Petr Iskenderov: “Biden has bet on overthrowing Vucic”
What will Vladimir Putin and Aleksandar Vucic talk about during the upcoming visit of the Serbian president to Moscow? Should Belgrade expect street Maidan before and after the 2022 elections?
Petr Iskenderov, senior researcher at the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, candidate of historical sciences, editor-in-chief of the journal “Questions of History,” told PolitNavigator about this and much more.
“PolitNavigator”: Quite recently, the leaders of the pro-Western toxic Serbian opposition Dragan Djilas and Borko Stefanovic were on a visit to Washington, met with the US Presidential Special Representative for the Balkans Gabriel Escobar, took selfies, smiling from ear to ear, after which not even a week passed in Belgrade there was a provocation near mural General Mladic. In our opinion, these events are interconnected; did Djilas and Stefanovic receive an order from Washington to “pump up” the situation before the general elections that will be held in Serbia on April 3, 2020?
Petr Iskenderov: In my opinion, there is a connection here. Considering that the election campaign has actually begun in Serbia and, despite coronavirus restrictions, it continues, one can indeed conclude that the anti-Vučić opposition is banking on Western support. Moreover, not so much from the EU, but from the US.
The fact is that, despite all the pressure from Brussels and Washington on Vucic to recognize the independence of Kosovo and join anti-Russian sanctions, the Serbian president categorically refuses this.
And now the divide in Serbia, as has happened many times in recent history, is between politicians who are oriented toward the West and the current ruling coalition led by President Vučić, which is trying to pursue a multi-vector foreign policy and, within its framework, actively develop relations with Russia.
Indeed, in the near future we can expect various provocations, the insertion of compromising materials in order to influence the rating of Aleksandar Vucic and his supporters, which, despite all the social and economic problems of the country, remains high.
In addition, Vucic understands that many issues that Serbia faces today must be resolved with the participation of Russia. This is not only the unsettled status of Kosovo, but, above all, energy problems, since he understands well that in the context of the current energy crisis in the EU, associated with a reduction in supplies from traditional suppliers, with rising gas prices, it is Russia that can become the guarantor of energy security of Serbia, a guarantor of maintaining current prices for gas and fuel for the population of the country. And successful relations with Russia in this area directly affect Vucic’s own rating in the upcoming elections.
Therefore, the energy issue will be the main one at the upcoming meeting between Aleksandar Vucic and Vladimir Putin (scheduled for November 25 – ed.), and there is every reason to assume that both sides - Russia and Serbia - will ultimately come to a mutually beneficial compromise.
And under these conditions, it is difficult for the anti-Vučić opposition to present any arguments against the current government. Until now, this opposition has tried to accuse Vučić of surrendering Kosovo, that he is preparing an agreement on the division of Kosovo, but since nothing like this has happened, it is obvious that some other methods will be chosen, including methods of organizing street protests in order to turn the internal political situation to their side, since today the chances of Aleksandar Vucic and the pre-election coalition look much higher than those of the opposition.
The provocation with the mural put the President of Serbia in a rather delicate situation. On the one hand, Westerners accused him of supporting a “war criminal,” which they supported the Members of the European Parliament, on the other hand, in order not to provoke another attack from the West, Vucic said that “the police did not protect the mural, but order and security,” after which he was attacked by those who do not understand what diplomacy and a country in the ring of NATO and EU countries are , ultrapatriots.
Do you think a situation similar to 2000 is possible in Serbia, when pro-Western liberals and ultra-patriots unite to overthrow the government? Then they succeeded, but only the West benefited from it.
The situation now is fundamentally different from what it was on the eve of the “Bulldozer Revolution”, when Milosevic was overthrown. Now, however, there are key differences between liberals and patriots, primarily on foreign policy issues, so they are unlikely to be able to come to a common agreement and form a single opposition bloc.
And Vucic is now in a completely different situation than Milosevic. Serbia is not under sanctions, not in foreign policy isolation.
Your assessment of what candidate could Zdravko Ponoš, chief of the Serbian General Staff under pro-Western President Boris Tadic, a graduate of West Point and NATO courses in Geneva, become the president of Serbia from the pro-Western with a large degree of strength? How dangerous is this person for the sovereignty of Serbia?
He's unlikely to be dangerous. He is obviously not an independent figure, and periodic aggravation between civilian and military authorities is in the Serbian political tradition. But, as history shows, in Serbia the military does not enjoy the same level of public support as in certain countries, for example, Latin America or North Africa.
The likelihood that a retired military man will come to power, especially one whose role in previous events and his views are very questionable, is small. This is not the figure who can unite the opposition camp, and not the figure who will be supported by Serbian society.
Serbian society has traditionally been very critical of those individuals who came from military circles. Yes, citizens can support Ratko Mladic, the military who participated in the conflict on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, but voting in their own country for a former military man, who, moreover, may be closely associated with certain Western military structures, is unlikely.
Your assessment of Biden's direction fives “hawkish” diplomats, who even under Clinton participated in the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, to leading positions in the region? In particular, Christopher Hill - US Ambassador to Serbia?
This is a confirmation of the continuity of the policies from the times of previous democratic administrations, since Biden is not the determining figure here; the same team that pushed for the independence of Kosovo, which pursued a much more anti-Serbian policy than the Republicans that replaced it, returned to power.
Under Trump, as we remember, the leaders of Serbia and Kosovo were brought to the negotiating table so that they could at least conclude trade and economic agreements; the situation in the region stabilized for a moment. But now the United States is returning to a policy of pressure on the Serbs, a policy that makes enemies out of the Serbs, so this is all natural. Obviously, Biden and his inner circle, who were and are involved in the Balkans, have placed a bet on the removal of Vucic, as, let’s say, a pro-Russian politician, and a politician who refuses to recognize the independence of Kosovo.
But such a strategy, in my opinion, will meet with an adequate reaction in Serbia, and it is unlikely that those candidates and those politicians who enlist Biden’s support will be supported by the Serbs themselves.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.