Russian oil roulette

g4520Like a big bang yesterday a news spread about still unheard discovery of oil and gas in the Russian territories around the Kara sea. Large quantities of crude oil were found in the basin of the Kara sea in the Arctic, which could make this region to become the largest shell site of crude oil, even bigger than the Gulf of Mexico.  This statement was revealed ​​by Igor Sechin, chief man of the company Rosneft. However, since this only more interesting is that the general partner of Rosneft in this business is American company Exxon. All this happens in a period of creeping “cold war” on the territory of Ukraine and sanctions imposed from USA towards Russia. Although these American sanctions in July were designed to withhold dollars for “Rosneft” and block access to modern technology, they were not designed to stop the joint projects of American and Russian companies. With new sanctions on 12th September, however it is stated that American companies have deadline until 10/10/2014. to end its operations in Arctic.  In the document, titled “Directive 4” from the pages of Department of  Treasury of the United States it is clearly and explicitly written what is the subject of these sanctions, while in the document entitled “Sectoral Sanctons Identification” we see a list of companies that are affected by them.


Like all other events, this story has its stronghold in geopolitical trends and things which happening behind the scenes, and therefore I will try to look over its very beginnings and the start of strategic partnership between Exon and Rosneft since the August 2011. Specifically, these two companies on August 31 st, 2011, signed an agreement on strategic cooperation, including research of the Arctic basin.  This agreement was signed in the presence of the Prime Minister of Russia at that time Vladimir Putin, president of Rosneft Eduard Khudainatov, deputy prime minister of Russia at that time Igor Sechin and President of Exxon company Niel Duffin.  This contract which later is expanded, involves investment of $ 3.2 billion that would be spent on research of 3 blocks in the Kara Sea. The ratio of the joint venture company is 66.7% owned by Rosneft and 33.3% owned by Exxon. Geographical details of the contract can be viewed HERE.  According to Bloomberg “Univerzitetskaja” geological structure is the size of Moscow city and big enough to contain at least 9 billion barrels of oil, or the wealth that is worth about $ 900 billion at today’s prices. Russians already mobilized an army that is sent to the destination in order to protect the sites. They only question now is are they going to be able to exploit and drill this oil without Exxon, and also is Exxon going to respect sanctions, remains to be seen.


One reason is actually indicative of all these analogies and the point that I want to depict in this text. At the time of signing this agreement even before signatures there were required some certain negotiations and guarantees before the exact date of signing. If we put all this in the time frame we come to the conclusion that negotiations on this project in the Kara Sea were lasted from at least the beginning of 2011, if not sooner. That year in the world and geopolitical relations was active only one country, and that country was Libya. The same Libya that today is ruled by anarchy, tribal conflicts and chaos, while members of parliament held its sessions at rented Greek ferry in the port of Torbuk. In all previous thoughts about everything what is happening on the global chessboard, I marked only two milestones important for Russia but with a different outcome. The first such milestone is of course Libya, and the second is Syria. When Libya is in focus for many of us will never actually be clear, why Russia has not vetoed a shameful Resolution 1973 of the UN Security Council, which created a legitimate option for military action. If Russia vetoed at that time this resolution, I believe that today in Libya, people would live much better, and Russians would avoid moving of “military zone” towards Ukraine and tightening the belt around Russia. One of the two decisive vote for this military intervention in Libya was given by Bosnia and Herzegovina, and this was ninth vote, and tenth vote was from Portugal. But before voting the delegation of Portugal firmly insisted that they declare themselves after Bosnia and Herzegovina delegation, because after 9 votes it is not important too much how Portugal will vote, unless any of the permanent members put veto, which has not happened. I don´t know why Bosnia and Herzegovina voted for this resolution, but I guess it´s because we are protectorate, and not a sovereign state, no matter how someone would be annoyed by this observation, but voting for this resolution is an obvious proof.   Once again Bosnia and Herzegovina demonstrated that we are artificial banana creation and not country. Except this at that time we had many of our companies started their jobs and operations in Libya, even from this side we voted against ourselves. From the other permanent members, Russia and China abstained and not vetoed, which in diplomatic terms means that the aggression against Libya is just about to start. How voted permanent and non-permanent members of the UN Security Council you can see in the picture below.

untitled1 (1)

What surprised me personally, and even some more serious geopolitical analysts was certainly the stance of Russia, which in a similar situation some time later made ​​it clear that it will not happen the same thing (mistake) with Syria. As a reason for this Russian decision we can take the geographical proximity of Syria to their boundaries, and the fact that in Tartus, the second largest Syrian port on the Mediterranean sea, is a Russian base, for which from Moscow clarify that it is used only for the overhaul and repair of ships. So, of course we can conclude that these two reasons were enough for Russia to take a tougher stance and to ban potential air strikes on Syria, which was obviously not the case with Libya.  An additional argument and one that I wanted to point in the text, and which goes in favor of the setback voting about Libya is signing of this very lucrative oil contract between Exxon and Rosneft. During the same year of  2011. in the month of May there was a meeting of “Arctic Council” in Nuuk the capital of Greenland. This meeting was primarily driven by the fierce debate between Russia and the United States, about who have right to claim its territories in Arctic. On that meeting some things never get defined and many of the borders in the Arctic remained questionable. Guided by this I believe that the Arctic after latest Russian discoveries, could come back into focus of wrangling and power struggle, even maybe in one kind of shout diplomatic conflict that has never been closed. What emerged from that meeting in Nuuk is that Russia and Norway, which is a NATO member, signed an agreement on areas in the Barents Sea, which solved their mutual long-silent conflict over these territories. Except this in the Arctic region still remain a huge number of unsolved questions, which will in the future, and especially with the research of new crude oils increasingly rise geopolitical focus and tensions.

Spread template

The reason for the signing of this agreement between Rosneft and Exxon could be also of technological nature. Because why would the Russians signed a contract with an American company unless there is not something in mutual interests. In the report from 2007. of the Norwegian green group Belona which declares to protect the natural environment in one part they showed their concerns for hydrocarbon technology that Russia possesses because it was “old and inefficient”. Regarding to this it is easily possible that the contract with Exxon was signed because they possess necessary hydrocarbon technology, which is needed for the exploration and exploitation of the oil and gas sources.  In the latest brochure Exon distinguished that they have experience more than 90 years for working in the areas of the Arctic. There should be added that this is certainly not the first project that Exon works with Russia, and prior to this there is a project “Sakhalin 1“, whose main contractor was Exon, where they broke down many records when it comes to drilling and quantity of oil. Rosneft as younger company certainly has less experience in wells such as these in the Arctic, which have higher technological requirements than Rosneft wells in Siberia from which they currently draws the bulk of their profit.

So, things are pretty clear, while aggression was taking place in Libya because of its regime where guilt has not been proven, on the world stage behind the curtain there were conducted these negotiations about capital cash investments between the most powerful Russian state-owned company and most successful American company. I’m pretty sure that Russia has not vetoed a resolution on Libya, inter alia, because of this agreement between Rosneft and Exxon. Somehow I get the impression that the Russians “swallowed” somehow Libyan resolution regarding to this contract. The presence of the Prime Minister at that time, and now President of Russia, is seen as a legitimate state interest of the Russian Federation which is respected, but Americans as Danaans who bear gifts and do not wait, today they brought a present to Russia named by “Crisis in Ukraine” in front of their own door. I am convinced that Ukraine and Russia, should be defended even in 1999 in Yugoslavia, and not to mention how thy should been defended in Libya in 2011. Russians probably knew very well what they risk, although they was hardly able to predict this really unnecessary war in Ukraine and exhaustion in front of their doorstep.

Today we have what we have. This crisis in Ukraine has brought many innocent lives on both sides, one country is divided, and the ghosts of fascism awakened irremediable and whatever the conflict is over, I believe that in this part of the world the situation will always be unstable. Knowing that Russian capitalism is identical to American, but our Serbian traditional ties with them as Orthodoxy, inverted flag, and that the sun rises in the “East” and on the other side depleted uranium from the “West” will always be an argument that sets them apart. That’s exactly why I want Russia consider us on the same way as we thought of them, because in addition to money and capital around which revolves the world, there is something else, something much deeper, which remains after us, and what we inherited, and capitalism force us to forget… Except my personal motives there are also some rational, which are best described by Mr. Willy Wimmer, a former deputy of the Bundestag and admitted friend of our Serbian people. In one of his texts at the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis he posted three questions which I will paraphrase below and with that I will finish this text.

1. Can there be peace in the world if the only hegemonic force is USA?

2.  Is there possible respect of international law and world power balance if we do not have Russia?

3. When the EU will stop to be like a soap bubble in the hands of the USA?


“Opium economy” from Afghanistan to Kosovo*

Writing my articles about geopolitical position of Kosovo*, an essential thesis that confirms stealing territory from Serbia actually refers to the drug route or so called in Balkans “green transversal”. This itinerary is the way of drugs moving from Afghanistan to Kosovo* and after further to the Europe. Two years ago, one joke appeared on the Internet that the producer of heroin acknowledged the independence of its distributor. It was about Afghanistan, which was officially first acknowledged the independence of Kosovo*. By some estimates, about 65% of the world’s heroin passes through this Serbian province, while 90% of the total amount of drugs coming into Europe from Kosovo*, and all of security for that trade is provided from Bondsteel base. As we can see this is not an ordinary story, and its real foothold we can see in the latest article published by The Economist.



On the other hand, when carried out the intervention in Afghanistan, the U.S.  justified struggle against “world terrorism”. After the intervention and disposition of ISAF troops, apart from terrorism they have found themselves in the fight against drugs. Their focus in this kind of the fight to prevent the production of opium was in the incentives that are set aside for Afghan farmers with a view to grow wheat instead of poppies. Except farmers, they also financially rewarded local politicians on whose territories was registered decline in production. Indeed, in this system of prevention U.S. invested more than $ 10 billion, according to data presented by the Special Inspector for Afghanistan John Sopko, responsible for overseeing of the process.

It would be great if something was really achieved with this huge money, but actually according to official UN report about cultivation of poppy in last year these awarded wheat growing Afghan farmers, actually broke down the record in cultivation of opium. That fact is absurd even more because before the intervention in Afghanistan they did not have so much area planted with opium, while after the intervention production always had an upward trend and now it reached its peak.

To make this worse, the money that was invested in reducing cultivation, primarily was invested in those areas that are less hostile to the United States soldiers because of personnel security reasons. The result of this was counterproductive as it increased production in the provinces that are under the control of the Taliban fighters. With simple economic calculations if they reduce the production, demand remains the same (or increases in drug case), then the price can only grow. This has two economic consequences:

First one is that the manufacturer makes more money because it produces the same as before then but now for a higher price, which means he has more money to reinvest in even greater production of heroin. The second one takes some time, because it encourages higher profits and greater production of both existing manufacturers and new participants. Thus, the global supply of heroin is growing.


Regard this analysis, I participated last year in one seminar in Prague, organized by the Diplomatic Division of NATO. Among other sessions there was one guided by Peter Pelc, former ambassador of the Czech Republic in Afghanistan. He mostly talked about how this country is stabilized by a process of democratization after the fall of the Taliban government.

On my statement in this context addressed to ambassador Pelz,  that Kosovo* is major transit hub for drugs coming from Afghanistan and that is what actually mostly hold the economy  of “west”, and that these are two “countries” that are in the process of democratization and nation-building and in both we can find U.S. bases located under cover and ensuring this commerce, and that there is no much coincidence when Afghanistan was the first country that recognized Kosovo*, later I presented him the following data from  UN report, but then I did not know how much U.S. invested to suppress cultivation. After this statement the question just raised itself.

Does NATO troops protect the interests of the people or provide the drug trade that flows freely? The answer that I received from the ambassador after a few seconds of silence and scratching his head was extremely funny, and boiled down to the fact that Kosovo * and Afghanistan can not be compared in terms of state-building and that good questions cant always give us good answers. For smart person that answer is enough.

This brief analyse in all ways made pointless American principles of fighting in Afghanistan, and possibly also whole their intervention, because after so many years they achieved nothing within their official plans. On the other hand certainly they have reached money interests of the military and other industries. Economically where we have demand, profit will always find its way. But I guess  it is clear to everyone reasonable that the “War on drugs” is just an ordinary “perpetuum mobile” for the trade financed by tax dollars, of which the profit for the most part stays in the hands of powerful individuals.

“Opijumska ekonomija” od Avganistana do Kosova*

Pišući geopolitičke tekstove o poziciji Kosmeta, neizostavna je teza koja potvrđuje otimanje ovog djela teritorije iz sastava Srbije, a koja se odnosi na put droge ili „zelenu transverzalu.“ Ova transverzala predstavlja put kojim se narkotici kreću od Avganistana do Kosova*  odakle ide dalje ka Evropi. Prije dvije godine, pojavila se i šala na internetu da je proizvođač heroina priznao nezavisnost svom distributeru. Upravo se radilo se o Afganistanu, koji je zvanično prvi priznao nezavisnost Kosova*. Po nekim procjenama, oko 65% svjetskog heroina prolazi kroz ovu srpsku provinciju, dok se 90% ukupne količine droge koja dolazi u Evropu šalje preko Kosova*, a sve to obezbjeđuje baza Bondstil.  Da ovo nije obična priča i da zaista ima svoje realno uporište vidi se i iz poslijednjeg članka koji je objavio Ekonomist.


Sa druge strane kada su vršile intervenciju na Avganistan, SAD su to pravdale borbom protiv svjetskog terorizma. Nakon intervencije i rasporeda trupa ISAF, osim terorizma našli su se i u borbi protiv droge. Fokus u ovom djelu borbe radi prevencije proizvodnje opijuma bio je na poticajima koji su izdvajani za seljake Avganistana sa ciljem da umjesto maka sade pšenicu. Osim seljaka novčano su nagrađivani i lokalni političari na čijim teritorijama bi se registrovao pad proizvodnje. Sve u svemu, ovim sistemom prevencije, SAD su uložile više od 10 milijardi $, prema podacima koje je iznio američki specijalni inspektor za Avganistan Džon Sopko (John Sopko) zadužen za nadgledanje tog procesa.

Sve bi bilo super da se sa ovim ogromnim novcem zaista postiglo nešto, ali zapravo prema zvaničnim podacima UN – a o uzgoju maka, prošle godine ovi nagrađivani seljaci Avganistana za sadnju pšenice oborili su rekord u uzgoju opijuma. Da podatak bude apsurdniji čak ni prije intervencije Avganistan nije imao toliko zasađenih površina opijumom, dok je poslije intervencije proizvodnja uvijek imala trend rasta da bi sada dostigla i svoj vrhunac.

Da stvar bude gora, novac koji se ulagao na smanjenje uzgoja, primarno je ulagan u one oblasti koje su manje neprijateljski nastrojene prema SAD iz prostog sigurnosnog razloga. Rezultat ovoga je kontraproduktivan tako što se povećala proizvodnja u provincijama koje su pod kontrolom Talibana. Prostom ekonomskom računicom ukoliko se smanji proizvodnja, a potražnja ostaje ista (ili se povećava u slučaju droge) onda cijena može samo da raste. Ovo ima dve ekonomske posljedice:

Prva je da proizvođač više zarađuje jer proizvodi isto kao i do tad, ali za veću cijenu, što znači da ima  više novca da reinvestira u još veću proizvodnju heroina. Druga je ona koja dolazi vremenom, jer veći profit potiče i veću proizvodnju i za postojeće proizvođače i za nove učesnike. Dakle, globalna ponuda heroina raste.


Na ovu analizu ću dodati i to da sam (10.6.2013.) učestvovao na seminaru u Pragu, organizovanog od strane diplomatskog odjeljenja NATO saveza. Ovdje smo između ostalih sesija imali i jednu vođenu od strane Petera Pelca, bivšeg ambasadora Češke Republike u Avganistanu. Uglavnom je govorio o tome o tome kako je ova zemlja stabilizovana pod procesom demokratizacije nakon pada talibanske vlade.

Na moju konstataciju u ovom kontekstu upućenu ambasadoru Pelcu da je Kosovo* glavni tranzitni centar za narkotike koji dolaze iz Avganistana i koji zapravo drže ekonomiju zapada, te da su to dve “zemlje” koje su u procesu demokratizacije i izgradnje nacije i da se u obe nalaze američke baze, a sve to pod pokrićem i osiguravanjem ove trgovine, kao i da nije slučajno da je baš Avganistan bio prva zemlja koja je priznala Kosovo*, pri čemu sam mu prezentovao i ove podatke UN –a, ali tad nisam znao koliko su SAD uložile za suzbijanje uzgoja. Nakon ove konstatacije pitanje se samo postavilo. Da li NATO trupe štite interese naroda ili osiguravaju ovu trgovinu da protiče nesmetano? Odgovor koji sam dobio od ambasadora nakon nekoliko sekundi šutnje i češkanja po glavi je bio krajnje smiješan, i svodio se na to da se Kosovo* i Avganistan ne mogu porediti u smislu izgradnje države i da dobra pitanja nemaju i dobre odgovore. Pametnom sasvim dovoljno.

Ovom kratkom analizom je na sve načine obesmišljen američki princip borbe u Avganistanu, a vjerovatno i intervencija jer nakon toliko godina nisu se postigli zvanični planovi. Sa druge strane svakako su se postigli kapitalni interesi vojne industrije i drugih. Ekonomskim rječnikom tamo gdje ima potražnje, profit će uvijek naći svoj put. No, valjda je svakom razumnom jasno da je „Rat protiv droge“ najobičniji „perpetum mobile“ trgovine finansirane poreznim dolarima, čiji se profit najvećim djelom slijeva u ruke moćnih pojedinaca.


g3983The latest events in Ukraine really showed us plenty of things, but perhaps most important thesis that stretches from the beginning of demonstration in Kiev, over referendum on Crimea, to the latest developments on the brink of war in Donetsk and Slaviansk the return of a multi-polar world order. Ukraine was accidentally or “intentionally” chosen to be the training ground for modern geopolitical chess game in which we can see the strength, power and influence testing between Russia and the United States. At the beginning of the year in conclusion of the text about  Russian missile diplomacy I mentioned this thesis about return of “multipolarity” and straightening poles on a global scale. As time passed, this thesis become increasingly clear and I think we’re much more in remind of the former Cold War rhetoric.

Barack_Obama_and_Vladmir_Putin_at_G8_summit_2013-1560x690_cReturn of Russia began with blockade of resolution about Syria intervention, and reached its zenith putting Crimea under its control. I think that in Russian case nothing is over yet, and that this is just the beginning. On the other side, the United States began to act like this long time ago and it is needless to enumerate: Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine … Sympthomatic things about these events in Ukraine are the methods used for superiority. These methods of taking and putting under control the administrative buildings were used in Kiev, and the same were later used in  Crimea, as well in the Donetsk. Apparent intentions of pro – russian population that they can fight for their status only with the same methods as we saw in Kiev. Although the official position of Russia that are not involved in the events in Donetsk, it is obvious that they are on the territory of Ukraine represented via their secret services, either Russians and USA. The only who suffer in situation like this is Ukrainian people and their economy.

The last time when circumstances were such geopolitically like this, there has been formed “third block”, ie Non-Aligned Movement in 1961. year. This formula, which were first among equals applied by president of Yugoslavia  Josip Broz Tito, president of Egypt  Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of India Jawaharlal Nehru, president of Indonesia Sukarno and president of Ghana Kwame Nkrumah, proved to be very successful in the circumstances that prevailed at that time. Non-Aligned Movement member states were generally overwhelmingly positioned at the margins of the world impacts and the only affirmation within such alliances could bring their joint action to find collective interest and that their voice become honored by the great powers. Yugoslavia was particularly in a very specific situation of a “big gap” between East and West, either geographically and politically. Opting for one or the other completely, would mean economic collapse and political problems. The only logical solution was to remain non-aligned, or “neutral” in some way, and to get legitimacy and regard by others. President Tito of Yugoslavia as an good expert of his chances and “diplomatic fox” performed this maneuver with surgical precision and in the best possible manner in the interest of Yugoslavia.


You don´t need not be so smart to conclude how successful diplomatic formula should be applied to identical political and global circumstances nowadays. I say this primarily referring to today’s awkward diplomatic position of Serbia and even worse position of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which since its establishment in this form there is no consistent diplomacy or foreign policy as a consequence of its internal political relations. To put it mildly, situation in this area is chaotic and could be described as good joke.For Serbia we know that country is officially in the process of accession negotiations with the EU, as well with small steps towards NATO membership. These small steps are reflected especially in the sending of an officer of the Army of Serbia at the headquarter office at NATO Joint Force Command in Naples, as well as few official meetings of officials of NATO and the Serbian Army. This is supported also by the dispatch from Wikileaks, originally sent from the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade to hands of Hillary Clinton. In this dispatch Jovan Ratkovic said that as a former Minister of Defense, President Tadic knows the issue well. Tadic believes that Serbia cannot remain outside of NATO forever, but doesn’t say this often because of the political sensitivity of the issue. Ratkovic explained that after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the citizens of Yugoslavia assumed that they would be among the first to enter both the European Union and NATO. It wasn’t until the wars of the Milosevic era and the 1999 NATO intervention that anti-NATO sentiment developed in Serbia. Ratkovic characterized current public support for Partnership for Peace participation and NATO membership as “surprisingly high” given Serbia’s history.” However, a little further eastern Serbia parallel builds strong ties with Russia, which the most visible evidence is the route of South Stream. In these circumstances, when it comes to complicating of situation in Ukraine and when UN General Assembly vote on the resolution which annexed the Crimea to Russia, inevitably comes up pressure on Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where both states generally were abstain from the voting.

Criema voting

Bosnia & Herzegovina and Serbia were the only abstain countries in the Balkans, which in general means that you are not declared. All other countries in the Balkans and from former Yugoslavia voted for this resolution. With this “garbled” move Serbia wanted to preserve good relations with the “booth sides” but after a while we can certainly expect this to bring new problems for Government because EU did not expect that, and in these circumstances, “to be abstain” means having position that not coincide with the same position within the EU. In Bosnia & Herzegovina abstain is almost standard story because three members of the Presidency who is in charge of foreign policy in general, could not agree on voting. Because of all the above mentioned, and primarily because of the “neo – multipolarity” and the complexity of the position in which are Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, I am very confident that both countries should clearly and diplomatically bring focus to change the status of observer and gain full membership status in the Non-Aligned Movement. Already in advance within the EU, on the possibility of these idea they did not take it too kindly and even emphasize that Serbia is no longer “non-aligned” and have to decide, although the EU itself is in the same position as the former Yugoslavia once. The attitude of the United States passed by the current Ambassador to Belgrade Michael Kirby showed us other side when he said :

“And for me, it will be interesting to contemplate that Serbia will do it, because it is a successor of Tito’s Yugoslavia, which was the founder of the Non-Aligned Movement. There is some ritual sense about the Non-Aligned Movement that will not take any side. This is something that Serbia has in its history, and perhaps in its future “

Except remark that Serbia is treated as successors of the former Yugoslavia, full membership in Non – Aligned would have greater maneuver space for Serbian nowadays situation. Deeper engagement and mobility in Non – Aligned movement could regain some old traditional friendship and improve economical situation, especially in the countries of growing African economies. On the other hand there would be possible to make ​​legitimate retreat towards NATO and also to confirm neutrality of Serbia declared by its National Assembly in Constitution. Besides this enhanced and a full engagement of Serbia would bring new energy to the Non-Aligned Movement and give more on the scale of importance. This would be also a great opportunity for Bosnia and Herzegovina to include itself seriously in international circles and to become more influent in the outer policy. With its comparative advantages Bosnia & Herzegovina could to accomplish primarily some economic benefits as well as Serbia, and moreover could be placed as partner with stance equally towards all, without any repercussions because all countries are aware of its constitution and complexity. Except this, Bosnia and Herzegovina should be completely demilitarized in the future, but this is not the subject of this analysis. My opinion is that with very quick turnaround to the Non-Aligned Movement, the position of Serbia would be much better, especially at the principles of greater development of economic diplomacy, without major political stories, and the situation at the global level itself brings us to this possible solution. This would also help to some stabilization in the Balkans relations between these two countries, as well as within Bosnia & Herzegovina itself, where there would not be different pressures and ugly methods tore down the position of the Republic of Srpska which guaranteed by the Dayton agreement and the focus should be shifted from political and constitutional questions to and only to economic development. When all is summed up, it seems that an indirect hint from Ambassador Kirby in general does not seem so bad, and how we are going to do, time will tell us in the future.

Preko Ukrajine do “nesvrstanosti” – nova stara šansa za Srbiju i BiH


*If you want this text in English just click HERE !

Najnovija dešavanja u Ukrajini pokazala su mnogo toga, a možda najvažnija teza koja se proteže od samog početka demonstracija u Kijevu, preko referenduma na Kirmu, pa do najnovijih dešavanja na ivici rata u Donjecku i Slavijansku je povratak multipolarnog poretka u svijetu. Ukrajina je slučajno ili “namjerno” izabrana da bude poligon za modernu geopolitičku šahovsku partiju u kojoj se odmjeravaju snaga, moć i uticaj između Rusije i SAD-a. Ovu tezu povratka “multipolarnosti” i ravnanja tasa na globalnoj vagi već sam spomenuo početkom godine u zaključku teksta o ruskoj raketnoj diplomatiji. Kako vrijeme odmiče, ovo postaje sve izvijesnije i mislim da nas mnogo toga podsjeća na onu nekadašnju hladnoratovsku retoriku.


Povratak Rusije je započeo sa blokadom intervencije na Siriju, a svoj zenit je dostigao stavljanjem Krima pod svoju kontrolu. Mišljenja sam da za Rusiju još ništa nije gotovo, te da je ovo zapravo tek početak. Sa druge strane SAD su počele odavno i suvišno je nabrajati: Jugoslavija, Irak, Afganistan, Libija, Ukrajina… Ono što je simptomtično događajima u Ukrajini su metode koje se koriste. Ove metode zauzimanja i stavljanja pod kontrolu administrativnih zgrada su korišćene u Kijevu, a iste su kasnije korišćene i na Krimu kao i u Donjeckoj oblasti. Očigledne su namjere proruskog stanovništva da se za svoj status mogu izboriti samo ukoliko uzvrate istim metodama. Iako je zvanični stav Rusije da nisu uključeni u dešavanja u Donjecku, očigledno je da su na teritoriji Ukrajine u velikom broju prisutne službe kako Rusije tako i SAD – a.

Poslijednji put kad su okolnosti u geopolitičkom smislu bile ovakve došlo je do formiranja “trećeg bloka”, odnosno Pokreta nesvrstanih 1961. godine. Ova formula koju su prvi među jednakima primjenili predsjednik SFRJ Josip Broz Tito, predsjednik Egipta Gamal Abdel Naser, predsjednik Indije Džavaharlal Nehru, predsjednik Indonezije Sukarno i predsjednik Gane Kvame Nkrumah, pokazala se kao jako uspješnom u okolnostima koje su tada vladale. Države članice Pokreta nesvrstanih su uglavnom velikom većinom bile na marginama svjetskog uticaja i jedino afirmacijom unutar ovakvog saveza mogle su zajedničkim djelovanjem da nađu svoj interes i da njihov glas postane poštovan od strane velikih sila. Jugoslavija je posebno bila u jako specifičnoj situaciji i u velikom rascjepu između istoka i zapada, kako geografski tako i politički. Opredjeljivanje za jedne ili druge u potpunosti, značilo bi ekonomski krah i političke probleme. Jedino logično rješenje je bilo ostati nesvrstan, odnosno “neutralan” u neku ruku, a da to bude legitimno i poštovano od strane drugih. Predsjednik Jugoslavije Tito kao dobar poznavalac prilika i diplomatski lisac je ovaj manevar izveo hirurški precizno i na najbolji mogući način u interesu bivše Jugosavije. 


Ne treba biti previše pametan da bi se zaključilo kako uspješne diplomatske formule treba primjenjivati na identične političko – globalne okolnosti. Ovo govorim prvenstveno misleći na današnju nezgodnu diplomatsku poziciju Srbije i još lošiju poziciju Bosne i Hercegovine, koja od svog osnivanja u ovom obliku nema konzistentnu diplomatiju ni spoljnju politiku kao posljedicu svojih unutrašnjih odnosa. Blago rečeno stanje u ovoj oblasti je haotično i ravno domenu pošalice. Srbija je zvanično u procesu pretpristupnih pregovora sa EU, a isto tako malim koracima i prema članstvu u NATO. Ovi mali koraci se ogledaju u slanju jednog oficira Vojske Srbije na štabnu dužnost u Komandi združenih snaga NATO u Napulju, kao i sastancima zvaničnika NATO saveza i Vojske Srbije. Ovome u prilog ide i depeša sa Vikiliksa, originalno upućena iz ambasade SAD u Beogradu na ruke Hilari Klinton. U ovoj depeši se spominje da je Jovan Ratković, savjetnik za spoljnu politiku bivšeg predsjednika Srbije Borisa Tadića, prenio ambasadorki Meri Vorlik lična uvjeravanja predsjednika Tadića da Srbija neće moći „zauvijek” da ostane van NATO-a, kao i da je podrška srpskog naroda Partnerstvu za mir i članstvu u NATO-u „iznenađujuće visoka”. Ipak, malo istočnije Srbija paralelno gradi i jake veze sa Rusijom, čiji je najvidljiviji dokaz trasa Južnog toka. U ovim okolnostima kada dolazi do složnjavanja situacije u Ukrajini i glasanja Generalne Skupštine UN o rezoluciji kojom se Krim pripaja Rusiji, neminovno dolazi i do pritiska na Srbiju i BiH, a gdje obe države uopšte nisu uzele učešće u glasanju. 

Criema voting

BiH i Srbija su bile i jedine zemlje na Balkanu koje se uopšte nisu izjasnile. Sve ostale zemlje Balkana i bivše SFRJ glasale su ZA ovu rezoluciju. Srbija je ovim “nemuštim” potezom htjela da sačuva dobre odnose i sa “jednima i sa drugima” što nakon nekog vremena svakako može da joj donese probleme jer u EU to nisu očekivali, a u ovim okolnostima “biti odsutan” znači imati neki stav koji se ne poklapa sa stavom unutar EU. U BiH je standardno jer se tri člana predsjedništva koje je zaduženo za spoljnju politiku uopšte nisu mogla dogovoriti oko glasanja. Zbog svega gore navedenog, a u prvom redu zbog “neo – multupolarizma” i kompleksnosti pozicije u kojoj se nalaze Srbija i BiH, uvjeren sam da bi obe zemlje trebale jasno diplomatski da se usmjere i da iz statusa posmatrača dobiju status punopravnog člana u Pokretu nesvrstanih. Već unapred unutar EU na mogunost ove ideje ne gledaju blagonaklono i čak naglašavaju Srbiji da više nisu “nesvrstani” i da moraju da se odluče, iako se i sama EU nalazi u poziciji kao i bivša SFRJ nekad. Stav SAD prenio je sadašnji ambasador u Beogradu Majkl Kirbi koji je izjavio

“A za mene će biti interesantno da posmatram kako će Srbija to učiniti, budući da je naslednica Titove Jugoslavije, koja je bila osnivač Pokreta nesvrstanih. Ovde postoji ritualni osećaj da pokret nesvrstanih ne staje ni na čiju stranu. To je nešto što je istorija Srbije, a možda i njena budućnost”

Osim toga što se Srbija tretira i kao naslijednica bivše SFRJ punopravnim članstvom imala bi veći manevarski prostor za situaciju u kojoj se sad nalazi. Dubljim angažmanom u Pokretnu nesvrstanih mogla bi povratiti neka stara tradicionalna i ekonomska prijateljstva, pogotovo u zemljama rastuće afričke ekonomije, a sa druge strane napravila bi se legitimna odstupnica prema NATO savezu i potvrdila bi se neutralnost koju Srbija deklarativno nosi u svom Ustavu. Osim toga pojačan i punopravan angažman Srbije dao bi i Pokretu nesvrstanih novu energiju i više na značaju.  Ovo bi takođe bila sjajna prilika za Bosnu i Hercegovinu da se postavi ozbiljnije u međunarodnim krugovima i da “prikoliko” postane faktor u spoljnjoj politici. Svojim komparativnim prednostima mogla bi da ostvari pre svega ekonmske benefite kao i Srbija, a osim toga mogla bi da se postavi partnerski i jednako prema svima, bez da iko napravi zamjerke jer su svi svijesni njenog uređenja. Uz ovo, Bosni i Hercegovini bi dobro došla i totalna demilitarizacija u budućnosti, ali to već nije predmet ove analize. Smatram da bi se veoma brzo zaokretom ka Pokretu nesvrstanih olakšala pozicija Srbije i popravila pozicija BiH pogotovo na principima većeg razvoja ekonomske diplomatije bez velike politike, a i situacija na globalnom planu nam sama nameće to kao moguće rješenje. Ovo bi takođe pomoglo i stabilizaciji nekih odnosa na Balkanu između ove dve države, kao i unutar same BiH, gdje se ne bi raznim pritiscima i ružnim metodama rušio položaj Republike Srpske garantovan sporazumom u Dejtonu i gdje bi se fokus unutar BiH prebacio sa političko – ustavnih pitanja na ona razvojna i ekonomska. Kad sve saberemo, izgleda se ovaj indirektni savjet ambasadora Kirbija uopšte ne čini tako loš, a kako se mi činimo, vrijeme će pokazati.


Moj govor povodom 15 godina NATO bombardovanja SR Jugoslavije

Poštovane dame i gospodo, dragi gosti i prijatelji Beofruma, pre svega želim da Vam se zahvalim što ste danas ovdje sa nama, a organizatorima upućujem najiskrenije čestitke za uspješnu organizaciju sa željama da ovako nastave u budućnosti.

Moje ime je Neven Đenadija, dolazim iz opštine Kostajnica u Republici Srpskoj po struci sam diplomirani politikolog, a trenutno i student MA studija međunarodni odnosi i diplomatija. U svom dosadašnjem radu najčešće se i bavim diplomatskim i geopolitičkim temama, a pitanje Kosova i Metohije kako sa istorijske tako i geostrateške pozicije je oblast od mog posebnog interesovanja i inspiracije. Sam povod zbog kog smo se skupili danas ovdje i na ovom mjestu je veoma težak, tužan i sigurno ga nismo sami birali već nam je na današnji dan pre 15 godina on ultimativno postavljen. Taj povod je trajao punih 78 dana, ostavivši za sobom hiljade žrtava, ogromna razaranja, zatrovanu prirodnu sredinu i otrgnuto Kosovo i Metohiju pod patronatom NATO-a, i ne samo to već za isti povod nije bilo odluke Savjeta bezbednosti Ujedinjenih nacija,  a zbog njega je 19 zemalja članica NATO saveza prekršilo Povelju UN kao i temeljna načela međunarodnog prava. Vjerovatno neki ne znaju, ali ovo nije bila prva akcija koju je poveo NATO savez protiv jednog naroda. Ta prva zvanična akcija je trajala 12 dana, zvala se „Odlučna sila“ i bila je uperena protiv istog naroda ali u Republici Srpskoj, Bosni i Hercegovini. Povod za tu akciju kao i onaj za intervenciju u Srbiji je veoma kontroverzan i upitan, te ni do dan danas nije jasno i argumentovano dokazana krivica Srba ni za žrtve na Markalma ni za žrtve u Račku, što se vidi i po nekim svjedočenjima u Haškom tribunalu. Daleko od toga da nismo imali svojih grešaka i nepromišljenih poteza imamo ih i danas, ali za ove smo već unapred kao narod osuđeni i pre nego što su se desile. Naravno želim da kažem da su za mene sve žrtve iste i da ni jedna nije niti veća, niti manja od druge, i da svim žrtvama treba odati počast. Žrtva nije samo običan broj, slovo na papiru ili slika u muzeju, žrtva je svetinja, bol i tuga čija god ona bila. Nažalost i same žrtve se često koriste u svrhe manipulacije i ostvarenja nekih političkih ciljeva ili pretenzija na dugoročnom planu, a to je ono što posebno prezirem. Problem nastaje onog momenta kada zaboravljamo sopstvene žrtve, a ostavljamo prostor za one druge koje će od srpskog naroda napraviti kolektivnog krivca i nepresuđenog osuđenika. Nama izgleda čak ni to nije problem, kroz istoriju smo navikli da tu ulogu junački nosimo i kad smo krivi i kad nismo, od NATO bombardovanja do holivudskih filmova. To što neko drugi konstantno razmišlja kako da od svojih žrtvi napravi dobar marketing, a samim tim i veću žrtvu, drugome na štetu, to je već njegova lična stvar i stvar njegove politizacije, a u krajnjoj liniji rekao bih i nepoštovanja sopstvenih žrtava. Mi ovdje danas na naš način, dostojanstveno pre svega pokazujemo da naše žrtve nisu zaboravljene i da srpski narod nije kolektivni krivac. Ono što mene najviše boli danas je odnos vlasti Republike Srbije prema teritoriji i srpskom narodu Kosova i Metohije. Ovaj odnos nije iskren i nije zaštitnički kako bi trebao biti. Neću sad da pričam o ogromnom istorijskom i pravoslavno – hrišćanskom značaju Kosmeta koji nije uopšte upitan za naš narod i koji je nemjerljiv kroz istu tu istoriju za cjeli zapadni svijet od 1389. pa na ovamo. Ono što ću ja spomenuti kao jedan svoj argument kroz prizmu onoga što proučavam je ogroman geostrateški značaj koji Srbija gubi ionako poraznim Briselskim sporazumom i nemuštim odricanjem od sopstvene teritorije i naroda. Navešću Vam samo nekoliko važnih činjenica koje idu u prilog ovome. Svi mi znamo šta voda znači za budućnost naše planete i života na njoj, pa tako i na Kosovu voda predstavlja veoma bitan resurs koji pokreće sve ostalo. Da li ste znali da je Priština jedini glavni grad neke pokrajine u Evorpi koji nema svoju rijeku ? Da li ste znali da je jezero Gazivode jedini i najsigurniji izvor vode u budućnosti na Kosovu i Metohiji ? Da li ste znali da se vodom iz ovog jezera koje se nalazi na sjeveru Kosmeta u srpskoj opštini Zubin Potok snabdjevaju i hlade generatori dvije jedine funkcionalne termoelektrane u blizini Prištine koje su praktički jedini izvor električne energije na Kosmetu? Osim vodenog bogatstva posebno treba istaći i ogromno rudno bogatstvo kojim raspolaže teritorija Kosova, a zanimljiva je i geomorfološka struktura pojaseva na Kosmetu koji su prema do sad još nezvaničnim i tajnim procjenama naftonosni. Ovome treba dodati i geografsku projekciju i značaj „Cvijićeve linije“ odnosno strateške linije koju je iscrtao naš najpoznatiji geograf Jovan Cvijić i  koja se smatra strategijskom kičmom regiona i oko nje su sudbinski vezani svi geoekonomski planovi, te o njoj moraju da vode računa sve projekcije budućih naftovoda i gasovoda. Samo iz ovih nekoliko činjenica koje sam ovdje naveo, a koje izuzimaju istorijsko – pravoslavni argument i našu nostalgiju jasno se i nedvosmisleno vidi geostrateški značaj Kosova i Metohije za bilo koga, a pogotovo za državu Srbiju u narednih 50 ili 100 godina o kojima već danas trebamo misliti. Vjerujem da je vlast mogla i morala bolje da zaštiti ako ništa bar sjeverni dio i jezero Gazivode, ali umjesto toga oni su još dodatno ružnim političkim sredstvima podjelili i ono malo srpskog naroda što je na Kosmetu ostalo. Sve je to Srbiji uz dodatne žrtve pre tačno 15 godina donio globalni intervencionalizam i interesi upereni protiv suverene zemlje. Da je bio mnogo prljav pokazuju i podaci o upotrebi kasetnih bombi, bombardovanju hemijske industrije gdje su oslobođene velike količine dioksina, kao i upotreba osiromašenog uranijuma čije posljedice se osjete i danas. Da je Srbija tad bila poslijednja žrtva tog intervencionizma i da je poslije toga uspostavljen globalni i trajni mir vjerovatno bi nekako i prihvatili to što nam se desilo, ali nažalost ovo su samo puste želje. Poslije Srbije bili smo svjedoci još težih i žešćih intervencija sa još modernijim oružjem i većim razmjerama stradanja koje vidimo čak i danas. Sve ove intervencije sigurno nisu postigle ono što se u medijima i zvaničnim državnim politikama NATO saveza propagira, ali su postigle dovoljno za one koji su ih i osmišljavali. Danas je u Srbiji zahvaljujući upotrebi naučno prostudiranih metoda i korišćenju suptilnih mehanizama u oblikovanju javnog mišljenja proizvedeno snažno uvjerenje da je Srbija ne samo izgubila rat 1999. nego da je za taj rat sama odgovorna. Identifikovanje sa agresorom je čudna i tužna boljka s kojom se neko društvo suočava, ona otvara put upravljačkoj strukturi da ostvaruje ciljeve samog agresora, pretvarajući se u njegovog klijentističkog poslušnika. Kada su u to klijentističko kolo upregnuti mediji koji nemerljivo utiču na oblikovanje javnog mišljenja, društvo koje se identifikuje sa agresorom u stvari je zahvaćeno samodestrukcijom, samorazaranjem i samozatiranjem. Ovo potvrđuju i riječi tadašnjeg potrtparola NATO saveza Džejmija Šeja koji je 1999. Izjavio: „Srbe treba spokojno bombardovati, jer će sve brzo zaboraviti”.

Osim onog povoda koji nas je ovdje okupio želio bih da dodam da nas je okupila i želja da jasno demantujemo gospodina Šeja koji je među živima i dalje obavlja funkciju unutar NATO saveza. I ne samo da ga demantujemo, već da pokažemo da osim što nismo zaboravili bombardovanje, nismo zaboravili ni njegove riječi i koje je tad izrekao.

Ovim bi želio i završiti moj prvi i najduži govor do sad koji nije bio ni malo lak ali je bio iskren i iz srca. Baš zato što mi je prvi i što sam govorio na ovu godišnjicu želio bih nekako da ga upišem u posebnu posvetu i za sjećanje na one najtragičnije i najbolnije žrtve. Jedna od njih koja je postala simbol svih nevinih žrtava je trogodišnja djevojčica Milica Rakić iz Batajnice koja je stradala od gelera u svom domu. Marko Simić iz Novog Pazara, dvogodišnji dječak koji je stradao od razorne bombe u naručju svog oca Vladana. Ljiljana Spasić student četvrte godine medicine, stradala je u sedmom mesecu trudnoće u samom centru Niša. Bojana Tošović i njen tata Božina iz Merdara stradali pred svojom kućom od granate. Na njivi u Ribnici kod Vranja, poginula je petnaestogodišnja djevojčica Irena Mitić dok je sa ocem sejala kukuruz. Na mostu preko Južne Morave u Vladičinom Hanu NATO bombe usmrtile su zagrljene i zaljubljene gimnazijalce sedamnaestogodišnju Gordanu Nikolić i godinu dana starijeg Milana Ignjatovića. Na mostu u Varvarinu, pod bombama ugašen je život briljantne matematičarke Sanje Milenković kad je NATO agresor izručio smrtonosne bombe na Varvarinski most, i u crno zavio deset porodica te ostavio 27 teških invalida. Osim civilnih žrtava imali smo i one vojno stradale i herojski od kojih bi želio da odam počast pilotima VJ Životi Đuriću, Zoranu Radosavljeviću i Milenku Pavloviću koji su živote izgubili u daleko inferiornijim avionima i borbi koja je bila neravnopravna, ali potpuno svjesno za odbranu svoje zemlje i znajući u šta se upuštaju. Njima, kao i svim ostalim vojnicima i civilima stradalim u NATO agresiji koje nisam pobrojao neka je vječna slava i hvala. Hvala i svim onima koji su branili svoju državu tada, a koji žive i danas i koji su zaslužili da ih Srbija ne zaobravi i da im pruži život dostojan čovjeka. Svima Vama još jednom hvala na pažnji i Vašem prisustvu na obilježavanju i pomenu ove godišnjice.