Societies are fed up with dialogue

In the efforts to find culprits for the chronic lack of progress in the dialogue, the EU's special envoy, Mirolslav Lajčak, has also mentioned the societies in Kosovo and Serbia, which, according to him, are not ready for the normalization of relations. between them. It is not easy to define what the term "society" means, but if you think about the citizens, they are fed up with the dialogue and would prefer that it ended immediately with a solution and normality.

The dialogue process between Kosovo and Serbia is completely political from the beginning. It continues to be so even today, when more than 12 years have passed since it started. As an extremely non-transparent process, in which the media must be satisfied with the one-sided statements of the participants in it, or with the general posts on the social networks of the facilitator, which in most cases is summed up with the words that "the way forward in the process has been discussed" of dialogue", he has left the public confused  and society. Even to this day, the public is not clear about what the dialogue is and is not about. At least they don't have the same understanding of it. And society is at least to blame. Society in Kosovo has been told that the dialogue process aims to normalize relations with Serbia, so that Kosovo can move forward in European integration and in international organizations, while normalizing inter-ethnic relations within Kosovo as well. The society in Serbia has been told that the dialogue is about the "Kosovo problem" or the "Kosovo issue", creating the impression that Kosovo has no status and that it can only be resolved when Serbia also agrees to such a thing. And society in Serbia has seen it as a loss in dialogue every time something has been achieved that strengthens Kosovo's sovereignty, while society in Kosovo has made compromises that under normal conditions an independent state would not make. And what both societies have experienced is fatigue from the dialogue process, which has not managed to normalize relations sufficiently.

In efforts to find culprits for the chronic lack of progress in dialogue, the EU's special envoy, Mirolslav Lajlcak, has also mentioned the societies in Kosovo and Serbia, which, according to him, are not ready for the normalization of reports. It is not easy to define what the term "society" means, but if you think about the citizens, they are fed up with the dialogue and would prefer that it ended immediately with a solution and normality.

Since the beginning of the dialogue, the society has been excluded from this process and has not had the correct information about what is happening in it. There have been efforts by the EU to involve civil society in the process, but not with the aim of listening to the opinion of civil society, but more to benefit from those in support of the positions of the European Union. Meetings of EU officials with representatives of civil society have been enough to say that they have taken place. And they haven't changed anything. For more than 12 years, the representatives of Kosovo and those of Serbia have given diametrically opposite statements after the meetings that took place in the dialogue process. The EU has not clarified what actually happened. In this way, the EU has not played the role of "facilitator" for society to understand what the truth is. Thus, the EU has deliberately left room for different interpretations which have created an absurd and often dangerous situation. For example, in Serbia from all levels for years they have insisted that in the process of dialogue Kosovo has assumed the responsibility not to send special police forces to the north of Kosovo. This has then turned into a campaign of incitement and criticism against the Kosovo police by Serbian politicians, who have used and continue to use terms such as "the terror of the Kosovo police" or "the Albanian occupying boot". Until now, apart from some unofficial statements that "it has become a common practice that the special police do not go to the north", we have not seen any evidence from anyone from the EU that in the dialogue Kosovo has really agreed not to send special police units. certain police. The only thing that has been confirmed is that through an exchange of letters by former Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi with NATO, Kosovo has promised that it will not send KSF units without the prior approval of the KFOR commander.

The same confusion and opposite meaning has also been created around the parallel structures of Serbia in the north of Kosovo. Once the international community denied that they exist, then they were told that, although they "do not exist", they have been extinguished or integrated into the structures of Kosovo. Now it is said that they should be allowed to operate and their unilateral expulsion from Kosovo is inciting tensions. Misunderstandings would not have happened if the EU had a clear position. The clear position is not the "constructive ambiguity" that the EU continues to have as a principle in its approach to dialogue.

It is not society's fault, neither in Kosovo nor in Serbia, that what the EU calls "agreement on the road to normalization of relations" is not being implemented. Is society to blame because Serbia, with words, letters and deeds, has expressed that it does not intend to implement the main parts of the Agreement? It is even less society's fault why the EU has not reacted to this. Now Miroslav Lajçak admits that the implementation of that agreement has not started at all. And he doesn't even expect to start until after the elections in Kosovo. So, in a way, he accepts that nothing will happen in the additional five months of his mandate, because there are elections in Kosovo. And what is the fault of the societies why there are elections in one or the other country involved in the dialogue. Or why there were elections in Europe and there will be in America. It is not society's fault that the dialogue process has not been built on sound foundations where it will not depend on electoral processes in the region and the world. It is not society's fault because in the dialogue there have always been only improvisations, which are seen as unsuccessful. And the insistence of the EU that "the agreement is legally binding, even though it has not been signed", is an improvisation. And Lajcak even took on the role of Serbia's spokesperson when, in an interview given to Radio Free Europe, he said that "Serbia has not withdrawn from the agreement": Serbia's leaders are saying the opposite. Societies in Kosovo and Serbia can be manipulated. They may also be uninformed. But they cannot be criticized that they are not ready for the normalization of reports. No one, not in Brussels, not in Berlin and Paris, not in Washington and London, needs more normalization of relations. But it seems that this is not needed by the political structures, which are keeping the dialogue process as a good opportunity to manipulate. So, the culprit should be seen in politics and not in society.