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