An interview given by Serbian Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-Government Snezhana Paunović to the outlet Kurir has sparked a storm of reactions.
She stated: “To our detriment and because of our stupidity, if I had been as free as Milošević, I would have ethnically cleansed Kosovo in 1998.”
Të lidhura
None found
For security expert Drizan Shala, these words are not merely a diplomatic mistake. In a statement to “Bota sot”, he described them as a deeply worrying signal showing that the mentality of the Milošević era is still alive.
According to him, such rhetoric that justifies ethnic cleansing undermines the security of the entire region and openly clashes with the principles of peace and stability.
“The Serbian minister’s claims cannot be read as a simple gaffe or an opinion detached from the state context. When a senior official expresses regret that Kosovo was not subjected to ethnic cleansing during the 1998–1999 conflict, this goes beyond political debate and directly strikes at the foundations of our shared security,” Shala stressed.
He added that, from a security perspective, messages of this nature show that narratives minimizing, and at times even glorifying, Milošević’s policies continue to survive within part of Serbia’s political elite. Instead of building trust and confronting the past, messages are being reproduced that take us back to the darkest times in Balkan history.
The expert stressed that post-war Kosovo has built its institutions on the pillars of democracy, human rights and Euro-Atlantic integration. Therefore, language that defends or justifies ethnic cleansing is not only an attack on Kosovo, but also on the entire system of values on which peace in the region was established.
Shala also warned that such statements flatten responsibility for war crimes and risk making hate speech commonplace. In his view, the return of the rhetoric of the 1990s sabotages the reconciliation process and becomes a real risk to the security, stability and European future of the Western Balkans.
“From a legal and political perspective, such claims can be interpreted as glorifying or downplaying policies linked to a period in which terrible crimes and massive human rights violations were committed. Even when they do not necessarily constitute a criminal offence, they help normalize a vocabulary that clashes with democratic standards and harms reconciliation efforts,” he continued.
Shala drew attention to the fact that the danger lies not only in the words themselves, but also in the circumstances in which they are uttered. The Western Balkans remains an area where ethnic tensions can be exploited for political gain. In times of internal crisis, nationalist rhetoric is often used to stir public emotions, divert attention from economic and social difficulties, or strengthen identity myths.
He considered the return of discourse from more than two decades ago as something that may not be spontaneous at all. According to him, it may be part of a well-considered tactic aimed at keeping the logic of confrontation alive, rewriting the past through selective fragments and avoiding honest historical accountability. Such an approach, he stressed, serves neither the long-term interests of Serbia’s citizens nor overall stability.
“Peace is not nourished by nostalgia for war, but by accepting the truth, institutional accountability and respect for the dignity of every victim. Therefore, every public statement that normalizes or justifies ethnic cleansing requires unequivocal condemnation, not merely as a moral violation, but as a concrete threat to security, reconciliation and the region’s European path,” Shala concluded to the newspaper.
