Your browser version is outdated. We recommend that you update your browser to the latest version.

The campaign of the Serbian political leadership against the admission of Kosovo to UNESCO is completely unjustified and harmful. It is based on untruthful claims that Kosovo's membership in the UNESCO means the seizure of Serbian cultural heritage in Kosovo by the Albanians from the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC). The SPC is the owner of Serbian religious buildings and monuments in Kosovo. As the owner it has the right and obligation to take care of these facilities, and membership of Kosovo in the UNESCO cannot in any way deprive SPC from these rights and duties. On the contrary, Kosovo's accession to UNESCO will give more protection to Serbian cultural heritage than those monuments have now. If Kosovo through its internal regulations in the field of urban planning and construction would endanger cultural heritage under the protection of UNESCO or other cultural or natural values ​​that represent the world's cultural or natural heritage, it would act contrary to its obligations under UNESCO conventions and could be sanctioned for these violations. UNESCO does not deal only with cultural heritage issues, much of the organization's activities are related to education, natural sciences, social sciences and information and communication. In a campaign run by the Serbian authorities against Kosovo's membership in UNESCO it is intentionally neglected that the US has been refusing to participate in the organization for two years because, despite Israel's opposition to UNESCO, the Palestinian authority has been accepted as member. Just as the opposition of Israel and the United States to the admission of Palestine to the United Nations and UNESCO is unjustified, it is also pointless and unjustified attempt by Serbia to prevent Kosovo's admission to these international organizations.

Serbian government policy regarding Kosovo, its candidate status for the EU membership and neutral policy in the NATO-Russia conflict is unsustainable. The thing is very simple. Serbia does not have the necessary resources, either economic or military, that would allow her to successfully achieve all three goals: to prevent the statehood of Kosovo, to enter the European Union and to remain neutral in the NATO-Russia conflict. If she wants to join the EU and at the same time to remain neutral, Serbia must give up opposition to Kosovo's independence.

If Serbia 2005 acted in the manner proposed by many (including the writer of these lines), and agreed to the independence of Kosovo in direct agreement with the Albanian leadership in Kosovo, provided  that Kosovo be organized according to the model of Belgium, as a two-member federation, with the Albanian and Serbian entities, both, Serbia and Kosovo could have been admitted together to the European Union at the latest in 2010, and possibly simultaneously with Romania and Bulgaria.

The impotence of Serbia was clearly demonstrated in March 2004. when the Albanians, organized and encouraged by their Kosovar authorities, attacked the Serbs, destroyed a large number of Serb monuments and expelled a large number of Serbs from their homes in the cities of predominantly populated by Albanians.

Many say that if Serbia cannot be neutral in the NATO-Russia conflict, it should give up its aspiration to EU membership  and turn to a firm alliance with Russia. Such a strategic orientation of Serbia could bring Serbia into a war with the Albanians on Kosovo.

However, neither Serbia nor Serbs and Albanians from Kosovo need a war. Serbia should be adhering to a pragmatic policy. Instead of encouraging negative emotions towards Albanians, the United States, and the EU, Serbian leaders need to realistically and pragmatically perceive the position of Serbia and align their policy to the available modest economic and military resources of Serbia.

The peoples of Germany, France, England, the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Spain, for centuries have been in relations of deep hatred, intolerance, and constant warfare. Nevertheless, they led a smart, pragmatic policy, deprived of emotion, and united in the EU. By contrast, with the exception to the period of the Second World War and the wars of the 1990s, the peoples of Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia and Slovenia had good relations of appreciation, trust and cooperation over the centuries. Serbia was with France and England an ally in the First World War, and through Yugoslavia and Yugoslav People’s Army also in the World War II.

Unfortunately, the Serb-Albanian relations were never good, the same as before cooperation within the EU German-French or English-German relations were not good. It's time for reconciliation. The only reasonable solution is reconciliation. Exchange of periods of  pressure of Serbs by Albanians and vice versa has to stop. Serbia does not really need to hold two million hostile Albanians under its domination as Turkey rules over millions of  Kurds. Serbia also does not need meaningless sovereignty over Kosovo, kind of sovereignty  of British Queen over Australia or Canada. Serbia should agree that Kosovo become an equal state with Serbia, join the UN, the EU, and all other associations, and Kosovo should agree to give Serbs in the north the autonomy that Kosovo has had in the former Yugoslavia or, kind of autonomy that Scotland has in Great Britain. There are many good examples that can be applied.