BELGRADE REACTION TO CG LONDON STATEMENT

C O N F I D E N T I A L BELGRADE 000155

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/02/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREL PBTS SR YI
SUBJECT: BELGRADE REACTION TO CG LONDON STATEMENT

Classified By: Ambassador Michael C. Polt, reasons 1.4 (b,d)


1. (c) The CG London declaration was discussed within the
negotiating team on February 01, and PM advisor Aleksander
Simic delivered the official reaction to local media at the
end of the day, with the reaction appearing in local press by
February 02. The official statement highlighted the
negotiating team,s satisfaction that the statement discussed
a settlement within the framework of UNSCR 1244, and
cautioned against setting specific deadlines for final
settlement. Local press also prominently reported Russian
President Putin,s statements on Kosovo (which followed a
widely-cited interview by DAS DiCarlo in Kommersant). Local
media highlighted Putin,s insistence that a Kosovo solution
be universally applicable under international law and that no
deadlines be set for concluding negotiations.


2. (c) PM advisor Vladeta Jankovic told emboffs earlier on
February 01 that Kostunica,s initial reaction after a first
reading was a positive one. He said the PM was pleased by
the tone of the statement, which was better than what he was
expecting and better than past statements, and was
particularly pleased with the reference to UNSCR 1244. Tadic
advisor Dusan Batakovic, meanwhile, noted that Belgrade had
reservations about the mentioning of a preferred deadline of
the end of 2006 for status talks, saying it would be best not
to establish deadlines in the expectation that the two sides
might need more time to reach a sustainable agreement. He
emphasized that it was not Belgrade,s intention to drag out
negotiations, but said recommending a date certain for a
settlement would only encourage the Albanian side to refuse
to engage with the expectation of reaping the prize of
independence at the appointed date regardless of outcomes on
other issues.


3. (c) Comment: Belgrade appears to have been satisfied
with the tone of the statement, but was even more clearly
buoyed by Putin,s &defense8 of the Serb position. Of
particular note, neither Tadic,s nor Kostunica,s office
took issue ) at least initially ) with the statement,s
assertion that a solution of Kosovo must be acceptable to the
people of Kosovo, a statement we would have expected to be
more prominently noted in Belgrade. The focus on 1244 and
the lack of comment on outcome acceptability strengthens our
concern that Kostunica has not internalized any form of
independence outcome.
POLT