The sanctity of state borders is a jewel in the crown of European state law. In theory. The redefining of boundaries along ethnic-cultural lines in Bosnia and Herzegovina 20 years ago passed without consequence.

The drawing up of borders, in this case, was done in the aftermath of bloodshed. Now Serbia and Kosovo are gearing up to repeat history, but with one difference — they want to redefine their borders amicably between themselves.

The terms of the trade remain vague, but the deal seems done nevertheless. It is a risky endeavor for the two states, and for the region as a whole.

A territory-swap meet?

Negotiations have been going on for more than seven years. But not in Belgrade and also not in Pristina — the bitter enmity between the two prevented that.

Instead, EU chief diplomat Federica Mogherini has been at the center of talks aimed at making the impossible possible.

Read more: Opinion: Redrawing borders in the Balkans is a recurring, bad idea

The nitty-gritty of the deal is intriguing, and the EU's integral principle of not shifting borders has been flipped on its head. That seems to be precisely the plan: Trade you some of yours for some of mine! It's the antithesis of the longtime core EU ideal of stabilizing multinational societies and not slicing them up.

Kosovo is a de facto new state in Europe with only a small number of EU countries — where fears of ethnic secession also exist — still not officially recognizing it.

This gives Kosovo a powerful negotiating position that they could only have dreamed of10 years ago.

Pristina could be given the Presovo Valley, a predominantly Albanian area in southern Serbia. In return, Serbia would claim northern Kosovo, home to almost 45,000 Serbs.

But the ethnic makeup of the population is not the only factor at play in the territory swap. It is also about resources and cultural monuments. Economic interests motivate both sides, but the presumable loss of Orthodox churches and monasteries also fuels nationalistic sentiment among Serbs. Kosovo — with its legendary battleground, the Kosovo field — is regarded as the "cradle of Serbian culture."

Read more: Scenarios to end Kosovo and Serbia's frozen conflict

Watch video 05:01 Share Kosovo: Independent and divided Send Facebook google+ Whatsapp Tumblr linkedin stumble Digg reddit Newsvine Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/2sXpI Kosovo: Independent and divided

Myths, wars and prehistories

The Kosovo field, the medieval heartland of the Serbs, was lost bit by bit over the course of the Ottoman invasion of southeastern Europe.

The mythic qualities of the Kosovo field have been repeatedly exploited for propaganda, most notably in 1989. Slobodan Milosevic took hold of the then-Yugoslav province of Kosovo 600 years after Serbian forces faced Ottoman troops in the Battle of Kosovo.

It was the beginning of the end of Yugoslavia, and a course of history that would see a quarter of a million people lose their lives.

When the conflict in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina finally subsided, the Kosovo-Serbian conflict escalated in the spring of 1998. The media reported on systematic mass expulsions of Albanians by the Serbs — many of which are documented, others were staged.

A marathon of negotiations followed. When talks broke down, NATO launched a bombing campaign of Serbian targets that lasted almost 80 days. Many civilians died in the intervention. As a quasi-international protectorate, Kosovo experienced a short transition period, which led to the declaration of independence on February 17, 2008 — of Europe's youngest state.

Read more:Ramush Haradinaj: Europe is Kosovo's destiny



1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Traces of war In the late 1990s, the conflict in Kosovo was escalating as tens of thousands of people fled the region. After all efforts at pacifying the region failed, NATO began carrying out air raids on military bases and strategic targets in Serbia on March 24, 1999. Eleven weeks later, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic finally gave in.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Peaceful resistance fails In the mid 1980s, protests began in Kosovo against government attempts to curtail the rights of the Albanian majority. The reprisals worsened in the 1990s. Ibrahim Rugova, leader of the political movement in Kosovo since 1989, tried to make Milosevic change course using peaceful resistance - without success.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Armed guerilla warfare An armed resistance formed in Kosovo. The self-appointed liberation army UCK started a brutal guerrilla war and carried out violent attacks against Serbs and Albanians whom they saw as collaborators. Serbia reacted with retaliatory measures: Houses were torched and shops plundered, as hundreds of thousands fled the region.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Systematic expulsion As time passed, the war became ever more brutal. Serbian forces increasingly attacked civilians with the aim of breaking the UCK's resistance and its support among the population. Many people looked for refuge in the forests. Trains and trucks transport thousands of people to the borders - without passports or other documents which could prove that their home had been in Kosovo.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Last attempt at negotiation Under the auspices of the US, France, the UK, Russia and Germany, the conflicting parties attended a conference in Rambouillet, France in February 1999 with the aim of working out a limited settlement guaranteeing Kosovo's autonomy. Representatives of Kosovo accepted the conditions of the deal, but their Serbian counterparts were not willing to make any concessions. The negotiations failed.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia 'Humanitarian intervention' On March 24, 1999, NATO began bombarding military and strategic targets in Serbia and Kosovo in order to stop the violence against Albanians. Germany joined the military action, known as Operation Allied Force. It was NATO's first war in its 50-year history - and that without the official backing of the UN Security Council. Russia sharply condemned the intervention.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Infrastructure destroyed Next to military installations, NATO also attacked transportation networks such as railroad tracks and bridges. During the following 79 days and nights, the alliance carried out more than 37,000 operations with 20,000 rockets and bombs striking Serbian territory and killing countless civilians - what NATO referred to as "collateral damage."

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Poison clouds over Pancevo Industrial sites were also among the targets. NATO bombs hit chemical plants and a fertilizer factory in the town of Pancevo near the capital, Belgrade. Huge amounts of toxic substances made their way into rivers, soil and the air, with grave health consequences for the local population. Serbia accused NATO of having used depleted uranium ammunition, as well as cluster and fragmentation bombs.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia War against war propaganda In order to deprive Slobodan Milosevic of his most important propaganda tool, NATO decided to attack Serbia's public television station in Belgrade. The Serbian government, although told of the attack in advance, withheld the information from the public. Sixteen people lost their lives in the bombing.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Off target In Kosovo, NATO bombs inadvertently hit a group of Albanian refugees, killing an estimated 80 people. More "collateral damage" occurred when NATO bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing four people. The incident led to a severe diplomatic crisis between Beijing and Washington.

1999: NATO intervention against Serbia Horrific outcome In early June, communications out of Belgrade showed that Milosevic was finally willing to make concessions. NATO brought an end to its raids on June 19. During the air strikes, thousands of people were killed, 860,000 refugees were displaced and Serbia's economy and infrastructure were largely destroyed. Kosovo was placed under the administration of the United Nations. Author: Sonila Sand / ad



Potentially risky consequences

If there were an exchange of territory between Serbia and Kosovo, it might open Pandora's box in the Balkans states — at least legally. Other countries in the region might see similar debates reignited. How such an event might play out in the context of Bosnia and Herzegovina remains the most difficult part to predict.

Serbian hardliners in the Republika Srpska have never buried their plans to accede to Serbia; such ambitions have only ever temporarily been put aside. The same applies to Croatian nationalists in West Herzegovina who would pledge sovereignty to Croatia in a heartbeat. Macedonia and Montenegro are also multi-ethnic states.

Paradoxically, the politically and legally controversial trading of land brings both states closer to the EU. Both are among the six Western Balkan countries seeking to join the bloc in the mid-term, but still have to prove themselves.

The EU's potential inclusion of the Western Balkan states is a divisive issue. French President Emmanuel Macron wants to establish a two-speed Europe of the "forward-looking," and has his foot firmly on the brakes when it comes to enlargement. Others are keener to allow "problem cases" into the fold before they fall into the arms of China, Turkey or Russia.

Watch video 01:08 Share EU holds accession talks with Western Balkans Send Facebook google+ Whatsapp Tumblr linkedin stumble Digg reddit Newsvine Permalink https://p.dw.com/p/317qT EU holds accession talks with Western Balkans

Opponents and proponents

The list of supporters and opponents of the intricate plan is long — on both sides. Donald Trump's security adviser John Bolton is now said to have given his blessing to the deal. How long that approving stance lasts is, however, irrelevant given Europe's apparent lack of interest in new US foreign policies.

The German government, and Chancellor Angela Merkel in particular, is cautious. As is elder statesmen Carl Bildt, the former EU special envoy to Yugoslavia, and Wolfgang Ischinger, a key figure in the Dayton Peace Accord.

The former top Balkan expert and right-hand man of Richard Holbrooke in Bosnia, James W. Pardew, is also firmly opposed to the Kosovar-Serb border changes. Other critics include Christian Schwarz-Schilling, a onetime minister in Helmut Kohl's cabinet and the EU High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2006 and 2007, as well as his British predecessor in the role, Paddy Ashdown.

But the political showdown is on. On September 9, Serbia's President Aleksandar Vucic intends to deliver the "greatest speech of his life" in front of his compatriots at a rally in Mitrovica, Kosovo.

Vucic's exchange offer in the lion's den is also about the metamorphosis of a nationalist hawk into an EU-worthy European. Serbia wants to join the Brussels club — that is its priority. The grief over the partial loss of the "cradle of Serbia" is likely to be limited in Belgrade.