The New York Times has a simple narrative for you:

Nine candidates were vying for the presidency, but only two were considered serious contenders: the pro-Western incumbent, Mr. Tadic, and his pro-Russian nationalist challenger, Mr. Nikolic. The presidency is formally a ceremonial post in Serbia. But during Mr. Milosevic’s autocratic government in the 1990s, when he virtually ruled alone, it gained in importance and influence.

Mr. Tadic, a telegenic and soft-spoken moderate who is supported by a majority of European leaders, advocates Western-style reforms and integration into the European Union, after more than a decade of isolation and wars under Mr. Milosevic.

…

Mr. Nikolic, a former ally of Mr. Milosevic, has sought to evoke Serbs’ nationalist pride by playing on their growing frustration over American and European Union backing for Kosovo independence. Analysts say a victory by Mr. Nikolic would probably bury Serbia’s pro-European aspirations, push the country back into political isolation and undermine its economic prospects.

Nonsense on stilts. Tadic has been playing the nationalist card as well, edging towards Russia, going along with Prime Minister Kostunica’s dirty games—all in hopes of taking some votes away from the Radicals and Nikolic. He is a cowardly politician who’s made some bad decisions during the past few years, and he will likely lose for it.

Furthermore, this is not the result of “growing frustration over American and European Union backing for Kosovo independence” as the Times would have it. The real story here is that there is a very large percentage of Serbs, quite possibly a plurality, who have not renounced their recent history and for whom Kosovo and Bosnia are still open questions. These are the same forces that brought Milosevic to power and who supported him through three disastrous wars. The Balkans will not be peaceful until Serbia goes through some sort of catharsis and relegates these ideas to its fringes.

Ultra-nationalist radical Tomislav Nikolic won the first round of Serbia’s presidential elections. If he wins the whole thing, this is nothing short of Serbia voting to rehabilitate the legacy of Milosevic.

Be prepared to hear commentary on how the West’s unreasonable policy over Kosovo has brought the hardliners to power in Serbia. That’s nonsense. This is the result of Serbia never having been compelled to come to terms with its most recent history, either through decisive military defeat or through a proper criminalization of its actions through the farcical ICTY.

Anatol Lieven has an important (yet in my view flawed) take on the significance of Kosovo in the Financial Times (via Steve Clemons). I don’t feel particularly great right now so I won’t delve into it too deeply, but my disagreement with Lieven comes down to this:

Kosovo’s independence will inevitably have repercussions for the Georgian separatist regions and Nagorno- Karabakh and Trans Dnestr. For the west to say Kosovo is a unique case is empty, given the obvious parallels.

To resolve these issues and restore elementary consistency to its own position, the west does not need to recognise Abkhaz and South Ossetian independence - something for which Moscow is in any case not asking, given the obvious lessons for some of Russia’s own restive minorities.

Russia’s backing of Serbia’s claims to Kosovo doesn’t have anything to do with them feeling that the rules of the international system are being applied arbitrarily—Russians couldn’t care less about fairness or the international system. They are establishing spheres of influence in Serbia through the purchase of a majority stake in the Serbian oil monopoly (Naftna Industrija Srbije - NIS). There are also plans afoot for gas pipelines to Serbia which could end up serving most of Central Europe, thereby pre-empting the Western-backed Nabucco Pipeline project.

This is pure power politics, and should not be mistaken for anything else. It’s about regional influence and energy dependency. Restoring “elementary consistency” to our positions doesn’t matter one whit. Richard Holbrooke had the right idea back in November of last year—Russia needs to be confronted on this.

Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica threatened thusly:

With such an illegal decision, the EU would seriously violate the UN Charter and Resolution 1244, which would automatically mean that there is the Stabilization and Association Agreement is no longer *[sic]*. After this, only in case that the EU withdrew its decision on sending the mission would Serbia be able to discuss the Agreement once again.

That’s right, he’s threatening that he will junk the SAA agreement which the EU extended to Serbia as a measure of goodwill if the EU goes on with its Kosovo plans.

Imagine you have a petulant child. You buy the child a present in order to quiet him down. The child threatens to destroy the present if you don’t do exactly as it demands.

As parents well know, there’s no negotiating with children.

Headline Junky enters the fray:

But its heavy-handed dissection of Serbia’s territorial integrity would deal Russia another humiliation at a moment when Moscow increasingly feels the need to demonstrate its resurgent influence.

Russia deciding to inject itself into this process does complicate things, to be sure. But people should try to keep recent history in mind when they write about these issues. Kosovo’s story is long and tortured, but in modern times it existed as a semi-autonomous body in the context of Yugoslavia, and it had its sovereignty severely curtailed by Milosevic only in 1989. That the current Serbian government is motivated by the same raw myth-driven nationalism which brought Milosevic to power should not be lost on the commentariat either.

Those interested in gaining a deeper understanding of the Kosovo problem need look no further than Noel Malcolm’s superb Kosovo: A Short History. While you’re at Amazon, go ahead and buy Malcolm’s Bosnia: A Short History as well, since Bosnia is up next for Serbian irredentism.

“Tribunalations” is not my favorite pseudo-pun of all time, but it does the job. My afore-mentioned article in The American Interest is up, free to the loyal readers of this blog.

Click here to enjoy.

Ed Joseph and Mort Abramowitz penned an interesting op-ed in the WSJ last week. To get a sense of the nastiness of the situation unfolding in Bosnia today, read their article for a succinct backstory. The authors’ main insight, that EU membership is a rotten carrot—an ineffective inducement to better behavior—is a very important one.

But their suggested solution, perhaps borne of desperation at circumstances, seems impractical:

The way to recruit the Serbs for this project is to give them a stake in its success. As a result of the short-sighted implementation of the Dayton Agreement, Sarajevo, which before the war had the largest concentration of Serbs outside Serbia, is today a Muslim-dominated city. It is difficult to interest the Serbs in an effective multiethnic state without a major Serb presence in Sarajevo.

Converting the capital into a truly shared “national district” and encouraging all ethnicities to resettle there would vitiate a core Serb argument against centralizing state power. It would also reaffirm the principle that a country’s capital and institutions must reflect the interests and makeup of its peoples.

The problem is that the Bosnian Serbs’ goal is not a well-functioning Bosnia. Backed by a nasty nationalist government in Belgrade, which is in turn supported by Russia, and faced with a dithering EU which seems to take every opportunity to appease Belgrade over Kosovo, the Bosnian Serbs must be starting to believe that breaking apart Bosnia is a feasible course of action.

The authors quip:

Secession from Bosnia is not realistic as it would carry substantial political, human, and financial risks for the Serbs, whose economy has just begun to prosper. It should be noted, however, that realism has not been a Balkan trait. Nor can another war for “independence” be discounted; there is growing nationalism among all elements of the Bosnian population.

Is the Bosnian Serb secessionist attitude so unrealistic, given that their leaders’ goal has been incorporation into Greater Serbia from day one, and given that they see before them the opportunities to realize these goals?

Also note that “growing nationalism among all elements” is basically shorthand for the same sort of misunderstanding of that happened during the fall of Yugoslavia. Let’s get it straight: the rise of belligerent Serbian nationalism is forcing the other groups to seek protection among their own. Whatever happens in Bosnia, it’ll be important to remember how this ubiquitous nationalism came to be. “All sides are guilty” is a pernicious meme which has in large part gotten us to where we are in the Balkans today.

Expect more of this in the coming weeks:

“If the independence of Kosovo is recognized, it would not be the final stage of the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia, but the first stage of new disintegration and secession in the Balkans,” Serbia’s Kosovo minister, Slobodan Samardzic, said.

For those not up to speed on what’s going on inside Serbia, this is a good primer on the political dynamics. The DSS is the party of Vojislav Kostunica, who was until recently fêted in the Western press as a welcome change after Milosevic. Whoopsie!

Signs point to most Balkan specialists still not really “getting” it. The International Herald Tribune runs an article titled “A Balkan crisis that some see as overblown”, which cites a certain European study:

In a recent paper published by the European Stability Initiative, a group based in Berlin that advocates the EU’s expansion throughout the western Balkans, argues that contrary to the rhetoric by Kostunica and Gregorian, Bosnia has made enormous strides in recent years, and this current crisis is political, not interethnic.

Fools!¹ It’s always been political, not interethnic! That’s the single biggest misapprehension of the recent Balkan wars: that they were the product of inscrutable ethnic hatreds. I’ve got an article coming out in the next issue of The American Interest on this very topic.

Stay tuned…

EU makes goodwill gesture towards Belgrade, signs pact beginning the process of accession. Serbs rejoice:

Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica told the state news agency Tanjug the move showed Belgrade “can at the same time successfully handle European integration … and defend the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country.”

Translation: my government can get us into the EU without compromising on Kosovo. Plus we’re sure to get Republika Srpska chopped off from Bosnia sooner or later.

The Eastern Question never dies, but the Sick Man of Europe isn’t the Ottoman Empire any more…