She declared she would have ethnically cleansed Kosovo, DW: Opposition demands dismissal of Serbian Minister Snezhana Paunović

The Serbian Minister of State Administration and Local Self-Government, Snezhana Paunović, has caused many reactions with her statement that, if she had been in Milošević’s place, she would have ethnically cleansed Kosovo.

Part of the opposition is demanding the dismissal of Minister Snezhana Paunović, and the request has been joined by the MP of the Party for Democratic Action in the Serbian Parliament, Shaip Kamberi.

Harsh reactions are also coming from the European Union, which stresses that “there should be no place in Europe for rhetoric that justifies and promotes ethnic cleansing”. According to the EU, such statements are not in line with the obligations Serbia has undertaken in the framework of the dialogue with Kosovo.

European Parliament member Sandro Gozi stated that “Serbia cannot convincingly claim to be committed to European Union membership while members of its government revive the rhetoric and ideology of the Milošević era”.

Politicians from Albania and Kosovo see this rhetoric as confirmation of the continuation of Slobodan Milošević’s policies. Paunović was declared persona non grata in Kosovo.

The minister “does not give up her party’s strategy”

The Serbian government has not commented, but this is common practice when President Aleksandar Vučić is abroad, as the official stance is usually announced only after his reaction. However, it is certain that such rhetoric and hate speech have almost never been publicly condemned in Serbia, and its promoters have often advanced in their political careers.

After strong reactions, Snezhana Paunović published a statement in which, instead of distancing herself from her words, she wrote that she “does not give up on the policy of the Socialist Party of Serbia, which led Serbia in extremely difficult historical circumstances; a party that made great sacrifices, whose name was mentioned most often in The Hague, a party that begged no one for anything in order to remain proud and faithful to its ideas. Nor do I give up on my party’s strategies, which were chosen in the circumstances of the armed uprising in a part of the house called Serbia.”

They said publicly what they think secretly

Part of the public opinion in Serbia believes that such statements aim to divert attention from other events. But Dragan Popović, director of the Centre for Practical Policy, says that this statement is “simply a reflection of the minister’s capacity in public appearances” and that “she only said publicly what the majority in power thinks”.

“They actually express regret that ethnic cleansing did not happen, while we know that her party, the SPS, tried to carry out ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. In addition, there were mass killings of Kosovo Albanians and for this reason the entire Yugoslav and Serbian military and police elite was convicted at the Hague Tribunal. We have reached the point where ministers praise the most serious crimes, which elsewhere would cause tectonic shock, but in Serbia it will be news only for a few days,” Popović assessed for DW.

Dačić relativizes hate speech

Deputy Prime Minister and SPS leader Ivica Dačić came to the defense of his party colleague. He called the attacks on the minister hypocritical and added that “ethnic cleansing against Serbs has been carried out in Kosovo”, but that “no one cares” about it.

According to Dragan Popović, “this is only proof that the ethnic cleansing carried out by Milošević is not a problem for anyone, and that no new ethnic cleansing would be a problem. It only becomes a problem when this is said publicly, and then the relativization of what was said begins.”

“If for Minister Paunović it can be said that she lacks sufficient political experience and that she sincerely said what is usually not said, this cannot be said for Ivica Dačić. He has long experience. Therefore, I think his statement is even more dangerous.”

Glorification of the ’90s policy

Despite the efforts of Serbian authorities to hide their true nature, the fact is that hate speech is highly cultivated in the public sphere and is increasingly accompanied by physical violence. This was especially evident during the days of commemoration of the Srebrenica genocide in July, and Minister Paunović’s statements fit into the common narrative of the authorities regarding dealing with the past, war crimes, and regional relations.

Popović assesses that all this shows that “not only has there been no distancing from the policy of the ’90s, but that policy is even being glorified. Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party and Dačić’s SPS are continuing the policy of the radicals and socialists from the 1990s, only in changed circumstances. We have a radicalization of public discourse and a society on the verge of an outbreak of violence, both verbal and physical. Such outbursts are a consequence of the general radicalization of society. These are the consequences of Vučić’s policy and that of his entire coalition,” warns the director of the Centre for Practical Policy.

Cluster 3 in danger

Reactions have also come from the European Union. Considering that in recent weeks there has been discussion about opening Cluster 3 in Serbia’s accession negotiations and that the European Commission has tried to assess some kind of progress by Serbia, Minister Paunović’s rhetoric has brought attention back to reality – that the current government inherits the policy of Slobodan Milošević, reinforced by the political visions of Vojislav Šešelj, and has no problem with the heavy burden of the past.

Popović thinks that “the European Commission will find it increasingly difficult over time to maintain this realpolitik approach, where it tries at all costs to keep Serbia on the European path, even though this government has long since strayed from that path. Perhaps it is not easy for people in the Commission to continue turning a blind eye, because Aleksandar Vučić’s government is becoming more and more problematic. Red lines should have been drawn long ago, because Vučić has crossed all those lines. I don’t know how long this stance towards his government can be maintained.”

The ideology of opening wounds

Traumas of lost wars seem to continue to be a topic through which political points are scored in Serbia. According to Popović, “this chapter has never been closed. That is exactly what nationalist ideology does – it constantly digs into wounds and spreads the conviction that the danger has not yet passed. Unfortunately, the current government has the ability to mobilize society on very dangerous grounds. I think this is not yet the final sign of a return to the ’90s – it is only a strong signal that reminds us who the political actors of that time were. They are the same people who are in power today,” Popović concluded for DW.