Bećirović on the Brdo-Brijuni Summit: Summit of Mistrust and Questionable Presidents

Dr. Zijad Bećirović, director of the International Institute for Middle Eastern and Balkan Studies (IFIMES) in Ljubljana, analyzes the Brdo-Brijuni summit held last weekend in Sarajevo for the BH News Agency, where the presidents of Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Slovenia, Kosovo, and members of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina gathered.

- The summit in Sarajevo is a Summit of Mistrust and mostly questionable presidents. Let's start in order. Slovenia, which actually initiated the Brdo process and was later joined by Croatia under the name "Brdo-Brijuni," cannot be a true role model for the countries in the region. Relations between Slovenia and Croatia, and vice versa, are marked by mistrust, accusations, and even the erection of a wire fence. These two countries spy on each other to an extent that is beyond all reason and necessity. Namely, these are countries that are partners in the EU and allies in NATO. Slovenian President Borut Pahor, during his time as Slovenian Prime Minister from 2008-2011, brought the country to the brink of bankruptcy, and he currently performs his presidential duties in an ostentatious manner with almost no added value.

Croatian President Kolinda Grabar Kitarović has not yet clearly committed to the reincarnation of Ustaše ideology through new forms of neo-Ustašeism, which is becoming an integral part of public discourse. Croatia's relations with its neighbors, not only with Slovenia but also with Serbia, and even with Bosnia and Herzegovina, are not at an enviable level. The country is facing financial collapse and is in a deep political crisis. Can you expect respect for a country in such a state? It's similar to life; a person who is heavily indebted and in debt can hardly be a respected person in society. The same applies to countries. Slovenia and Croatia are not role models for anyone, yet they are the initiators of the "Brdo-Brijuni" process.

Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić is not a significant political factor in Serbia, let alone in the region. This is evidenced by his announcement of an official visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the last year of his term. That says a lot about his regional cooperation. It is no secret that he sympathizes with outdated and despised fascist ideologies from World War II and that he publicly does not want Serbia to be a member of NATO, and experts believe he does not want it to be a member of the EU either. EU membership entails NATO membership because it is a security and defense "umbrella" for every EU country. You cannot be in the EU and be under the security and defense "umbrella" of Russia or China. Serbia's unrecognized military neutrality is not binding on anyone, least of all on Serbia's neighbors, which are already or will be NATO members.

The Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially two members, Bakir Izetbegović and Mladen Ivanić, represent a kind of noose for the country's further progress. This has been shown by their frequent political bickering, which makes no sense to anyone but the two of them. Internal relations in BiH have never been more complex and tense since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. Milorad Dodik, with his nationalist and pro-Russian policies and his SNSD party, has created an internal conflict in the Republika Srpska entity in a desperate fight to remain in power, which is suspected to be unresolvable through democratic means. Bosnia and Herzegovina is a country of archived nationalisms, which feed themselves and fuel others. If the international community truly wants to help Bosnia and Herzegovina, it needs to prioritize its membership in NATO and the EU. Any delay leads to uncertainty.

Kosovo President Hashim Thaçi is under the shadow of war crimes, crime, and corruption. It is an open secret in international circles that the Special Court for War Crimes in Kosovo was established, despite the existence of the EU Rule of Law Mission (Eulex), domestic courts, and the ICTY, partly because of Hashim Thaçi. Internal relations in Kosovo are unstable and tense and could escalate. By delaying the formation of the Association of Serb Municipalities, Thaçi is artificially trying to stay in power, as he is aware that he will no longer be needed by anyone afterward.

Montenegrin President Filip Vujanović not only represents no political factor in Montenegro but the constitutionality of his re-election is also being questioned, as he is considered to have been elected president of Montenegro for the third time, making his election unconstitutional. The situation in that country is politically unstable, as confirmed by the formation of a transitional government. After the elections, scheduled for October, the political crisis will deepen regardless of who wins the elections. Montenegro is a country of internal antagonisms, which have been artificially concealed for the past 20 years. Joining NATO could represent hope for a less uncertain future.

Macedonian President Gjorge Ivanov represents a symbol of the patronage of political crime and corruption and unconstitutional actions, and one of the causes of the political crisis in Macedonia. His illegal amnesty of regime members and the illegal wiretapping of 26,000 citizens of that country triggered mass demonstrations and the formation of a transitional government and early elections, which will most likely be held on October 9th this year. Even the ruling Albanian party DUI does not recognize him as president. He is simply the president of a country who is a puppet in the hands of Nikola Gruevski and VMRO-DPMNE.

The culmination of all this was the awarding of the Founder of Sarajevo Award, Gazi Isa-beg Isaković, to Macedonian President Gjorge Ivanov, who, as I said, is a symbol of the patronage of crime and corruption in Macedonia. This has humiliated the citizens of Sarajevo and completely devalued the award for future generations. It is almost unbelievable that the Award Committee recognized in President Ivanov a person who "promotes the common values of the region." After awarding this prize to Ivanov, it is expected that next year and in the following years, all honest, upright, and deserving individuals will refuse this award because, with the awarding of the prize to Ivanov, the true meaning of such a noble award has been lost.

Albanian President Bujar Nishani was barely elected president in the final round of voting in the Albanian parliament. He is not an important political factor in Albania, let alone in the region.

The role of all the aforementioned presidents in their countries is ceremonial, while at the same time, at such gatherings, they undertake obligations that fall under the purview of the government or executive power. It would be far more beneficial if prime ministers of the countries participated in such gatherings.

The "Brdo-Brijuni" process has been unnecessary from the very beginning. We have an inflation of various multilateral meetings, most of which have no or minimal added value. This is best shown by exact data. For example, Croatia's GDP in 1979 was higher than in 2015. What, then, do such summits lead to? They are useless and come with high costs for taxpayers. All these countries are not showing significant progress. The countries of the region are only recording progress in segments where there is strong private initiative and entrepreneurship, which is left to itself to achieve results, because otherwise, it cannot survive. Countries generally represent a burden to entrepreneurship with their taxes and fiscal and other inspection repression against business entities that produce, work, and create new value, instead of encouraging entrepreneurship and thereby fiscally relieving business entities. None of the presidents in the region has so far offered a comprehensive program for the economic recovery of their countries and a strategic vision for the future. These are the types of politicians whose policies are based on the concept of "from today to tomorrow" and how to survive in their current position at all costs.

Talking about European integration in the way it was discussed at the Summit in Sarajevo represents political illusionism, because the future of the EU is likely more uncertain than the future of the countries in the region, as the architecture of state formation in the region is complete.

Therefore, when we consider who leads individual countries, we must justifiably be concerned about the future of their citizens. No positive changes can be expected with them. Unfortunately, existing political structures are hindering the recruitment and emergence of new political elites in every way, as they literally hermetically control all processes in their countries, and the international community has left the fate of these countries in the hands of such political structures. For this reason, it is very likely that individual countries may change their geopolitical orientation, which could lead to new turbulence in the region.