The latest explosion in the north of Kosovo, Bislimi: We have evidence of communications before and possibly after the attack

The Deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo, Besnik Bislimi, says that Serbia is behind the explosion in the water supply channel from Lake Ujman and therefore it would not be logical to become part of the crime investigation.

Although Belgrade has denied having a role in the explosion that has further strained relations between the two countries, Bislimi said in an interview for the Voice of America that "all the information we have leads to only one address".

According to Bislim, who is also Kosovo's chief negotiator in the talks with Serbia mediated by the European Union, this latest incident reconfirms that Serbia is not interested in normalizing relations and that it alone is responsible for the stalemate, despite Western criticism of it. both parties.

Tensions have increased due to last week's explosion. Although the Kosovo government accused Serbia of being behind the explosion, Serbia itself has denied such a thing. Would Kosovo be ready to accept Serbia's cooperation in the investigation of this explosion, this issue?

Bislim: It would be illogical for the main address to which the crime is attributed to become part of the crime investigation at this stage. Therefore, I think it is impossible for the investigators from Serbia to become part of the investigations. There is no need for this moment. Our institutions have asked for help internationally, but not from Serbia.

A conclusion has not yet been reached as to who is behind this explosion...

Bislim: Now we must take care that the terrorist attack that happened in the irrigation channel, or the water supply, in Ibër - Lepenc, does not become a test of Kosovo's ability to prove the perpetrator of the crime, and of Serbia's ability to commit a crime perfect. All the information we have leads to only one address and I think it would be illogical to now deal with whether there is enough evidence or not. What is important is to analyze what was the primary purpose of this attack. Was it only the damage to the canal, or was the intention to destroy it in its entirety, so that the supply of electricity, water and communications is then impossible? Or was it just the intention to send the signal that Serbia still has the potential to destabilize Kosovo and then use this to increase their negotiating power in Brussels.

Have you asked for international help to investigate this incident, this explosion?

Bislim: Police institutions have requested cooperation with certain international segments, but we must also understand the nature of the crime. The terrorist attack happened in the channel that brings water. It means that the explosion also happened there and therefore it will be difficult to find certain evidence at the scene of the crime. The evidence we have relates to communications that occurred before the attack and possibly after it, which then requires a different nature of forensics.

What impact do you think such an event will have on the general process of negotiations and talks?

Bislim: Now, the signals that are important for us is that we are not dealing (simply) with a terrorist act, but part of a wider plan, which prove that Serbia has other agendas. It means that Serbia is not interested in normalizing relations. Appearing in Brussels, Serbia only serves to continue absorbing financial funds from the European Union, which are then combined with pro-Russian influence. But in the dialogue talks, Serbia's participation is only pro forma, and their only contribution in Brussels is the press conference they organize after the meetings, where they show their constructiveness and willingness to cooperate. But in fact, this participation has always been fake, because there is no case during these three years where I have seen even the minimum of constructiveness on the part of the Serbian side, or the minimum of willingness to take any step that at least takes us further. a little towards normalization.

In fact, the criticisms of the internationals have been towards both sides, as far as the will for these talks, for these negotiations, but also for the various actions of the parties, regarding the agreements...

Bislim: It has been an approach in Brussels that in order to move forward with normalization we need both sides and any attempt for one side to apostrophize as the responsible party may negatively affect the willingness of this side to participate. And in this context, in the absence of the will to identify the blocking party, the European Union has then preferred to share the blame between the parties, but it is not formally known clearly who is the blocking party and who is the constructive party and offers alternatives . For example, for each Brussels initiative, the Kosovar side has offered its constructive proposals. Let's take as an example the discussions we have had about the sequencing plan. So far, we have ten drafts prepared by Mr. Lajçak's office. In these ten drafts, we have ten comments from the Kosovar side, but zero comments from the Serbian side. This shows which party has been active in finding a solution, which has been active in blocking solutions.

On December 17 is the next meeting mediated by the European Union with the envoy Miroslav Lajcak and the chief negotiator of Serbia. In these conditions that you describe, what are the expectations of this upcoming meeting?

Bislim: The meeting of December 17th is not that it can produce, that it should produce reception, either in Brussels or in Pristina or in Belgrade. It is happening at a critical moment for three reasons. First, we have the terrorist attack on the Ibër Lepenci channel. We have the arrival of new figures in the Commission, who will be responsible for the dialogue. And we have the departure of Mr. Lajçak, who ends his mandate as emissary. Consequently, this is not the best period to start something bigger, but there is also probably no readiness on the part of the Serbian side to deal seriously with the implementation of the Brussels agreement and the Ohrid implementing annex of 2023.

In terms of international political changes, we will have a new administration here in Washington in January, the leaders of the European Union have changed, how do you foresee the progress of relations with the new administration of Mr. Trump, while we must emphasize that even during Mr. Biden's relations were not so good, let's say...

Bislim: First, let's say that in Europe we have more clarity at the moment, because the main figures who will have the Kosovo issue on the table are well-known. Ms. Kaja Kallas, as a high representative who will also be in charge of the dialogue portfolio between Kosovo and Serbia. And we have Mrs. Marta Kos, who will deal with the enlargement policy. What is missing is only the name of the new facilitator, or the special representative for the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. In the United States of America, the administration is still being completed. Still those figures who can deal with Kosovo, or the Western Balkans region are not known. I would not have agreed with the conclusion that the relations with the administration of President Biden have not been good...

...according to comments from Mr. Biden's own administration officials.

 Bislim: ...now I can't speak based on the comments. I can speak based on what was said in the meetings. I think that through continuous meetings, the pro-American attitude of the Kosovo government has been recognized. There have even been cases when it has been established that the pro-American attitude is documented through the promotion of the values ​​for which America stands, which are related to increasing well-being, fighting crime and corruption, policies which the Kurti government has done best . /VoA/