How do you assess the cooperation between Serbia and NATO?

The partnership cooperation between Serbia and NATO is conducted with usual dynamics, based on the principles of partnership that include voluntariness, inclusiveness, and transparency, and, most importantly, is based on the partner countrys needs. The current cooperation between Serbia and NATO is a continuity of our collaboration since 2006 when Serbia became a member of the NATO Partnership for Peace Program.

What are the priorities of the Serbian Mission in Brussels when NATO is transforming, mainly due to the conflict in Ukraine?

The priorities of the Mission are long-term. There are two main issues that we are most focused on. One is partnership cooperation and all its aspects - civilian and military. The other, currently even more important, is the issue of Kosovo and Metohija, considering the current situation, that the KFOR Mission is deployed in the territory of our southern province, and that the cooperation of the Serbian Army with KFOR is part of our partnership cooperation, which takes place in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the Military-Technical Agreement. This cooperation is continuously very good, with a high level of communication at various levels, which is very important for maintaining peace and security in Kosovo and Metohija. NATO is the only legal military force that exists in that area, according to UN Security Council Resolution 1244.

As an ambassador and the head of Serbias Mission to NATO, how do you see the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija the actions of KFOR? NATO sources have told Demostat that the security situation remains fragile and unstable.

That is correct. To this, we add that we are very concerned, considering what is happening in the area of Kosovo and Metohija, which primarily relates to the unilateral actions of Priština and its failure to fulfill obligations taken under the Brussels Agreement. We consider this a very serious potential for tension and instability. As you know, we are trying to maintain a sustainable dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. President Aleksandar Vucic and chief negotiator Petar Petkovic have always responded to the meetings of the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, but all these meetings we have been committed to have not resulted in what we expect, which is the full implementation of the Brussels Agreement, the establishment of the Community of Serb Municipalities, and, what is especially important, avoiding unilateral actions that endanger the rights of Serbs, pressure them, and intimidate them. These are the main points of our concern.

KFOR fully implements the mandate provided by Resolution 1244 as the only legal and legitimate military force in Kosovo and Metohija. We expect KFOR to act as much as possible and preventively suppress all unilateral actions of Pristina and the consequences of those actions. The cooperation between the Serbian Army and KFOR is crucial to preempt many of Pristinas provocative actions and reduce their impact. I must admit openly, and I think it is clear to everyone, that Pristina, with its provocations, actions, and unilateral measures, is trying to worsen the relations between the Serbian Army and KFOR, of which, I believe, both KFOR and our side are aware. Through joint efforts, we are trying to stabilize the situation, and we expect KFOR to protect the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija despite its mandate to protect all communities in Kosovo and Metohija. It is indisputable that the only seriously endangered community is the Serbs in the north and south of the Province.

How much have the two incidents that occurred in the north, in Zvecan, where KFOR soldiers were injured, and in Banjska, where three Serbs and one Kosovo police officer died, affected the relations between Serbia and NATO, and relations with KFOR?

We have very clearly expressed our regret for the events in Banjska and Zve?an. These are tragic events that we never want to occur. However, it is essential to prevent Pristinas unilateral actions from leading to such outcomes. NATO expects an investigation from our side regarding these events. However, what is necessary is that a partnership should be based on mutual trust and respect and that together, we overcome all situations that can question our relationship and collaboration. Our cooperation continues, but all these events affect the overall situation.

Has trust been lost to some extent?

I hope that trust remains; I am convinced of it. It is logical that the attack in Zvecan on KFOR, when its members were injured, caused reactions in NATO. Still, one must consider the entire development of events that led to this, as well as the broader picture of the events in Banjska, where a Pristina police officer and three Serbs from Kosovo and Metohija died. It is necessary to continue cooperation because both NATO and Serbia have a common goal of preserving peace and security, primarily in Kosovo and Metohija, where the KFOR mission is deployed under the UN mandate and peace and security in the wider region.

The 25th anniversary of the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is approaching. How do you see the perception of citizens when it comes to NATO? Could it change if citizens were better informed about what NATO is doing now, what the mutual cooperation is like, and how do you assess the fact that the perception of citizens about NATO was more positive a few years after the bombing than it is now?

I have also come across those data. However, the fact remains that two issues still burden the relationship between Serbia and NATO. One is the bombing of the then Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 by NATO members without authorization from the UN Security Council, and the other is the fact that the majority of NATO member states, but not all, have recognized the unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo, recognizing the violent secession of a part of our territory. These are factors that burden the perception of citizens because of the victims and destruction caused by the bombing. The bombing occurred in an era of global peace; in a time of integration, a small country was bombed by the most powerful military alliance in the world, and later, the violent secession was recognized, even though an alleged humanitarian disaster was declared as the reason for the intervention.

First and foremost, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defence, as well as other Serbian institutions, are working very intensively on the aspect of public diplomacy to familiarize the citizens of Serbia with the essence of Serbias partnership cooperation with NATO and to present it in the best possible way. The goal is to explain to the citizens, from the public diplomacy perspective, how the partnership cooperation with NATO is part of Serbias foreign policy and how we realize our own interest through this cooperation. This requires serious and gradual work. It is crucial for NATO and its member states to understand and respect our interests, primarily the essential red lines of our national and state interests, and on the other hand, to jointly affirm, as we are doing, the approach and shared commitment to maintaining peace and security in the region.

Serbia is a neutral country, and NATO consistently states that it does not wish to change this status unless the government wants to change it. However, has the war in Ukraine influenced NATO to change its stance, and is a different engagement of Serbia being sought behind the scenes?

No, NATO fully respects Serbias military neutrality, which NATO officials confirmed on several occasions. Secretary-General Stoltenberg has very clearly stated, during his recent visit to Belgrade, as well as on other occasions, that NATO fully respects Serbias military neutrality, as well as the choice of every partner in defining their security arrangements. So, there are no changes there. However, in the worlds perception, the situation is such that the war in Ukraine has led to new global circumstances and divisions, with many countries imposing sanctions on Russia. Still, Serbia has not done so, considering its interests on the international scene. On the other hand, from the beginning of the war in Ukraine, through the decision of the Government and based on the stance of the National Security Council, Serbia has very clearly expressed a stance that has not changed about full support for the territorial integrity of Ukraine and condemnation of any armed action undertaken without the authorization of the Security Council. This stance is principled and clear, and we express it in an equally principled and clear manner.

Serbia introduced a moratorium on military exercises with foreign partners after the start of the war in Ukraine. How does this affect the partnership cooperation between Serbia and NATO?

A few days after the beginning of the war in Ukraine, the Government of Serbia made a decision and determined Serbias position in relation to the situation and war in Ukraine, which has not changed. At that time, a kind of moratorium on military exercises was established with all partners worldwide. That decision was based on expressing military neutrality in the context of the war in Ukraine. Undoubtedly, military exercises are an important and recognizable form of partnership cooperation between Serbia and NATO, as well as cooperation with others in the world where our interest lies. However, I want to highlight that in the last two years, there were 120 different activities annually in the military domain of partnership cooperation with NATO, as well as Serbias active participation in other Partnership for Peace (PfP) programs. This indicates the maintenance of the level and quality of cooperation, with the key presence of political dialogue between President Vucic and Secretary-General Stoltenberg, but also dialogue at other diplomatic and military levels. This dialogue is also the basis for various forms of practical cooperation. In this context, a network of communication channels between Serbia and NATO has been successfully developed to better shape the partnership in the joint interest.

When Secretary-General Stoltenberg recently visited Belgrade, the possibility of holding a NATO-Serbia military exercise, which was planned earlier but postponed based on the aforementioned government decision, was discussed, as mentioned in the joint press conference with President Vucic and Secretary-General Stoltenberg. Currently, the possibilities of resuming military exercises with partners are being analyzed, since our army, like any other, needs interoperability in developing capabilities and capacities. In this context, the prestigious role of Serbia and its armed forces in the missions and operations of the EU and the UN should be taken into account. This is an essential part of our foreign and defense policy, and thus in the context of partnership cooperation with NATO. Our contribution in these missions and operations is highly valued in both military and civilian structures of NATO, as well as the EU and the UN, and contributes to strengthening Serbias international position as a reliable contributor to peace and stability in the region and beyond.