTY cooperation and proceeding with 
European integration. 
 
¶13.  (SBU) Countryman told Dacic that the Bytyqi case, in which three 
American brothers were killed in southern Serbia in 1999, was also 
very important to bilateral relations.  He said Dacic could 
contribute to solving the case by encouraging police officers to come 
forward in the investigation and ultimately testify in court.  Dacic 
did not respond to the suggestion. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶14.  (SBU) The inconsistent messages that PDAS Countryman heard from 
Ratkovic, Jeremic, and Spasojevic - all members of the same party - 
are unfortunately characteristic of the government's disjointed 
approach to foreign policy.  Personalities rather than strategy 
continue to dominate Serbia's political scene with lack of 
communication among important government players.  Though eager to 
 
BELGRADE 00000667  003 OF 003 
 
 
engage PDAS Countryman and to express in private Serbian appreciation 
for U.S. support and assistance, Serbia's political elite apparently 
still consider public recognition of an emerging productive 
partnership with the United States to be politically risky with no 
visible upside.  End Comment. 
BRUSH