Harmonious Transformation Of Europe: Brussels Agreement Considering The Geopolitical Constellation – OpEd

The EU policy in relation to Kosovo claims to be in accordance with its platform of its harmonious transformation. In this document, the central place is the treatment of this transformation and the motives of overcoming classical geopolitics in accordance with the objectives of critical geopolitical shifts.

But a worthy country also has hypotheses as to why the Brussels Agreement [February 27, 2023], after the letter that the Prime Minister of Serbia sends to the EU’s Foreign Service, may go towards nullification, and be archived in the annals of history. In this framework of geopolitical developments, Southeastern Europe is being delineated, moving from the corridors of diplomacy to military battlegrounds.

See for this, I treated the Brussels agreement as a byproduct of the same political mindset that once produced the prototype of Kersten Knipp’s “Fascist Commune”. The same mindset on the eve of World War II had used the combination of many of those contradictory aspects of real life to form a dangerous, mass psychotic populism that could easily be followed by 21st-century missteps in Southeast Europe. which seem to be related to the platform of Serbian-Russian ideologues for the creation of the “Serbian World”.

In the light of these developments, the Brussels Agreement nevertheless gains specific weight.

Introduction

The UN General Assembly, after an intensive dialogue, on September 10, 2010, approved the resolution that will pave the way for direct talks between Kosovo and Serbia, the first since Kosovo declared independence.

The resolution in question was presented by Serbia itself and co-sponsored by the European Union. Through it, the main role of the European Union in mediation between Serbia and Kosovo was supported.

The resolution was approved by the 192 members of the General Assembly, had accepted the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, which categorically affirmed that the declaration of independence of Kosovo in 2008 does not violate any international law.

The resolution removed Serbia’s earlier illegitimate demands for the reopening of the dialogue on the status of Kosovo.

The resolution in question, amended, recognizes the judgment of the International Court of Justice, which states that the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo was legal. It also welcomed the European Union’s offer to enable dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo, as a path to future membership in the organization.

With this resolution, the path is initially opened for technical dialogue, but over time, it would turn into pure political dialogue.

The policy of the EU in relation to Kosovo, for pure geopolitical interests, investing in the separation of Serbia from the Russian orbit, continued to make concessions to Serbia to the detriment of Kosovo, the product of which was the agreement of April 2013 and that of August 2015, which would degenerate into secret talks for the division of Kosovo in 2018.

[The EU’s] European policy towards Southeast Europe was unlikely to follow the US geopolitical doctrine of creating a “New Democratic Middle East”. To paraphrase Josep Borrell, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Brussels cannot make the development of South-Eastern Europe limited only to the development of gardening and clearing the jungle, with the only foresight that the “lava” of the war provoked by the canary of France – Serbia, would not spread over the EU fence and subvert the continent’s security.

The Brussels Basic Agreement vs. Critical Geopolitics

The attitude of the Berlin-Paris axis towards Serbia and thus the Brussels Basic Agreement [February 2023] was an attempt to surpass classical geopolitics as the tradition of political realism in international relations. Consequently, the Brussels Agreement appears to us to be the product of a critical geopolitical approach. The latter, as is known, is a link between the free platform of political geography and international relations.

Underlying the Franco-German agreement itself seems to be the basic principle of critical geopolitics, which incorporates the interests of the axis in question. The authors of the Brussels Basic Agreement, with emphasis on its Annex approved in Ohrid [March 18, 2023], transforming Kosovo into experimental laboratory, through the definition of the actual recognition of the Republic of Kosovo, as if they want to demystify the classic Serbian geopolitics, placing it in line with the interests of the EU, fully in the historical context and the perspective of the region as a whole in the EU.

Classical geopolitics mainly focused on four essential elements: space, identity, vision, and statehood.

Critical geopolitics focuses on the social construction of space – the way in which space is more meaningful and accessible to many geopolitical actors and their ideas. Space is central to critical geopolitics. Yet unlike classical geopolitics and its often-implicit materialism, this dismisses any relationship between geographic space and global politics. Instead it investigates the social construction of space – the way in which space is made meaningful by a wide range of geopolitical actors and their ideas. [1]

Critical geopolitics also points out that geopolitics has historically served as an essential foundation of knowledge that remains linked to the birth of the modern state, i.e. the symbols of state-making. See for this, the process of the disintegration of Yugoslavia [1991-1999] should be seen in the light of the transformation of the conception of critical geopolitics for the benefit of the creation of new states, therefore also the Republic of Kosovo, in the process of the complete transformation of Southeast Europe. In this new process in which Southeast Europe is claimed to be incorporated as a whole, critical geopolitics can be strongly encouraged, avoiding attention from classic geopolitical topics and reconceptualizing its entirety and the integration process in the EU and NATO.

As such, critical geopolitics, in this case, trying to transcend classical geopolitics, thus questions the rigid boundaries between territorial identities, bringing into question its own existence.

The Serbian Prime Minister’s letter resets the agreement to zero

After the EU-Western Balkans summit, which was held in Brussels in mid-December 2023, a joint declaration was adopted. The statement, among other things, called on all Western Balkan countries to impose sanctions on Russia and work to prevent the evasion of restrictive measures that Brussels imposed on Moscow in response to its aggression against Ukraine.

In the said statement, among other things, it was underlined:

“We expect constructive engagement from both sides in good faith and in a spirit of compromise to make rapid progress in normalizing their relations, which is critical to the security and stability of the entire region and to ensure that the parties can advance in the respective European journeys”, says the statement from Brussels. Kosovo and Serbia were called upon to fully implement the Agreement on Normalization of Relations and its Annex, as well as all previous Agreements “without further delay or preconditions”.[2]

But after its publication, the rage of Belgrade was immediate. Just two days before the elections, Prime Minister Brnabić sends a letter to the EU’s Foreign Service.

“The agreement on the path towards the normalization of relations and the implementation Annex, as referred to in this statement, is considered acceptable only in the context in which it does not include the de facto or de jure recognition of Kosovo”, it is stated in the document where Serbia has expressed its position.

“The Republic of Serbia underlines that this adaptation does not include the acceptance of Kosovo membership in the UN, in the system of UN organizations and agencies, nor the so-called territorial integrity of Kosovo”, it is further stated in the said letter, adding that this declaration is considered legally non-binding and does not have the weight of an international agreement under international law.

Furthermore, Serbia states that “Kosovo is an integral part of the Republic of Serbia under international administration in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 1244”.[3] But weeks have already passed and there is no concrete attitude towards this letter from Brussels!

It was expected that in the second part of January, when the meetings of the EU’s high structures [Commission, Council of the EU…] were held, this letter would at least be treated seriously. The attempt by Borrel’s office to pass it off as unfounded leaves a bitter taste for the spirit that dominates the European Commission.

However, the fact that the Serbian Prime Minister’s letter restores the agreement to zero cannot be avoided by anyone who considers the course of events from September 24, when we had the Serbian military aggression in the north of Kosovo, until the first days of January of this year, when the primary topic is returning to the security of the region.

The transition from the corridors of diplomacy to military battles

Everywhere in the EU, in the absence of operational unity for Southeast Europe, it seems that the missionary role of preparing the public for the expected change will be taken in the meantime by the liberal left forces in coordination with the conservative right. The Franco-German project that was then adopted by the EU bloc and supported by Great Britain and the USA, included in the basic plan of February 27, 2023, was the product of this compromise. However, it was not signed by the Serbian president. Meanwhile, the aggressive act of Serbia towards Kosovo on September 24 and the letter of the prime minister of Serbia, Ana Brnabiq, addressed to the Council of the EU on December 13, overturn everything related to the agreement in question. Meanwhile, Serbia, in addition to rejecting the first four points of the agreement in question, constantly insists that it will never accept the independence of Kosovo and that it does not recognize the territorial integrity of Kosovo. In accordance with this attitude was the aggressive act of September 24, but also the attitude towards the unit that executed that act and meanwhile also the intensive preparations it is making for the repetition of the act in question, since it does not leave the north of Kosovo. All other actions in relation to Kosovo, including the recognition of vehicle license plates of the Republic of Kosovo, which it is applying from January 1, 2024, are simply part of the tactics and maneuvering done by the Serbian leadership to escape EU sanctions. and the measures that should follow after the end of the investigations into the attack of September 24, 2023 in Banjskë Albanik [Leposaviq].

Southeastern Europe is shaping the new order by moving from the corridors of diplomacy to military battles.

The three events that mark this process are:

  1. Serbian military aggression on September 24, 2023 in Banjskë i Albanik [Leposaviq];
  2. The flight of American F-16 aircraft on January 6, 2024 over the skies of Bosnia in the name of securing its sovereignty;
  3. The visit to Kosovo of the Foreign Affairs Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, on January 4, in which case he reconfirmed the British support to Kosovo, respectively its clear position in the role of the protector of Kosovo.

In this transitional process, similar to the turn of the 20th century, the winners are those who know how to choose alliances and are determined to resist.

In the process of the harmonious transformation of Europe and the integration of Southeast Europe as a whole in the Euro-Atlantic institutions, with an emphasis on NATO, Great Britain is expected to play a significant role anyway. In this framework, the visit of the British Foreign Secretary, David Cameron, at the beginning of this year to Pristina should also be seen.

“Serbian Fascist Commune” alias Serbian Community in Kosovo

In September 1919, exactly 2,500 troops of Black shirts under the leadership of the eccentric poet and war hero Gabriele D’Annunzio occupied a small Croatian coastal town and established the Republic of Fiume [Rijeka] on the ruins of the Habsburg Empire. Here they put on a strange spectacle of antagonistic elements: military parades, torchlight processions and war hymns, combined with an endless orgy of free love, drugs and nudism.

The Republic of Fiume marks the beginning of a century of violence. It becomes the aesthetic laboratory of fascism and an early site of the “anticultural” wave that will be promoted in 1968.

In his landmark essay, aptly titled The Fascist Commune, Kersten Knipp describes how all these contradictory aspects combine to form a dangerous, mass psychotic populism, and shows how this astonishing episode marks the beginning of the twentieth century.

Modern Serbian fascism during the process of disintegration of Yugoslavia applied this “culture” of action in Banja Luka, transforming it into the main epicenter of Serbian fascism.

The ideologues of the “Serbian World”, pretending to copy the success applied in Banjaluka, had managed to win the support of the special political circles of their traditional allies, especially the French ones, since at the end of the war in Kosovo [June 1999], began promoting the “Fascist Commune” in the north of Mitrovica, including in this framework the entire north of the Republic.

The north of the Republic, even after the declaration of independence [February 17, 2008], see here, would become the oasis of experimentation of modern Serbian fascism.

The discovery and closure of 11 drug laboratories only within the last two years 2022-2023 by the Kosovo Police; the discovery and complete demolition of dozens of other “laboratories” of the creation of cryptocurrencies and a series of “aesthetic laboratories” of its kind, which Serbian fascism had inaugurated for a long time under the direction of the Serbian president Aleksander Vučić and the incriminated duo Vulin-Radojčić, it is the best evidence of what the Union of Serbian Municipalities in Kosovo could be, in case it was created during the time when this nomenclature of fascists is in power at the head of power in Serbia.

In his landmark essay, The Fascist Commune, Kersten Knipp describes how all these contradictory aspects combine to form a dangerous, mass psychotic populism, and shows how this astonishing episode that marks the wrong start of the 20th century began. 20th.

If it weren’t for February 14, 2021 and the silent democratic revolution in Kosovo, which sent the collaborators and puppets of Serbian fascism in Kosovo and its allies, even within the EU, into history, we could easily have a replica of this Italian fascist commune in the north of the Republic and the opening of pandora’s box that would precede the more accelerated creation of the “Serbian World”.

The agenda of the creation of the “open Balkans” on the basis of which could be the creation of the “Serbian World”, of course on the ruins of the countries where it will lie [Bosnia and Montenegro], in the name of the creation of free and safe corridors to energy sources, transport routes and free access of Western capital to the Middle East market and the agenda of strengthening the US transatlantic strategic bridge to Europe, with the aim of American dominance in European affairs, are contained in the geostrategic project “New American Century” (Project for the New American Century – PNAC), published in 1997, which in reality became a doctrinal document of American foreign policies.[4]


Vucic’s fascism has lost its masks after September 24. See for this, Vucic through the elections of December 17 sought to homogenize everything by destroying all exceptions to his rules, we would conclude if we paraphrased Mark Lipovetsky.

Similar to Russian fascism, Serbian fascism, over time, has not been able to resist being infected by post-modernist ideas, which summarize that those who are more powerful are always right.

This conclusion therefore makes Serbian fascism “particularly dangerous”, not only for its internal political opponents [Sandulović’s case], but also for the region.

Serbia will spend around 740 million euros this year alone for the purchase of military equipment and weapons, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić said on Saturday at a press conference at the Military Security Agency.

These comments were made by Vucic just two days after the United States of America accepted a request from Kosovo for the purchase of Javelin anti-tank missiles, which will meanwhile be reviewed by the American Congress.

Every time the Serbian chief faces segments of the new reality in the field of security and defense, as evidence of the real functioning of the Republic of Kosovo, he returns to UN Resolution 1244, like religious fanatics “holy book”. Communicating more with the domestic public, in this public communication, this time, he had no choice but to express his deep concern for the US decision to sell 246 American-made anti-tank missiles to Kosovo, as well as tracking equipment.

“According to Resolution 1244, there cannot be any group of armed Kosovar Albanians, and they created an army for them and continue to create it”, Vucic said.

This statement of his is closely related to the theories on modern fascism.

“Post-modernism undermines binary oppositions,” says the Russian culture specialist at Columbia University. “Consequently, post-modernism also fights against essentialism, the idea that there are some eternal and irreplaceable categories that are not subject to criticism” (novayagazeta.eu/articles/2024/01/10/tsinicheskii-konsensus-golosuet-za-putina).[6]

Fascism was from its origins a political and social ideology. Since its appearance, it has been accompanied by legitimizing the ideas on society’s need for a charismatic leader, on the basis of a hard-working authoritarianism, extreme nationalism, which would be crowned with the creation of fascist parties and the fascist state, which would promote dictators at the top. the type of Mussolini, Hitler, Milosevic, Putin… “Post-modernism” is a school of thought that has embraced a particular approach to science, art, philosophy, and culture in general. For example, it has emphasized relativism, skepticism towards absolute narratives, and a sense of fragmentation and variability in society.

Post-modern Serbian fascism therefore has its roots in the political thought produced by the Academy of Arts and Sciences, which would shape opinion for decades, about the Serbian genocide in Kosovo at the end of the decade of apartheid in the 20th century.

According to Lipovetsky, “an important component of the so-called “post-modern fascism … has become a cynical consensus in which the powers that be and society have agreed that there are no rules and that there is no need to seek them. There is only post-truth: whoever can lie the most is right. In this case, lying as a Serbian virtue, as described by the so-called father of the Serbian nation, Dobrica Qosić, rises to the pedestal of public communication.

Serbian post-modern fascism appears today everywhere in social and political life – but it has reached its peak in the way of governance, where the authoritarian, nationalist spirit with a strong anti-Albanian orientation dominates, accompanied by strong feelings of fragmentation, relativism, or the use of technology and modern media to promote it as an idea for the defense of Serbia and Serbian national interests!

This style of communication in the spirit of post-modern fascism, Serbian fascism, if we were to use Lipovetsky’s conclusions about Russian fascism, is typified by the increase in aggressiveness within Serbian society, especially in relation to political opponents after the elections of December 17, 2023, but also in relation to the outside world, despite the fact that there are notes of irony in the vocabulary of the Serbian chief fascist.

“Are we strong like America, England, Germany, Turkey – we are not. But we can show the whole world that this [arming of the FSK-SR] brutally violates international legal norms”, says Vucic in the speech in question.[7]

This language is slightly different from that of the Serbian mercenaries who went to the Donbas to help the Russians in the war against Ukraine, who recently came out with a threatening message for Kosovo.

In the video that is circulating on the “X” social network, a Serbian mercenary can be seen who gives a speech in front of the flag of Serbia and Russia, where he warns that after Donbas, the next destination is Kosovo.

“We want to greet all the brothers in Kosovo and let them know that they are not alone. We are here today, God willing, to get rid of the NATO occupiers from Kosova. The next destination is Kosovo!” Kosovo is Serbia”, [8] declares the Serbian mercenary as a typical postmodern fascist.


Serbian post-modern fascism is “the result of this cynical consensus, the acceptance of the rules of the game, according to which the strong are always right”. But it seems that Vuçic is clear that “in such a world, almost everyone is stronger than some and weaker than others, but everyone will try to deceive everyone that this is the reality” [9], therefore he continues to play the role of the victim!

In this context, there is also the denial of the Recak massacre even 25 years after it was carried out by the Serbian forces.

“The full truth about the event in the village of Reçak, on January 15, 1999, is being revealed to the world. The truth that I then established as an investigating judge, that there was no massacre of civilians, but that it was a legitimate action by the Serbian police against the terrorists of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), was known starting from those who they made the decision to bomb the then Federation of the Republic of Yugoslavia, but this was not in their interest”, [10] Danica Marinković, the former investigating judge for the Rečak case, claims for the Serbian daily Novosti.

The attempt to deny again and again the massacre of Recak, but also the genocide against the Albanians, remains part of the strategy of post-modern Serbian fascism for the benefit of the “cynical consensus”.

Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek talks about the concept of Jouissance, says Lipovetsky, the feeling that “even the oppressed feel when they are able to deceive a master or become a master for those who are even weaker.” It seems that this is the basis of Vucic’s cynical consensus with his like-minded people, with whom he reunited on the eve of the elections, because this model allows all fascists of all formats to feel more certain of victory, anyway even more happy, it even makes them more immune and ready to cope by ignoring the real problem.


“Post-modernism is often equated with irresponsibility,” says the Columbia university scholar; “but that’s not true. It is an art of responsibility: yes, there are no objective truths, but that means I am responsible for the truths I know and promote. It requires the individual to be responsible in the matrix of which the person considers himself a part”.

Therefore concludes Lipovetsky. “Jumping from one coordinate system to another for expediency saying that there is no truth and that it cannot exist or aggressively presenting falsehoods quite openly as truths does not mean that it is compatible with post-modernism, on the contrary that action is simply cynicism” – and it is this cynical consensus in Serbia that constitutes the foundation of Vucic’s state that the West must challenge and not further do anything to detach it from the Serbian orbit and incorporate it as part of liberal democracies. Serbian post-modern fascism, being a typical appendage of Russian fascism, therefore also endangers the West. The support of the special political circles of their traditional allies, especially the Efreng ones, who at the end of the war in Kosovo [June 1999], started promoting of the “Fascist Commune” in the north of Mitrovica and the north of the Republic.

North Macedonia – the crutch of the “Open Balkans”

In a changed geopolitical situation, the EU continues to have no clear agenda for the perspective of the six countries of the Western Balkans. In these circumstances, Serbia’s cooperation, and not only with Russia, has taken on a new meaning since the beginning of the war in Ukraine.

The EU meanwhile has suffered a significant loss of credibility, especially due to the current status of the enlargement policy. See for this that hardly any country in the Eastern Balkans believes today that there is a real possibility of membership in the near future, despite the oft-repeated phrases that the future of the Western Balkans [BP] lies in Europe. The six BP states, however, willingly refuse to sit and wait forever in the waiting room

of the EU without cooperating with external actors from whom they are receiving direct benefits. Russia, China, Turkey, etc. are the powers that have deeply interfered in BP’s economy and are gradually influencing their political agenda. The “open Balkan” turns out to be a product of this intervention and as a substitute for blood for membership in the EU.

However, geopolitical rivalries with Russia should not lead to overriding essential BP reforms with improvisations and ad hoc solutions. This clearly means that with Serbia not imposing sanctions against Russia, the historical conflict of Kosovo cannot be resolved. Therefore the EU and the West as a whole must work more intensively on these fronts. The West should also change its approach to local actors such as Vucic or Dodik, who are already the main drivers of pro-Russian policy in the Balkans, instead of overestimating Russia’s potential for possible interference.

The accession process for North Macedonia and Albania has entered into one with new challenges. With this act, Brussels has sent wrong signals to the region.

Reforms become irrelevant as soon as an EU member state appears on the scene that can block the enlargement process, as Bulgaria is in this case. But Bulgaria’s intervention in this case, with the condition that North Macedonia carry out the appropriate constitutional reform, through which the existence of the Bulgarian minority would be accepted, has brought North Macedonia (NM) back to the attention of neighboring countries and not only.

In this context, the Republic of North Macedonia is of vital importance and can serve as an important factor for peace and stability in the region, even if it can turn into a bone of contention, for several reasons:

  1. Political stability: After the clash between the State and the Albanian insurgents under the emblem of the National Liberation Army in 2001, which was concluded with the Ohrid Agreement and the opening of the perspective of treating Albanians as citizens of the Republic, it has managed to build a relative political stability. The improvement of the political situation and achievements in European integration have contributed to the strengthening of institutions and the rule of law, creating a safer political and social environment.
  2. Ethnic and cultural diversity: North Macedonia is a country with an ethnically and culturally diverse population. The commitment to promote diversity and ensure equal rights for all ethnic groups in the country has opened the possibility of building a harmonious society and easing inter-ethnic tensions. But this process is not satisfactory for a good part of the Albanian political spectrum in NM and for the representatives of the Bulgarian minority.
  3. Geostrategic role: North Macedonia is located in an important geostrategic position in the Western Balkans. As a transit country, North Macedonia is of particular importance in trade and transport links in the region, connecting Central and Eastern Europe with the Adriatic and the Aegean Sea. The stability and development of this country can contribute to the growth of economic and security cooperation in the region.
  4. Integration into international structures: North Macedonia’s efforts to integrate into the European Union and NATO have been a stabilizing factor in the region, especially its accession to NATO. These processes have significantly contributed to the visionary orientation and the increase of hope for the positioning of the State in long-term plans, taking into consideration the geopolitical interests of the Albanians. Finally, North Macedonia is a vital interest of Albanians as a Nation. Our two existing republics – political Albania and the Republic of Kosovo, love and consider North Macedonia as an important partner for peace and stability in the Western Balkans.
  5. The intervention of Serbia and Russia – “Open Balkan” as a strategic project is a product of the interests of Serbia and Russia in the region. The insistence to revive this project, even after a silent departure of Albania, has a pure geopolitical character. As such, this project conflicts not only with the interests of Albanians, but also those of the EU.

The political forces in MV that are currently in power, including DUI, are victims of this strategic course that has turned the Republic of MV into a crutch of the “open Balkans”, alias Serbia.

The MV election campaign, already underway, will further expose this purely geostrategic division. Their outcome, therefore, will either cement the status quo, giving way to Serbian-Russian influence, or orient the Republic of MV to a new political process, transforming it into a fully multi-ethnic and democratic society, opening up road to self-determination of Albanians and its federalization.
Serbia – hostage of Russia

Serbia, as small as it is, due to its geostrategic position and traditional ties with Russia [in the East] and France [in the West], being for a long time the nucleus and the very voice of Yugoslavia, had “crossed the rainbow” and imposed shortcomings for each small state, becoming a kind of gendarme for the former Yugoslavia and the Balkans; See for this, not infrequently during the historical processes it has managed to set a political agenda for the region and thus have an increased capacity to influence or modify the behavior of others towards it.[11]

This selection of Serbia for alignment proves that it further prefers to maximize its influence, therefore it has announced a foreign and security strategy based on its clear pro-Russian positioning.

Here are some factors that have helped strengthen relations between Serbia and Russia:

  1. Cultural and Historical Ties: Serbia and Russia have a common Orthodox history, and have followed a common cultural tradition. This has created a strong sense of solidarity between them.
  2. Russia’s assistance in International Institutions: Russia has almost always followed the role of guardian mentor, of support to Serbia in several institutions and organizations with an international character and specific states, especially in the period after the liberation of Kosovo [1999], engaging in favor of maintaining the status quo and possibly its separation.
  3. Common Foreign Policies: On several occasions, Serbia has shared positions with Russia in international politics, including their positions in the United Nations and other international forums.

Meanwhile, Serbia is taking the first step towards the objective of its transformation into a military state, not hesitating to implement the obligation it has taken against Russia – to review the possibilities of opening a second front in the Western Balkans. This should be the basic reason why Serbia needs mass recruitment of Serbian youth. This idea is served by the application of compulsory military service, which was announced by the Serbian Minister of Defense, Milosh Vučević. He announced that the relevant document has arrived at the President’s cabinet, however, it will then be sent to the military cabinet and the Assembly. If military service is reinstated, the proposal is to last up to four months, Pink reports.[12]

“After 13 generations and taking into account the dangers our country is facing, the General Staff of Serbia and the Ministry of Defense officially addressed the President of the Republic yesterday and launched the initiative for the return of mandatory military service,” said Vučević. [13]

In the tradition of relations between Serbia and Russia, military cooperation has a special history.

In early 1945, Soviet troops began marching into the Balkans, including Yugoslavia. In April 1945, the Soviet forces made a successful “unification” with the Army of Yugoslavia, alias Serbia. This “cooperation” facilitated their march towards Belgrade and strengthened their grip on the city.

On October 20, 1944, after a strong resistance from the German forces, the two armies – the Russian and the Yugoslav, would liberate Belgrade. This event would mark the climax; was part of a sequence of events that led to Yugoslavia’s dependence on the USSR until the 1948 crash, when Yugoslavia would “break away from the so-called socialist bloc.” However, the cultivation of relations between Serbia and Russia would continue, especially in the military field. Meanwhile, after the breakup of Yugoslavia [1990], and especially in the last decade [2012-2023], Serbia has turned into Russia’s own kind of hostage, being intensively dealt with on the global and regional geopolitical chessboard, as it were American geo-strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski.


After the Second World War, Europe underwent a profound transformation, marking a new period in its history. This transformation was characterized by political and territorial changes, which was followed by the formation of a new bloc of powers on the international scene. This transformation, especially in the field of security, would be crowned with the creation of the largest politico-military alliance, NATO, of which most of the states of Western Europe would be part, while in the socioeconomic field, deepens especially with the creation of the core of the European Union. Serbia, as the pivot of Yugoslavia, was involved in this process of change, enjoying strong economic and political support.

However, after Tito’s death in 1980, and especially with the beginning of changes in the international scene, which would mark the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Germany, Yugoslavia entered the process of bloody disintegration. The terrible scenarios of four wars and two genocides that Serbia will cause in this process are the product of Serbian ideologues, who were promoting the creation of a greater Serbia, alias the Serbian World.

Serbia and Croatia were the two main actors of this conflict explosion that led to the division of Yugoslavia, however the highest cost for this process of undoing will be paid by the two peoples against whom Serbia also practiced genocide – that is, the Bosniaks {BeH] and the Albanians [Kosovo] .

The war that Serbia imposed on Kosovo to the extent of genocide [1998/99], caused the international intervention in 1999, in which case, to stop the genocide in Kosovo, NATO would bomb the targets of the Serbian army for a full 78 days, when Belgrade would accept the capitulation and signing of the Kumanovo Agreement [June 9, 1999] and the liberation of Kosovo from its colonial treatment for a full 87 years [1912-1999].

After these events, Serbia for a short time suffered an international isolation, but without being punished as it should be, respectively as happened with Nazi Germany after the end of the Second World War. A period even followed when Serbia was being treated as a factor of stability and peace in the region!

In this context, the geopolitical repositioning of the West towards Serbia, especially in the last decade, was connected and calculated with the repositioning towards the Russian Federation.

The last decade is the period when Serbia has tried to restructure and strengthen itself as an independent state in the true sense of the word, absorbing finance from all parties. This also includes its quasi-efforts to integrate into the Euro-Atlantic structures and to build better relations with its neighbors. The “Open Balkan” project, see here, aimed to restructure the new Yugoslavia [without Slovenia and Croatia, plus Albania], claiming to keep Kosovo in a frozen status, but this new structure would still be under the of Serbia. However, the resumption of the war in Ukraine, in February 2022, would also be the end of this ambitious project for Serbia.
Conclusion

The world during 2024 will not find peace between crises and wars. Southeast Europe in the meantime, since Serbia has become a vassal-hostage of Russia, is also in the midst of crises and war. What role will the EU have in maintaining peace in the Eastern Balkans, which is facing elections this year, in the concert of major players, and if so, what will that role be? January for many things can be decisive also in this plan.

We cannot properly venerate the fall of Yugoslavia outside of geopolitical developments. This collapse was followed by the creation of chaos and the outbreak of programmed wars.

The phenomenon of creating programmed chaos has been well studied by geopolitician William Engdahl in his famous book “A century of war”.

The deepening of the crisis in the Balkans by imposing the Serbian “Fascist Commune” alias the Community of Serbian Municipalities, as an overture to secession, an example of the Republika Srpska in Bosnia and the creation of programmed chaos, would hardly be limited to Kosovo and Bosnia.

The realignment of Serbia again on the side of Russia or its positioning on the side of the West remains intertwined with the project of Serbian ideologues who carry the label “Serbian World”. On whichever side Serbia will be positioned in the meantime, it will be transformed into an instrument of the programmed war that will end up with the creation of a new political – economic map in Southeast Europe.

Notes:

  1. See: Dodds, K. & Sidaway, J. D. (1994) ‘Locating critical geopolitics’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 12: 515-524
  2. https://www.evropaelire.org/a/perafrimi-i-politikes-se-jashtme-ne-qender-te-samitit-be-ballkani-perendimor/32728573.html
  3. https://www.ishgj.org/aktualiteti/perfundon-samiti-be-ballkani-perendimor-te-gjitha-vendet-e-pranojne-deklaraten/
  4. https://academic-accelerator.com/encyclopedia/project-for-the-new-american-century
  5. https://www.evropaelire.org/a/vuciq-thote-serbia-shpenzoj-170-milion-pasisje-ushtarake/32773043.html
  6. Paul Goble: https://www.eurasiareview.com/14012024-cynical-consensus-in-russia-makes-putins-fascism-especially-dangerous-oped/
  7. https://www.evropaelire.org/a/vuciq-thote-serbia-shpenzoj-170-milion-pasisje-ushtarake/32773043.html
  8. https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1746372854961361111?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1746372854961361111%7Ctwgr%5Ece2a74c43a35692040ef8a4295e5ded28a407641%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpamfleti.net%2Fprishtine%2Fkercenojne-mercenaret-serb-do-te-heqim-qafe-nato-n-destinacioni-i-radh-i207724
  9. Paul Goble: https://www.eurasiareview.com/14012024-cynical-consensus-in-russia-makes-putins-fascism-especially-dangerous-oped/
  10. https://www.novosti.rs/drustvo/vesti/1322043/voker-lazirao-masakr-opravda-akciju-nato-proslo-25-godina-oruzanog-sukoba-selu-racak-koji-bio-povod-agresiju-srj?fbclid=IwAR2B0fbTfIpV8e13TXLF5CKzMkA6Ck4dP2N5GgNLx1zvKa4vKE3Bdx2qYP4
  11. Fendius Elman, Miriam (1995). “The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism in Its Own Backyard”, British Journal of Political Science, 25, Issue 2, pp. 171-217.
  12. https://www.Kosova-online.com/vesti/politika/vucevic-srbija-pobedjuje-u-miru-ne-idemo-u-ratove-ali-morate-da-pratite-sta-se
  13. Ibid.

Check Also

French President Macron Meets With Arab Delegation To Discuss Gaza

Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Prince Faisal bin Farhan headed an Arab ministerial delegation …