SANADER'S VISIT TO BELGRADE OPENS POSITIVE CHAPTER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 ZAGREB 000180 NOFORN SIPDIS PLEASE PASS TO EUR/SCE E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/23/2019 TAGS: PRGOV PREL HR SR SUBJECT: SANADER'S VISIT TO BELGRADE OPENS POSITIVE CHAPTER IN BILATERAL RELATIONS REF: A. 08ZAGREB688 ¶B. 08ZAGREB00778 ¶C. 08BELGRADE1234 ¶D. ZAGREB00024 Classified By: PolOfficer Peter D'Amico, for reasons 1.4(b) & (d). ¶1. (U) This cable was drafted jointly by Embassies Zagreb and Belgrade. Summary -------------- ¶2. (C) Summary: Croatian Prime Minister Ivo Sanader visited Belgrade on March 20 to meet with senior Serbian political figures, including Serbian President Boris Tadic. Both the GoC and the GoS viewed the trip as a success and both shared credit, acknowledging the need to improve bilateral relations which will make them more attractive to the European Union. Sanader and Tadic held a private one-on-one meeting where they further discussed sensitive issues such as the ICJ cases and Tadic's views on NATO. Sanader and Tadic also spoke about cooperating more to improve stability in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Publicly both sides emphasized that they supported each other's Euro-Atlantic aspirations and sought to improve cooperation on energy issues. Some of the potential future high-level contacts between the two countries included a possible Tadic visit to Croatia in May or July as well as annual joint cabinet sessions. Sanader's trip to Belgrade signaled the potential beginning of a new positive phase in the bilateral relations between the two countries, which is vital for the stability of Southeast Europe. End Summary. Sanader Goes to Belgrade -------------- ¶3. (C) On March 20 PM Sanader had a one-day visit to Belgrade to meet with senior Serbian political figures, including Serbian President Boris Tadic. Sanader, who was accompanied by a delegation of Croatian officials and businessmen, also met with Serbian PM Mirko Cvetkovic, Speaker of the Parliament Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic as well as representatives of the Croatian community in Serbia. Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic, whose last visit to Zagreb was famously unproductive, perhaps intentionally was out of the country. Sanader has been looking for the opportunity to engage with Belgrade to try and improve relations between the countries (ref A and B). As Sanader noted to the press during the visit, he views the relationship as being key to the stability of the region. GoC Has Positive View of the Visit -------------- ¶4. (C) The Director for the Croatian MFA's Regional Department, Ambassador Davor Vidis told Embassy Zagreb on March 23 that the GoC viewed the visit as very positive. He noted that two agreements had been signed during the trip. The first was a protocol on cooperation regarding the EU integration process. This protocol would help facilitate the transfer of documents that the GoC had translated as part of the European integration process at considerable cost. Sanader mentioned during the trip to the press that these documents could be exchanged in return for some reciprocal gesture on the part of the GoS. The second document signed was a memorandum of cooperation on language and literature that set up a lecturer position for Serbian in Zagreb and a Croatian lecturer in Novi Sad. Vidis said the representatives of the Croatian community in Serbia were pleased that this agreement had been signed. Belgrade also Positive -------------- ¶5. (C) Though describing the Sanader visit as welcome and successful, Vladimir Odavic of the Serbian MFA's Neighboring Countries Directorate told Embassy Belgrade that despite the "good, intensive dialogue," nothing serious was accomplished. Odavic said that the Serbian side was disappointed that the meetings did not broach in any depth nor set a timetable to discuss the more sensitive outstanding issues in the ZAGREB 00000180 002 OF 004 bilateral relationship, including refugee-related issues, the ICJ suit, Croatian "secret lists" of war crimes indictments, and unresolved border disputes. Odavic estimated that Zagreb was motivated to achieve a thaw with Belgrade so as to demonstrate to Brussels that Croatia can be a good neighbor despite Croatia's border dispute with Slovenia. However, Odavic said, Zagreb was unlikely to want to touch the serious bilateral issues and would instead focus on economic cooperation, particularly in the energy sector, which would be more politically palatable on both sides. His boss, Neighboring Countries Directorate Chief Maya Mirkovic was more optimistic telling us at a lunch on March 27 the rapprochement was both timely and necessary. Other lunch attendees, Croatian DCM Romana Vlahutin and Serbian EU Coordinator for the Prime Minister's Office Milica Delevic, practically duked it out taking credit for the trip's success and commitment to a joint EU future. ¶6. (SBU) Belgrade's political elite was divided in its views of the Sanader visit. While expressing optimism that the visit was a productive start of a thaw, President of the Forum for International Relations and former Serbian Ambassador to Croatia Milan Simurdic said that Belgrade and Zagreb have yet to reconcile their understanding of priorities in their bilateral relations. Conservative commentator Misa Djurkovic denounced the government's focus on cultural exchange instead of tackling the difficult issues involving refugee returns and property restitution. Ex-Radical and leader of Serbia's second-most popular political party, the Serbian Progressive Party, Tomislav Nikolic predictably and unconstructively described the visit as a "mere courtesy call" that could not advance relationship further because Croatia "is not a democratic country, and is no kind of partner to Serbia." ¶7. (SBU) During the weekend following the visit, random samplings of Belgraders, demonstrated considerable relief that the visit had occurred at all and that the two countries were talking about a more normal relationship. They started talking about returning to Croatia's seaside for vacation, resuming sporting competitions and attending concerts of each other's pop stars. Sensitive Issues Addressed in a Constructive Manner -------------- -------------- ¶8. (C) Both sides publicly acknowledged that there were issues on which they disagreed, and that had strained relations, such as Croatia's genocide case against Serbia at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and Serbia's countersuit against Croatia (ref C). However, they stressed that they wanted to address them in a manner that would improve bilateral relations and deal with some of them at a later, unspecified date. During the visit Tadic told the press that bilateral relations had been "traumatized" during the previous century and that both sides were now attempting to "de-traumatize" them. Tadic noted, in remarks that received substantial coverage in the Croatian press, that while the GoS disagreed with Croatia's decision to recognize Kosovo's independence, Serbia would defend its territorial claims by diplomatic and legal means and would not "wage wars." Additionally, the two sides briefly discussed issues that stemmed from the war in the 1990s like the return of refugees and the fate of missing persons. One-on-One Meeting between Sanader and Tadic -------------- ¶9. (C/NF) Vidis provided a readout on some of the unreported aspects of a private, nearly hour-long one-on-one meeting between Tadic and Sanader. On the ICJ cases, Sanader mentioned during the meeting that when he was Deputy Foreign Minister in 1999 he had recommended against the idea of filing the genocide case. While there could not be an immediate resolution of the respective ICJ claims at the moment, there existed the opportunity for a possible compromise solution on the cases at some point in the future. According to the Vidis, Tadic also spoke in favor of NATO during the one-on-one meeting, remarks that he did not make publicly. Sanader responded that Croatia would help Serbia with its NATO aspirations at whatever "tempo" Belgrade wanted from Zagreb. ZAGREB 00000180 003 OF 004 Bosnia-Herzegovina -------------- ¶10. (C) President Mesic's Foreign Policy Advisor Budimir Loncar told the Ambassador on March 25 that Tadic and Sanader had also discussed Bosnia-Herzegovina. Sanader noted that Bosnian territorial integrity needed to be respected and raised concerns about the rhetoric of Republika Srpska (RS) PM Milorad Dodik. Tadic acknowledged that Dodik was not easy to deal with, but added that Dodik was not crazy. Dodik knew that Dayton provided important guarantees for the RS. Tadic also said that some of Croatia's actions regarding Bosnia were not helpful, such as Mesic's comments about Dodik, the Croatian HDZ connections with the Bosnian HDZ 1990, as well as the right that Bosnian Croats had to vote in Croatian elections. According to Loncar, Tadic and Sanader agreed that it was important that Croatia and Serbia try to "harmonize" their views on Bosnia. Euro-Atlantic Integration -------------- ¶11. (C) Both sides emphasized that they supported each others, Euro-Atlantic aspirations. Sanader said that Croatia would help Serbia on its path toward Euro-Atlantic integration. He publicly stated that Croatia "would not behave like Slovenia," and would give its full support to the efforts of its neighbor to join the EU and NATO. Sanader told the press that Croatia and Serbia could be the France and Germany of Southeast Europe since they were two neighbors that had fought against each other but were now the foundation for stability in their regions. Energy Sector Provides Area for Greater Cooperation -------------- --- ¶12. (C) Sanader brought along with him Deputy Prime Minister Damir Polancec and representatives of the major Croatian energy companies to meet with their Serbian counterparts to increase cooperation on energy issues. Both sides noted that they had an interest in diversifying their supplies of energy and increasing the energy links between the energy infrastructures of the two countries, particularly in the aftermath of the cutoff of Russian gas in January. (Note: Sanader spoke directly with Tadic during the gas cutoff in January about the crisis (ref D) End Note.) One area for cooperation discussed was possible Serbian involvement in the planned LNG terminal on the Croatian island of Krk as part of an effort to diversify gas supplies for both countries and the region. Additionally, they also talked about potential investment in gas storage facilities in Slavonia and Vojvodina. Looking more broadly at the economic relationship, Sanader also told the press that there should be no obstacles for Serbian goods in Croatia. Future Visits -------------- ¶13. (C) During the visit the press reported that PM Cetkovic would visit Zagreb in the future. Both the Serbian Embassy in Zagreb and the Croatian MFA mentioned that Tadic would likely visit Croatia in May or July. Additionally the Croatian MFA stated that the two sides discussed having annual joint cabinet sessions like Croatia already has with Hungary, an initiative that was reported in the Serbian media. Vidis also noted that President Mesic wanted to visit Serbia before the end of his term. Vidis added, however, that Mesic would also like to visit Kosovo which would complicate a trip to Belgrade. Comment -------------- ¶14. (C) Sanader's trip to Belgrade marked an important step forward in bilateral relations between the two countries that had been strained over the last year by Croatia's recognition of Kosovo's independence and the ICJ cases. The successful high-level visit sent an important signal that the bilateral relationship should focus more on future cooperation rather than past grievances. Each side's Euro-Atlantic aspirations played a key role in facilitating good neighborly relations ZAGREB 00000180 004 OF 004 between the two key countries, and the private meeting between Sanader and Tadic was important because they were able to broach the difficult issues, which will be much more difficult to resolve, such as the ICJ cases. Making further improvements in the ties between Croatia and Serbia will be vital to increasing stability in the region, particularly with economic conditions worsening in Southeast Europe and concerns in the region growing on the prospects of further enlargement of Euro-Atlantic institutions. End Comment. BRADTKE