Obama on Afghan leaks. The BBC reports:
“While I am concerned about the disclosure of sensitive information from the battlefield that could potentially jeopardise individuals or operations, the fact is these documents do not reveal any issues that have not already informed our public debate on Afghanistan,” Mr Obama said at a press conference in Washington. “Indeed they point to the same challenges that led me to conduct an extensive review of our policy last fall.”
“For seven years, we failed to implement a strategy adequate to the challenge in this region,” he added, pointing out that it was from Afghanistan that the 11 September attacks on New York and Washington and other terror plots originated. “That’s why we have substantially increased our commitment there, insisted upon greater accountability from Afghanistan and Pakistan, developed a new strategy that can work. Now we have to see that strategy through.”
Moscow condemns EU’s sanctions against Iran. The BBC reports:
Russia has branded EU sanctions against Iran as “unacceptable”, saying they undermine international efforts to rein in Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
“This not only undermines our joint efforts to seek a political and diplomatic settlement around Iran’s nuclear programme, but also shows disdain for the carefully calibrated and co-ordinated provisions of the UN Security Council resolutions,” the foreign ministry said in a statement. The use of sanctions outside of the UN Security Council framework is “unacceptable,” the statement said.
Reuters has some background:
The comments show that despite a deterioration in ties between Tehran and Moscow this year, significant disagreements with the West remain.
“If the West wants something more from Moscow, beyond the UN sanctions it supported, it will have to earn it,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the Russia in Global Affairs journal. Yet, Moscow’s criticism of the West does not automatically mean better ties with Iran, he said. “Russia’s opposition to unilateral sanctions is a position of principle, it does not amount to Russia supporting Tehran.”
Russia’s decision to back U.N. sanctions in June represented a shift from years of support for Iran. Sharp words from Moscow and Tehran in recent days show relations remain tense. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev made his toughest comments yet on Iran’s nuclear program in July, saying that Tehran was moving closer to having the potential to create nuclear weapons. Tehran says its nuclear program is peaceful.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said those comments were part of a “propaganda play” orchestrated by Washington. The Russian Foreign Ministry hit back on Monday, accusing Ahmadinejad of “fruitless, irresponsible rhetoric”.
Ashton must “energise” EU’s Western Balkan policy, the Economist’s Tim Judah says in the Financial Times:
Compared with solving the problems of the Middle East or Afghanistan, the western Balkans are easy. Every country in the region has EU membership as its strategic goal, and all understand that there is much to be done in order to achieve that aim.
The granting of visa-free travel to Europe’s Schengen zone to citizens of Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia last December is a perfect example. Given a clear target, the three countries introduced modern and secure databases, integrated border management systems and passed the test.
With the exception of Croatia, which could join the EU as early as 2012, no other western Balkan country (Serbia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Montenegro and Albania) is likely to be ready for membership before 2020. So those now opposed to enlargement, primarily Germany, must be reassured. Enlargement is not for tomorrow, but keeping the Balkan states moving forward is vital.
It is important because the EU is a promise of stability and the rule of law for a region that needs both, and which without them will radiate instability and organised crime.
So, what is to be done? Lady Ashton needs to energise a process that has stagnated in recent months. When it comes to Kosovo, Europe can move things forward, especially in partnership with the US. We do not need a final settlement now, but we do need compromises and constructive ambiguity from both sides. Europe is and always has been full of oddities in terms of territories and sovereignty. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Serbia, which applied for membership last year, needs to be moved to candidate status as soon as possible, as do Montenegro, Albania and Bosnia. Macedonia needs a date to start talks on accession. The European Commission has recommended that Bosnians and Albanians are ready for visa-free travel to the Schengen zone. This needs to be granted now.
An idea launched by the European Stability Initiative think-tank recently needs to be given traction. After almost 19 years of dispute between Greece and Macedonia over the latter’s name, the two should agree to a change, but it should become effective on the day that Macedonia joins the EU. Greece has always held that the name implies a territorial claim to its own northern province. This is nonsense, but if Athens dropped some of its more extreme demands and accepted a simple geographical suffix, for example “Northern Macedonia”, then both countries could be transformed from antagonists to partners.
None of this is very complicated. There are some 22m people in the western Balkans, roughly the same amount as in Beijing. Difficult though their problems may be, they are eminently resolvable. Let’s hope that Lady Ashton’s low profile until now was just her induction period. These are problems you can solve, so come on Catherine, speak for Europe.
EU needs to set agenda on Kosovo, says Misha Glenny in the IHT:
Kosovo and Serbia are in a special situation, and both have a particular incentive for resolving their differences — the prospect of E.U. membership. If they can resolve their problems the door to Brussels will swing open.
Catherine Ashton, the E.U.’s foreign minister, was quick to recognize this. “The E.U. is ready,” she said in a statement on the ruling, “to facilitate a process of dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade. This dialogue would be to promote cooperation, achieve progress on the path to Europe and improve the lives of the people.”
Ms. Ashton is too skilled a diplomat to say it, but the implication of her statement should be clear to both Belgrade and Pristina. Kosovo must cease looking to secure its future by getting close to Washington, as Prime Minister Hashim Thaci appeared to be trying to do last week. And Belgrade must stop clinging to Russian objections to Kosovo’s independence. Serbia’s foreign minister, Vuk Jeremic, sometimes gives the impression that this is indeed Belgrade’s central policy.
The European Union needs to set the agenda on Kosovo and the Balkans, a region whose members have already been guaranteed eventual membership. If the Union fails in its own backyard, then it can bid farewell to any idea of exerting its influence elsewhere.
Along with the active dialogue that Ms. Ashton promises, Brussels needs to do two things. First, it should improve the system of incentives offered to the Balkan countries that are still outside the Euopean Union. Second, Brussels should act to silence those forces in Washington and Moscow that clearly do not want a compromise solution to tensions in northern Mitrovica — the primary Serbian enclave in Kosovo — and the other problems dogging Pristina.
Meanwhile, the Serbian electorate should be asking why the government in Belgrade shot itself in the foot by bringing such a narrow issue to the international court with the overconfident assumption that the court’s ruling would be in Serbia’s favor. Who should be held accountable for this miserably failed strategy?
Serbs and Kosovo Albanians alike also would like to know how their leaders intend to accelerate moves toward E.U. membership and entrenching the rule of law. Kosovo’s government needs to pay particular attention to this latter goal, especially as the chief of the Central Bank in Pristina was arrested on Friday by the E.U. legal administration in the territory for money laundering, bribe taking and other forms of financial malfeasance.
Kosovo’s government will doubtless feel buoyed by the international court’s ruling, but this will not magically resolve the enormous challenges it faces.
Serbia and Kosovo find themselves confronted by the prisoner’s dilemma. Either they cooperate in their quest for E.U. membership or they remain outsiders, with disastrous consequences for themselves, the region and E.U. diplomacy.
Given their enmity, the idea of Belgrade and Pristina actually cooperating may appear far-fetched. But we can all take heart from the exceptionally fruitful regional and bilateral ties that have developed in the Balkans over the past five years. Just 10 years ago, Serbia and Croatia regarded each other as bitter enemies. Though they still face outstanding issues arising from the wars of the 1990s, they have shown a tremendous willingness to work together on the most pressing regional questions, like the struggle against organized crime.
Whether contact between Serbia and Kosovo comes via the organs of regional cooperation; whether it is established through discreet back-channels; or whether the European Union fashions an Oslo-style peace process does not matter greatly. But the two must start talking. Not just about unilateral declarations but about things that ultimately will matter much more to their citizens.
What role for the new EU diplomatic service? The EU Observer reports:
With the fight to have the service established largely over, the focus is now likely set on the extent to which member states, several of whom jealously guard their foreign policy prerogatives, will allow a coherent foreign policy to thrive.
Big countries have been keen to stress the service will not impinge on their foreign policy sovereignty, a point illustrated by the extent to which they are prepared to consider closing their own embassies in certain countries and use the EU embassy.
According to France’s Europe minister, Pierre Lellouche, some countries may consider saving money through using EU embassy facilities but this should not be the case for France. “I am the secretary of state, and I do not speak for France [but] I think it is desirable that France continues to maintain a global network. It is one of the few countries to do so, ” he said, according to Le Monde.
To sign up for the Global Europe Morning Brief, send an email to globeurope@gmail