Economist: If Serbia and Kosovo exchange territories, "the gates of hell will open"

The British newspaper Economist, in an article about the exchange of territories in the Balkans, stated on Monday that if "Serbia and Kosovo were to exchange parts of the territory, the process would not stop there", reports Al Jazeera Balkans.

It is emphasized that there could be huge consequences in the case of an exchange of territories and that "it would be wiser to reduce the importance of national borders".

In the introductory part of the text, the newspaper recalled how Kosovo declared its independence from Serbia ten years ago and how the Albanians, who make up the majority of the population, "celebrated, but the Serbs living in the enclaves did not".

Serbia has not recognized Kosovo, writes the Economist further, indicating that Kosovo Serbs still consider themselves citizens of Serbia, reports Al Jazeera Balkans.

'Is that a sensible idea?'

"The situation is typical for the Balkans, where the borders are, frankly speaking, a mess," the text emphasizes.

There are, he writes further, "Serbs who live in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where they have their own republic [Republika Srpska], Albanians and Bosniaks (Muslims) who live in Serbia and Greeks in Albania".

Recently, the Serbian authorities, as the newspaper stated, proposed to discuss the exchange of territory with the Kosovo Albanians.

"Is it a reasonable idea?" asks the author of the text and continues with examples of "exchange" from history - in 1923, Greece and Turkey agreed to exchange about two million people.

The majority Christian population of Turkey was sent to Greece and the Muslims from Greece were sent to Turkey.

It was almost a forced resettlement, but Greece and Turkey have not been at war since then, it was stated in the text, reports Al Jazeera Balkans.

The only place where Greece and Turkey are in conflict is Cyprus, where their population is mixed, notes the Economist.

Nobody thinks about human rightsa

"This inspired nationalists in the Western Balkans. Between 1918 and the late 1950s, many Muslims were encouraged to leave Yugoslavia for Turkey. But at the time of the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the population was still quite mixed," writes the Economist.

"Leaders during those Yugoslav wars saw ethnic cleansing as the best way to create new nation-states uninhabited by problematic minorities."

Until 1995, the areas historically inhabited by Serbs in Croatia remained empty, and hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks were evicted from their homes in Bosnia in a similar way, the newspaper reminds, as well as that a large number of Serbs left Kosovo after the war, while 120.000 remained.

The Serbian authorities want, it is further stated, to discuss giving the northern part of Kosovo to Serbia, and that, in exchange, the parts of Serbia inhabited by Albanians should be given to Kosovo.

Proponents of such an idea point out that multi-ethnic states have failed in the Balkans, but as the British newspaper stated, "they ignore the fact that once governments go down that path, the process has no obvious end and they do not pay attention to the human rights of everyone involved" in the process.

"Greater Bosnia" and "Greater Albania"

"If Serbia and Kosovo start serious talks about redrawing their borders, the impact on the Balkan communities, except for those in the affected parts of Kosovo and Serbia, can be very deep," the author of the article believes.

Then, as the Economist writes, "leaders in Republika Srpska will hold a referendum on the future of Republika Srpska, Bosnian Croats will follow the same path, and Bosniaks will then fight to prevent the dismemberment of their common state."

The paper writes that "Serbia will further prevent Bosniak nationalists in Sandzak who dream of uniting that region into a 'greater Bosnia'", reports Al Jazeera Balkans.

"Meanwhile, Albanians in western Macedonia and Montenegro will seek to join 'Greater Albania'," the paper stated, adding that proponents of such an idea would also like to annex parts of northern Greece, where Greek nationalists would request part of southern Albania.

"The irony of the disputed exchange is that the majority of Kosovo Serbs actually live in enclaves in the south of Kosovo, so the agreement would not allow them to live in Serbia and they would probably have to leave their homes," the text stated.

"Balkanization" has a bad reputation

It is estimated that "Serbian officials would be less concerned about their population than about taking steps towards the recognition of Kosovo - which would facilitate their path to the European Union".

"They may not be concerned that the exchange of territories in the Balkans could have enormous consequences," writes the Economist, as reported by Al Jazeera Balkans.

Hungarian nationalists, after all, have not come to terms with the loss of Transylvania in Romania, and Romanian nationalists would like to redraw their border with Moldova, so these are the reasons why "Balkanization" has a bad name, the Economist points out.

As the EU is integral, diminishing the importance of national borders would seem wiser than redrawing them, which, as a high-ranking EU official said, would "open the gates of hell", the text concludes.