Picula: Serbia is a beacon for certain Montenegrin politicians who declare themselves as Serbs, I don't think that's good

"Montenegro did a solid job negotiating with the European Union until the beginning of this decade. However, over the last few years, it has fallen into serious political turbulence. I think that, in part, the reason for that is external influence. The Montenegrin parliament is led by a man who declares himself a Chetnik, coming from the wing of the radical Serbian view of things," said the European Parliament rapporteur for Serbia.

27629 views 75 reactions 76 comment(s)
Picula, Foto: Screenshot/Youtube/Glas Amerike
Picula, Foto: Screenshot/Youtube/Glas Amerike
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

Tonino Picula, the European Parliament's rapporteur for Serbia, said that he sees the sanctions on the Oil Industry of Serbia (NIS), which is majority-owned by Russia's Gazpromneft, as a political message to the Serbian leadership.

"In a situation where Serbia is not imposing sanctions on the Russian aggressor in Ukraine - this is, in a way, a way to show President Aleksandar Vučić that it is not unimportant how Serbia orients itself in this war. So it represents a kind of political message," Picula - a member of the European Parliament in his fourth term - pointed out in an interview with Voice of America.

He believes that the way in which the Serbian leadership interprets and reacts to the sanctioning of NIS will be very important.

This company has been under Russian ownership since 2008, which has contributed to Serbia's energy dependence on Russia, which has been partially reduced due to the efforts of Western partners to implement energy diversification in Serbia.

"It remains to be seen how the Serbian leadership will consume this type of message. Will they understand that the West is serious and that any policy that does not also mean solidarity or compliance with the European Union's policy towards Ukraine, or the Russian Federation, is not worthwhile in the long run. That is the moment when we will see whether this American move has initiated a change in Serbia's rather ambivalent political orientation," says Picula, who was elected to the European Parliament as a representative of the Croatian Social Democratic Party.

He underlines that Serbia's inconsistency with European Union policy is a very serious issue, which has gained importance since the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

"This issue is so important that a number of European Union countries have stopped the opening of cluster number 3 to Serbia. Not only because it does not meet the interim criteria, but also because they wanted to send a political message," Picula explains the circumstances under which Serbia has not opened chapters in the negotiation process with the European Union for the past three years, which began in 2014.

In addition to foreign policy harmonization, he states that Serbia needs to reform areas that have been measuring progress - to improve the fight against corruption, the rule of law, the protection of human rights and freedoms, and the media sphere - in order to seriously accelerate the integration process.

Stagnation initiates tensions

Voice of America: Kosovo authorities have closed several institutions in southern Kosovo that they label as parallel, and even criminal. This is happening at a time when the dialogue on the normalization of the two sides has slowed down considerably. The mediator in the dialogue, the European Union and their ally the United States have criticized such and similar moves in the recent past, describing them as unilateral, noting that they make life difficult for Serbian and other communities and encourage escalation. What is your position on these issues?

Picula: Since the dialogue is stagnating in many of its elements, this always opens up space for actions that can lead to increased tension or an escalation of violence. We expected a lot from the Borrell plan that he presented – it is now almost two years old and its iteration that was agreed in Ohrid shortly after. However, it is obvious that almost nothing has happened. And, unfortunately, instead of progress, we got Banjska – an incursion by Serbian paramilitary troops into northern Kosovo, when a Kosovo policeman was killed. There were also wounded. Belgrade was asked to remove any suspicion of involvement in that incident, as well as to prosecute those responsible who were very quickly identified – nothing happened. Which, of course, then leaves room for the Kosovo side to try to influence the situation on the ground with its moves. Therefore, the last two or three years have certainly not been good for dialogue – although here and there some breakthroughs have occurred. Some progress has been agreed on on the margins. Until there is a move motivated by the interests of both sides, we will consume bad news instead of good.

Voice of America: In your opinion, to what extent are their political elites responsible for the current relations between the two sides, as well as the state of the dialogue, and to what extent is the mediator, the European Union, responsible?

Picula: The European Union really should have stepped back twelve or thirteen years ago and tried to do more to normalize relations between Belgrade and Pristina. A lot of political and other capital was invested in those negotiations. However, as we can see, after so much time we still don't have an agreement, but sometimes we have very serious crises and even escalations of violence. The European Union may have simply been too cautious in all of this. It was as if it expected that the negotiating parties would be motivated by the speed of progress towards the European Union and do more. However, it was clearly more profitable to have permanent tensions and to gain some kind of legitimacy in front of their electorate – than to solve the problem. Of course, this will not benefit anyone in the long run. I am guided by the fact that the European Union wants Kosovo and Serbia as its members and will be far more energetic. Let's not forget another factor – and that is the United States of America. Which could also create an atmosphere in which some elements of the agreement could happen much sooner. Whether this will happen now with the Donald Trump administration and after Ms. Kaia Kallas has taken over the leading position in European diplomacy remains to be seen.

Voice of America: And what about the responsibility of the political elites leading Kosovo and Serbia and their capacity to reach any kind of agreement – ​​ever?

Picula: First of all, it should be said that these are people who have been involved in this problem for too long. They certainly grew up politically in periods when it was difficult to agree on anything. Their mutual relationship is far from trusting. Therefore, I think that both sides need to step out of their own shadows. If they want the best for their countries - to enter into dialogue in good faith. That is certainly not simple, nor easy. But, if various agreements could have happened on the European continent recently, since the Good Friday Agreement - or some other - there is always a way that descendants will call a historic agreement. Whether today's elites are capable of doing that is difficult for me to assess. Perhaps the changed geopolitical circumstances will play into their favor. But, I am more afraid that this general tightening of relations will put additional pressure that will make it more difficult to reach a real agreement.

EU and US synchronization needed

Voice of America: How would you assess the performance and engagement of the mediators whose mandates are ending, Miroslav Lajčak and the American side?

Picula: I think they did the maximum they could within certain limits. Their dedication to the job cannot be denied. But, given the quality of the negotiators and the circumstances, I think that this policy of small steps, which was rational, did not lead to any major agreement. It probably needs to be combined with a strategy to very clearly indicate by what deadline an agreement needs to be reached and what it actually is. And then after that, the roadmap, which already exists, should simply be implemented. We should not start from scratch, because there is vast negotiating experience, the process is long. For a start, we should avoid mistakes from previous mandates.

Voice of America: What could the new European and American administrations contribute to this process?

Picula: First of all, with better understanding. We need to consult each other. We have had different phases when it comes to the relationship between Brussels and Washington towards the East of Europe – the Western Balkans. I am not sure how good it is that the two sides are not synchronized. I remember President Trump's attempt in his first term when he invited the then Prime Minister of Kosovo, Avdullah Hoti, and President Vučić to the White House and offered them a whole set of documents to sign that were supposed to normalize relations. But, in fact, also satisfy certain American interests. What was indicative was that none of those documents mentioned the European Union – even though Serbia is negotiating with the EU, and Kosovo has submitted a request to become a member. Therefore, I hope that the new administration of Donald Trump will change that relationship – and that it will try to work together in partnership with the European Union in Southeast Europe. Some results were achieved then. If that does not happen, I am afraid that the next conversation of this type will be conducted in a much darker mood.

Voice of America: You mentioned deadlines - when could we see an end to the dispute between the two sides and the establishment of sincere and meaningful normalization based on the agreements reached?

Picula: In these circumstances, talking about dates, as people would say, is a blind business. Now there are several years and dates in political circulation that politicians are attached to: 2026, 2027 - when negotiations with Montenegro, Albania or Serbia should be concluded. So that by the end of the mandate of this European Parliament and the European Commission, there will finally be some major breakthrough after 2013, when Croatia entered the European Union. I am not overly optimistic, I think that international circumstances, the situation in the European Union and the pressures that will come from different sides - may keep the issue of enlargement afloat in the coming period, but I am not sure how much we will spread our sails. Three years ago, I proposed recommendations, which were adopted, on a new EU enlargement. I was cautious with my colleagues and pointed out that it would be good to conclude negotiations with a number of countries in the process by the end of the European Commission and Parliament, if nothing else. I still hold that opinion today when we see that the priorities of the European Union will be directed towards the economy, energy, and the fight against inflation. Of course, the war is still raging in the east of the continent. It seems to me that all of this will, in a way, suppress the enlargement policy - especially if no good news comes from the Western Balkans.

Serbia as a regional partner

Voice of America: Do you see Serbia as a regional partner of the countries in the Western Balkans or a generator and cause of instability?

Picula: Serbia often exports unresolved issues of democratic transition as problems to those parts of the Western Balkans where the influence of certain Serbian politicians or the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) is extremely strong. This is no secret. We recently had the opportunity to see the arrival of a high-ranking delegation from Belgrade to celebrate the unconstitutional Day of Republika Srpska in Banja Luka. The other day, the Speaker of the National Assembly, Ana Brnabić, found herself in the role of a congratulatory message to Nicolas Maduro – during his inauguration as President of Venezuela. Although, of course, none of the Western politicians, the European Union or the USA were there because of the regime that rules there. Therefore, these are all elements that create suspicion of Serbia's influence in the region. As long as this is the case and as long as some politicians from Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina refer to Serbia, while taking steps that are not in the spirit of European integration – then people will, first and foremost, look to Belgrade.

Voice of America: How do you see the current relations between Serbia and Montenegro, are their political/social relations based on the principle of equality, mutual respect and understanding - or are there indications that Serbia is trying to influence internal Montenegrin issues?

Picula: If you ask the Serbian leadership, they don't want to have anything to do with the idea of ​​influencing the situation in Montenegro. However, if you don't listen very carefully to certain Montenegrin politicians who declare themselves as Serbs and organize themselves politically as such – then Serbia is simply a beacon for them. I don't think that's good. Montenegro did a solid job, until the beginning of this decade, negotiating with the European Union. However, over the past few years, it has fallen into serious political turbulence. I think that, in part, the reason for that is external influence. The Parliament of Montenegro is led by a man who declares himself a Chetnik, coming from the wing of the radical Serbian view of things. This is causing certain setbacks on Montenegro's path to the European Union. Montenegro did what no one else did – by adopting a Resolution on the genocide in Jasenovac, after the adoption of the Resolution on Srebrenica in the United Nations. This has strained relations with Zagreb, which was its support on the path to the EU.

Voice of America: What does the perspective of Serbian-Croatian, Croatian-Serbian relations look like?

Picula: Answering that question about ten years ago, I said that it was a cold peace. At the diplomatic level, relations are correct, and economic exchange between Croatia and Serbia should be pleasing. It is making progress. I am also pleased that citizens of the Republic of Serbia are coming to work in Croatia, which, like many countries, has a chronic shortage of labor. These are great workers, who are well received, and are satisfied in Croatia. However, when it comes to political relations – they are stagnant. Ministers meet occasionally, but there is no great cordiality.

Voice of America: Can we expect Croatian support for Serbia's European integration - will there be more help or more tension?

Picula: Croatia's entry into the European Union in 2013 was very significant for it. However, it will be possible to enjoy all the benefits of membership on the day when all our neighbors become its members. I mean Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia. That is the meaning of the European project – that the members do not cooperate only formally, which means that they have left the deficits from their past behind them. Therefore, it is in Croatia's interest to have members of the Union on all its borders, and not just on the western and northern ones. But good will alone is not enough for that. We need to create the conditions for these countries to truly progress.

Demonization of the media for the sake of a monopoly on truth

Tonino Picula, the European Parliament's rapporteur for Serbia, speaking about cases of wiretapping of journalists and representatives of the non-governmental sector, as well as their connections with foreign intelligence services, said that these are attempts by Serbian authorities to maintain a monopoly on the truth.

"It seems to me that here in Serbia, if we are not yet at that level, the attempt to demonize the media actually points to an old problem that has been noted in almost all reports by the European Commission and the European Parliament describing the situation in Serbia. And that is, first and foremost, the government's effort to maintain a monopoly on the truth. We are, of course, fully aware that there are many media outlets in Serbia that are nominally privately owned - but are an extension of the tongue and arm of the ruling structures. Therefore, it is obvious that the government in Serbia does not like political competition, especially not media competition that presents other facts," Picula pointed out.

Asked what needs to be done to improve the situation in that area, the European diplomat pointed out that media diversification should be implemented.

"In Serbia, there are very few, if any, television channels that have a national frequency. There are, of course, television stations that are not under the direct control of the government that can be watched by a limited number of people. It is a well-known fact that the political opposition in Serbia has a very hard time getting airtime on these television stations, which are still watched by a much larger number of people. It is necessary for the government, if it wants the true mood of the public and the people to be represented - for that people to make politically informed decisions. This is impossible without the approach of all competitors - if they are not in an equal position in expressing their views," Picula said.

Bonus video: