In response to pressure on Serbs in Kosovo, Serbia's president mentions altering the Ibar River's course, but experts warn it's an unrealistic and long-term endeavor with serious consequences.
Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić has once again escalated his rhetoric against Pristina, announcing that changing the course of the Ibar River could be one of the responses to pressure on the Serbian community in Kosovo. His words, as reported by Deutsche Welle and published by Tportal, were: "we will see what the Albanians will do and how they will behave."
The Ibar-Lepenac water system is of strategic importance for Kosovo's water supply, irrigation, and energy production. The Ibar originates in Montenegro, partially flows through Serbia, and at the border with Kosovo fills Lake Gazivode, which stretches across both countries. The river then passes through Kosovo and central Serbia before flowing into the West Morava.
Vučić announced that he has initiated the formation of a working group of engineers and construction experts to examine the possibility of diverting the Ibar. He believes Serbia has the sovereign right to undertake such a project within its borders.
Experts in Serbia, however, warn that this would be a massive and long-term project. Traversing rocky and mountainous terrain would require enormous investments, the construction of tunnels and dams, and the environmental consequences for the entire basin could be severe.
Retired professor of hydraulic engineering and hydrology Jovan Despotović told FoNet that Vučić's announcements about changing the Ibar's course are "like sleepwalking, and that it's a project that is impossible to carry out in a short time without demolishing hills and mountains, and it's out of the question even under European regulations."
The idea of diverting the Ibar is not new. It first appeared in 1985, during the drafting of the SANU Memorandum, which is why it is often associated with the political context of that period. The plan was eventually abandoned.
Dušan Janjić, president of the Governing Board of the Forum for Ethnic Relations, links Vučić's announcement precisely to that time. He told Deutsche Welle: "You can expect anything from Vučić, but I didn't expect him to regress to 1983-1985, when Serbian nationalists began their fantasies. By changing the Ibar's course, they wanted to write off Kosovo, and this shows they never wanted to deal with Kosovo except at the level of promises and slogans about Kosovo as the heart of Serbia. I also see this as his attempt to evade responsibility for everything he has done regarding Kosovo-and perhaps still does-and to gain an alibi in that political clamor and say: see, nothing more could have been done."
Janjić adds that he is particularly concerned that "objectively, this is not a rational project. It's not a project that solves any problem; rather, it's a small ideological-propaganda project-if we can even call it that-which serves to create even more chaos and noise in the region, so people would think there's no salvation without you and that there will be a flood."
Diverting the Ibar would not only affect Albanians but also the Serbian community in Kosovo. Janjić believes the threat itself is hardly feasible.
"The threat to harm Albanians is an empty story, because, for instance, the Danube-Tisa-Danube canal was built over 20 years in a far more organized and wealthier state, and for the Ibar, 50 years would be needed. So Vučić will hardly be able to see Albanians suffer, but all other residents of Kosovo are being harmed. What is already definitively damaged is the image of Serbia and its leadership. Because when you come out with such statements, everyone will wonder if this is a partner to work with," Janjić warns.
Commenting on the position of Kosovo Serbs, Janjić assesses that "the position of the Serbian community on the ground is finished with the monopoly of the Serbian List. That position is cemented by the social corruption of active political actors among Serbs. There is no multi-party system in that community, and unfortunately, the European Union (EU) has also helped to break that down. Democracy and a multi-party system simply were not a topic of normalization."
Vučić's proposal has drawn criticism within Serbia itself. Zdravko Ponoš, leader of the Serbia Center (SRCE) party, said that "while Vučić practices becoming Moses, he should first try to solve the sewage problem in Borča."
Janjić believes the comparison with Sisyphus is more appropriate. "I think this truly is an epic dimension of these appearances during the election campaign, but it also seems to me that here we are dealing more with the myth of Sisyphus. That's why the entire foreign policy is now engaged to cushion everything happening on the domestic front in order to preserve power. His problem is that he lacks the strength to prevent the rock from crushing him," Janjić concludes for DW.
