The US is in a difficult position which the new appointees cannot escape. The new US Ambassador to Belgrade, Christopher Hill in particular will find the strategic environment transformed from the last time he worked on the Balkans, when the US was in a hegemonic position, with huge resources, few distractions, few challengers and domestic support for its intervention, says Timothy Less, a British expert at the University of Cambridge, Center for Geopolitics. As a former British diplomat in Bosnia and now a researcher on Balkan issues, Mr. Less says in an interview for KosovaPress that Serbia is stronger than it used to be after a period of sustained economic growth, a revival of its military and its nurturing of relations with Russia, China and Turkey which Belgrade can leverage against the US. Interviewed by: Fadil Miftari KosovaPress: Developments in the Balkans seem to be taking on a different dynamic from what we have seen in recent years. President Biden has appointed as ambassadors to several Balkan countries the most eminent American diplomats who were very active in the Balkans during the wars in the former Yugoslavia. I am interested in your opinion, how you see these appointments and do you believe that a plan is being prepared to end the problems that are still open in the Balkans. Lees: I see the new appointments as an attempt by the Biden Administration to fulfil the objectives which Washington set itself in the 1990s – to pacify, modernize and integrate the Balkans into western structures – but which it is failing to do. The region remains tense, undemocratic, poor and locked outside the EU. Russia has a foothold and China is gaining influence. Most seriously, revisionist groups such as the Bosnian Serbs are reviving their unfinished business over borders, risking instability. The thinking in Washington seems to be that, by appointing officials who are committed to the original policy, understand the local politics and have a track record of success in the Balkans, the US can potentially return the region to its intended course. However, I don’t believe there is any kind of plan being prepared, that is, any significant kind of change in policy or objectives. On the contrary, officials have emphasized continuity in Washington’s approach and the appointments of diplomatic veterans of the Balkans appear to confirm this. What will change is the forcefulness with which the US pursues its policy. By awarding itself the right to sanction individuals, Washington has signaled its intention to punish those who challenge its policy goals. KosovaPress: Many analysts say the change of administration in Washington will accelerate the pace of resolving key regional issues, particularly the Kosovo-Serbia dispute and the stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, we are still seeing a lot of problems, as the EU seems to have lacked the capacity to solve problems in the Balkans. Are these new appointments of American diplomats to be engaged in the Balkans an indication that the US will take a leading role in future developments. Lees: It’s important to distinguish between what the US wants to achieve and what it can practically do. The US presumably thinks it must assert a leading role because the EU has failed to uphold peace and progress in the region, the latest proof of which is the crisis in Bosnia and the flare up of tensions in Kosovo. However, the US is in a difficult position which the new appointees cannot escape. Hill in particular will find the strategic environment transformed from the last time he worked on the Balkans, when the US was in a hegemonic position, with huge resources, few distractions, few challengers and domestic support for its intervention. By contrast, the US today must deal with the rise of China and other regional rivals, while public opinion has turned against American involvement in peripheral regions of the world like the Balkans when the strategic justification is unclear, and the US needs to focus its attention and resources elsewhere. That was clear from the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. Another change is the breakdown in the process of European integration which leaves the US without its one-time exit strategy from the Balkans since it cannot easily hand the region over to the EU for safekeeping. The end of enlargement also removes the main reason which revisionist powers like Serbia previously had for accepting the region’s existing borders. Meanwhile, Serbia itself is stronger than it used to be after a period of sustained economic growth, a revival of its military and its nurturing of relations with Russia, China and Turkey which Belgrade can leverage against the US. This is the political reality in which Washington must operate. It sets meaningful limits on what the US can bring to bear in the Balkans in terms of energy, resources and influence, and whether it can achieve its policy goals. The test will be to see what happens when a local actor such as Milorad Dodik refuses to back down in the face of punishment by the US. KosovaPress: You have said that the new appointments of American diplomats in the Balkans are interrelated. But you have expressed the opinion of the possibility of changing the boundaries. Please tell us, in this regard, What can happen which states can be involved in changing borders. Lees: There is no evidence that the US is planning to change borders. On the contrary, the new ambassadors in Bosnia, Kosovo and Serbia are all committed to upholding the existing borders, and that is partly why they have been appointed. However, what I can see is an emerging change in the map of the Balkans because of the escalating parallel crises in Bosnia, where the Serbs are threatening independence, and Kosovo where Prishtina is trying to assert its authority over the north. Both sides seem determined to take matters to the brink and Serbia has signaled its willingness to use force. That will sharpen the reality of the Serbian national question: two breakaway territories adjacent to the mother state, one of which wants to be part of Serbia and one of which does not. One way or another, and however reluctant the US and others may be, I see the eventual outcome as a land swap between the two. The corollary will be some resolution of the Albanian question. Kosovo is moving closer to Albania and this process will probably accelerate if Serbia continues to threaten Kosovo and outsiders fail to back it. In turn, the formation of an Albanian national state brings into question the other Albanian-inhabited regions in the Balkans. KosovaPress: Two years ago, when the possibility of changing the borders between Kosovo and Serbia was mentioned as a possible final solution, the political force of Prime Minister Kurti was extremely against this idea. While now the Prime Minister of Kosovo is the man who had mostly opposed the idea. What do you think Mr. Kurti can do about this idea? Lees: I don’t think he can do very much because he is constrained by earlier position on the issue, as you say. I also don't think he has any intension of shifting his position which is sincerely held. The consolation for the prime minister is that the Western powers are unlikely to push the idea of partition anytime soon, so Kurti will not come under pressure to accept it. KosovaPress:  In fact, the increased attention of the American administration for the Balkans is being noticed very clearly, while the European Union will also have a role. But I want to ask you, why in recent years Great Britain has somewhat withdrawn from involvement in developments in the Balkans. Historically, Great Britain has played, perhaps the main role in the developments in the Balkans, is it likely to be involved in future developments? Lees: The answer is that Britain has just passed through a decade of political alignment and is embarking on a process of international repositioning. The most significant moment in this process was the Brexit referendum in 2016. This has had its resonance in the Balkans. When I was a diplomat, Britain was the major European player in the region, with the weight of the EU behind it, pushing a clear policy of territorial integrity and EU and NATO membership for the region as a long-term solution to the unresolved problem of borders. Subsequently, the UK has lost its seat at the EU table and plays no formal role in initiatives such as the Brussels-led dialogue. It cannot easily push the policy of enlargement, especially as the EU without the UK has effectively withdrawn its earlier offer of membership to the region. Meanwhile, London sees the EU discussing the idea of strategic autonomy and providing for its own security in Europe, at a point where the UK is pivoting away from Europe towards the Pacific where it sees the greatest threats and opportunities. That does not mean the UK is out of the game. It has power and influence, especially when allied with the US, and the international and regional politics are continually evolving. There are definitely scenarios in which the UK re-emerges as the most powerful European player. KosovaPress: I want to ask you the last question, regarding the appointment of Mr. Hill as the US Ambassador to Serbia. Ambassador Hill is considered a bulldozer of advancing Western politics in the Balkans. Can Mr. Hill be expected to energize the negotiation process between Kosovo and Serbia in order to have an epilogue? Lees: I’m sure Mr Hill will try but I’m skeptical that he can make a breakthrough because of the constraints he is operating under, which I described before, as well as the Biden Administration’s own red line on redrawing borders which will make it difficult to persuade Serbia to shift its position on Kosovo’s recognition. My best guess is that Hill will try to push the long-standing idea of a deal in which Kosovo grants autonomy to the Serbs and Serbia recognizes Kosovo, while ratcheting up the pressure on both sides to accept a deal. However, I suspect the outcome will be formal stasis and unilateral attempts by both sides to resolve the dispute in their favor. / Timothy Less is the lead researcher on the Center for Geopolitics on Dissolution Studies project. His research focuses on disruption of the existing political order in Europe, the forces driving this process, and the new political order. For a decade he worked as an analyst, diplomat and policy maker in the British Foreign Office and Commonwealth, where, among other things, he headed the Office of the British Embassy in Banja Luka (Bosnia) and the EU Institutions department in London./