---

Western Balkans

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the issue of developments in the western Balkans. Despite the fact that it is part of Europe and it is still in a volatile state, there are few opportunities to discuss these important developments in the main Chamber. That is why I am particularly grateful to Mr. Speaker for allowing me to secure this short debate. However, I do not think that half an hour will be long enough to address all the issues. We will be able to touch on only certain parts of what I wish to concentrate on. We are discussing the western Balkans, but I will concentrate my comments on the area around Serbia, including Kosovo and Serbia and Montenegro, and also Macedonia. However, before I start doing so, I shall make a plea to the Minister. There is an excellent organisation called the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe, which many Members have become involved with. Visiting groups of different sorts of people from central and eastern Europe, including the Balkans, have come over to this country and, similarly, delegations of British lawyers and so forth have travelled to countries in that area. That has been a worthwhile exercise, and I was disappointed recently to hear that the Government have decided to reduce the grant in aid for that association by a third, and then by two thirds for the next two financial years, and finally to end it in March 2008. I understand that there is always a need for economies and for ensuring that money is well spent. However, I have been involved with some of the programmes—I have seen them in operation both in this country and elsewhere—and I feel that the association is doing important work. I urge the Minister to go back to his masters and plead its case. In respect of the area we are discussing, the sort of interaction the association provides is very important, not only in allowing other people to understand the complexities involved, but in trying somehow to work our way through what is a very tangled web in respect of the Balkan area. Recent events have brought the area back into the headlines. The most notable of them was the death in custody of Slobodan Milosevic. I remember a debate of a few years ago with the then Member for Halifax, Alice Mahon, who, along with me, was a member of the all-party group on Serbia and Montenegro. We discussed the problems of The Hague tribunal, such as the fact that the process was going on for a long time and that Slobodan Milosevic's health meant that it might end with him dying in custody. Although his death might in many respects close a chapter in that area, unfortunately, if the circumstances are not handled correctly, it will lead to all sorts of new conspiracy theories in an area where conspiracy theories abound. In particular, it will raise new questions for the Serbs about how they have been treated. In saying that, I am not making any judgments about the process. However, as I said at the time, we should look at what is happening in Iraq. The Iraqis are being allowed to deal with the case of Saddam Hussein. I still find it strange that Milosevic and others were taken off to The Hague, instead of Serbia being allowed to deal with things. I have a feeling that that might become a slight problem in the future. I hope not; I hope that the death of Milosevic will to some extent allow the area to move on, but I am slightly fearful. The Minister knows that, and it will become clear from some of my comments during this debate. There are other trouble spots around the world—such as in Northern Ireland, which is not far from home—where history runs very deep. It is difficult to separate the history, the legends, the traditions and so forth from modern peace processes. The most important issue for the area under discussion is probably the status of Kosovo, but there will also be a referendum in May in which Montenegro will decide whether it wants to carry on with co-existence—with Serbia and Montenegro as a country. It seems that the mood has changed somewhat; Montenegro may well opt for separation; I will not say secession, because they were two republics originally, and, going back further, two kingdoms. That has been highlighted in a slightly trivial way by the problem the two areas have had over the Eurovision song contest; that has been reported in the newspapers. They could not even agree on who would present them because national feelings were running so high. I believe that, in the end, they have pulled out of this year's contest, and that they will not be in for some time while they sort things out. That is not of the greatest import, but that no agreement can be found on something like that highlights the problems that the countries face, as well as those facing the diplomats of other nations who are trying to understand what is going on. These problems are incredibly deep-rooted. I used to go around the Balkans a lot and at that time, strangely enough, Montenegro and Serbia regarded themselves very much as twins and were fiercely proud of each other. It is a great shame that things have now got to this stage. Montenegro uses the euro as its currency, and the dinar is still used in Serbia, so ostensibly they are one country using two different currencies. I think there are also still different customs tariffs. I should like to know from the Minister what the Government's view is. I remember that when I used to go around that region a lot—even at the height of the problems, when Montenegro felt that it was being somewhat ostracised because of its associations with what was then seen as a pariah state—the Government's view was that they should try to stick together. Is that still the case? I would be interested to know. It is not for me to interfere in that, but we have to tackle that issue. Ultimately, if all the countries in that area achieve the status of membership of the European Union, that may solve the problem, but I am afraid that that is a long way off for a lot of them. Bearing in mind the time, I shall now concentrate on the current talks and discussions on the final status of Kosovo. That is obviously a very emotional subject for all parties involved and if I thought there was an easy answer to the situation, I would be the first to offer it to Governments. The pendulum in Kosovo has swung the other way: now it is the Serbs who feel very much at the wrong end of an apartheid system. The Serbs feel, perhaps as a result of the way that western Governments are talking, that there is a certain inevitability about Kosovo being granted independence. Mr. John Sawers, the political director of the Foreign Office, stated on 6 February that in the end Kosovo will be ““independent””. That was possibly not a wise thing to say and it rather prejudges the discussions. It might be an opinion but it is not a very sane thing to say at the moment. It tends only to inflame the situation. Without giving a long history lesson, Kosovo to the Serbs and Serbia is rather like—some would say—Jerusalem is to Israel, but that would get us into a whole different ball game. In terms of England—I could think of somewhere in Scotland, but I shall stick to England if it is all right with you, Mr. Weir—it would be like Canterbury and Kent, having lost their English majority population in 300 or 400 years' time, becoming an independent area, with spiritual parts of the nation's soul such as Canterbury cathedral and the site of the battle of Hastings being taken away. I say that because we have to understand that the final resolution of the situation will be extremely delicate, to say the least. The Serb minority in Kosovo are deeply concerned about what is happening to their heritage. Orthodox churches, monasteries and cemeteries are being destroyed. It is tragic; I have seen pictures of 15th and 16th century places that I visited 20 years ago that have been burnt down and destroyed in the terrible, religious and nationalistic fury that has taken place. I have grave concerns that the perpetrators of those actions have not been caught. KFOR is seemingly powerless—although it represents the best diplomatic way to prevent a lot of what is happening—and that only stokes the fires. If we do not have a fair and equitable solution, we will only make more problems for ourselves. We do not need a history lesson to remember what happened in Germany after the first world war, when there were feelings of injustice at the peace settlement. History is littered with such examples. Whatever might happen in the immediate aftermath, if we are not careful we will leave an open sore, so I urge the British Government and all the others to tread very carefully. They should not try to get rid of what is a very difficult situation. I do not think that the west helped by its intervention, but that is in the past and I am trying to move on. However, we have to be very careful; I have already given a couple of examples of how deep rooted the nationalism is. If we are not careful, we shall store up more problems for ourselves, so I urge the British Government to ensure that the discussions going on are not prejudged. Statements should not come out that seem to favour one side or the other. Because there are precious few in this Parliament who understand the situation and it is sometimes difficult to be non-partisan on the matter, I hope that the Foreign Office will send a few MPs who do not know anything about the area, and are thus neutral and fresh to the subject, to talk to people in Belgrade, Pristina, Skopje and Tirana, in order to find out exactly what people think. I have one final point, which will not have escaped the Foreign Office. If Kosovo became an independent state—I do not question whether that is right or wrong, or whether such a state is viable—a precedent for all sorts of other places will be set. President Putin already indicated earlier this year that the status of places such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the Caucasus area might have to be reviewed. Countries such as Macedonia, which are working incredibly hard and have done almost everything asked of them, are nervous because the boundaries have not been entirely defined. The Albanian Foreign Minister said recently that he could not guarantee that borders are fully defined. I do not know whether he has rowed back from that, or whether it was a misquote. I do not want to stir up the situation any more. However, a whole load of problems are involved. In that area, we have Republika Srpska and what has gone on in Bosnia. If we start interfering with the boundaries, we shall open up an incredible problem, and return to both the problems of recent history and those that have existed for a longer time. I want to hear what the Minister says, so I conclude my remarks there.