HELSINKIBulletin Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia Rige od Fere str. # 20 , 11000 Belgrade, Serbia tel./fax +381 11 30 32 408; e-mail: [email protected] ; www.helsinki.org.rs No 53 ● January 2010 Serbia and Croatia: Past Still in the Way Almost two decades after the end of Above all, the two countries share the war and fourteen years after the responsibility for Bosnia-Herzegovina. establishment of diplomatic relations, Unlike official Zagreb that clearly Serbia and Croatia still move from one distances itself from any paternalism crisis to another – each reviving over Bosnian Croats, official Belgrade traditional and carefully cherished openly supports Republika Srpska as an mutual animosities. Belgrade is autonomous and statelike entity. Serb responsible for such oscillations in the strategists maintain status quo as they first place: not only when it comes to expect territorial aspirations – on the Croatia but also for the entire region. account of which the war in 1990s was Official Belgrade recognizes regional wagged in the first place – to come true realities with leaden step unwilling to sometime in future. acknowledge “new” borders. Serbia specifically reproaches Croatia for recognizing Kosovo and establishing diplomatic relations with Prishtina at ambassadorial level. According to some analysts, recognition of Kosovo’s independence placed Belgrade-Zagreb relations at the lowest point ever since 1996 when the two established diplomatic relations. Belgrade’s officials and the media were The predominant political and most angered at the fact that Croatia was intellectual elites in Serbia are not the only ex-Yugoslav republic (and the ready yet to distance themselves from only neighboring country besides the legacy of Milosevic’s era and Bulgaria) to advocate Kosovo’s right to Milosevic’s warring policies. This independence before the International hampers objective analysis of the Court of Justice. chronology and context of the By applying for EU candidacy in developments of 1990s on the one December 2009, Serbia officially joined hand, and generates the club with Croatia that had reached a misunderstanding and tensions political consensus on its European weighting Belgrade-Zagreb relations future much earlier and is now on the other. Many burning problems practically at the threshold of Brussels. (the borderline issue, return of EU rules of conduct in bilateral relations refugees, property rights, etc.) are – Zagreb is duty-bound to obey for some being shelved therefore. time and Belgrade by its application for Serbia’s and Croatia’s position candidacy – will considerably determine in the region and their responsibility the dynamics of this regionally crucial for regional stability make their relation. Such a new frame opens up mutual relations even more complex. 1 prospects for the entire region. Despi- charge at the time Serbia had a different te the fact that each of the two coun- policy…Things have changed in the tries aspires to regional leadership, meantime and the charge serves its new circumstances may invest their original purpose no more.” 1 rivalry with a new, positive dimension. What may lead to such a conclusion? Both sides were by far more reserved than expected when commenting the latest developments dealing with Croatia’s charge against Serbia and Serbia’s counter-charge. Serbia’s Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic described them as “a pure symmetry.” Ivo Josipovic It was on December 31, 2009 that Serbia filed a counter-charge against Indicatively, legal experts and Croatia for genocide of Serbs before analysts from both countries warn that the International Court of Justice in the outcome of proceedings before the The Hague. highest international court will not satisfy either side. Most of them take A chance paradox that ICJ judges will hardly qualify destruction and crimes Serb forces In 1999 Croatia filed a charge against (under the auspices of YPA) committed in Serbia (FRY at the time) for aggression Croatia in 1991 or the crimes by and genocide before the International Croatian forces during liberation of the Court of Justice. As the ICJ had to country in 1995 as genocide. decide first whether or not it was The argumentation and the authorized to rule in the case, the rhetoric of Serbia’s counter-charge rather charge has been shelved for years. associates it with the atmosphere in the When in 2008 the ICJ affirmed its eve of 1990s wars and the policy of competence the atmosphere in both Milosevic’s regime. Commenting this countries became heated. Serbia resemblance and Vojislav Kostunica’s immediately announced a counter- application for FRY’s membership of UN charge that had been prepared for in 2000, professor of international law over a year. Vojin Dimitrijevic says the act itself Serbia’s media and officials should have manifested “discontinuity differently reacted to the announced with Slobodan Milosevic.” “Now we are counter-charge. President Boris Tadic defending everything he has done. So, was reserved when commenting the why did we oust him in the first place?” breaking news that the counter- says Dimitrijevic. 2 charge was ready and waiting to be sent, the media run in late December Reactions by politicians 2009. He said the counter-charge and public figures “should wait for a while” before being sent to The Hague. However, only a Unlike rightist-nationalistic parties, couple of days later (on December 31, advocates for EU course in Serbia and 2009) Tadic said that after consulting Croatia alike take that the ICJ is not the Premier Mirko Cvetkovic he decided to right place for settling mutual disputes. have the counter-charge forwarded to Leader of the Liberal Democratic Party the ICJ. /LDP/ Cedomir Jovanovic says that the For his part, the then Serbian government’s policy towards presidential candidate, Ivo Josipovic, most countries in the region is still also gave two mutually contradictory wrong and harms the relations with statements in the period of couple of those with which Serbia should days only. Josipovic first underlined cooperate best. Serbia should lead a wise he was among co-authors of the foreign policy, the one that “responds not Croatian charge and claimed its withdrawal was out of the question. However, when commenting Serbia’s counter-charge for Belgrade-seated 1 Kurir, Janury 5, 2010. media, he said, “Croatia filed its 2 Politika, January 5, 2010. 2 to a mistake by making another criticizing Serbia’s counter-charge. He mistake,” says Jovanovic. 3 pleaded against the use of the counter- Damir Kajin, vice-president of charge for “inciting anti-Croatian the Istrian Democratic Alliance, respo- sentiments in Serbia.” 9 nds in about the same way. In Croa- tia, nobody can deny that Croatia was Croatia’s Serbs a victim of aggression the same as no- Every growing tension between Belgrade body can hush up the crimes commit- and Zagreb disadvantages the Serb ted by the Croatian side, says Kajin, community in Croatia. Their leaders adding, “Instead of preoccupying our- constantly warn about this fact and selves and others with charges we appeal to both sides to think rationally should better try to solve the problems and try to solve problems without of return, war crimes, reconstruction resentment and strong emotions. This 4 of states, etc.” refers to the present charge and counter- However, “right-wing” charge too. We must do our best to make oppositionists hold the counter-charge the odds for withdrawal of the changes not only justified but, moreover, late – realistic, said Milorad Pupovac. “It’s time i.e. Serbia should have filed a charge to sober up and open a new chapter of against Croatia first. This is the relations through dialogue on crucial opinion voiced by the vice-president of issues. Withdrawal of all charges could the Serb Progressive Party, Aleksandar provide a foundation for an agreement 5 Vucic and strongly shared by leading both Croatia and Serbia towards Milosevic’s ex-foreign minister, EU,” he said. 10 Vladislav Jovanovic. According to Vojislav Stanimirovic of Pupovac’s Jovanovic, the counter-charge should party shows more understanding for have been filed ten years ago. “We Serbia’s motion because Croatia’s Serbs’ should have spoken the same lobbying for withdrawal of the charge by language they used while speaking to Zagreb was in vain. For him, the us, the more so since they are heavily counter-charge is “the only way to prove burdened by historical experience we what really happened.” 11 don’t have: a real genocide of Serbs in Refugee associations in Serbia 6 WWII.,” says Jovanovic. persistent in their grudge against Croatia Djordje Vukadinovic, chief editor are the loudest in their support to of the New Serb Political Thought, Serbia’s government counter-charge. complains that no one seems happy These are the same organizations that with Serbia’s counter-charge: neither come handy to official Belgrade whenever the opposition nor leaders of Serbs in it needs to raise tensions with Croatia. Croatia, whereas “some from the regime seem ashamed at having to What is the point of counter-charge? deal with these ‘remnants of the past.’” For Vukadinovic, filing of the Apart from being “a pure symmetry,” counter-charge is welcome no matter Belgrade’s counter-charge is meant to how late. He adds, however, “No force Croatia to give up its charge. The charge whatsoever will be of any avail pressure on Croatia from Belgrade has to us unless Serbia changes its been behind the scenes for long but filing attitude towards national interests of the counter-charge practically revealed and state issues.” 7 this endeavor. According to a news story For Croatian politicologist Zarko run in the Blic daily, Belgrade dispatched Puhovski, motives behind the change “a truck loaded with documents and and the counter-charge are political evidence” to the ICJ – a piece of rather than legal.