Speaking about the recent meeting of representatives of non-governmental organizations, opposition parties and experts from Serbia, on one hand, and moderate representatives of Kosovo Albanians, on the other, which took place in Paris, Pesic emphasized that even these supposedly moderate groups found very little common ground. The two sides only managed to agree that all problems must be resolved peacefully and that European Institutions, so far overshadowed by the USA, should assume the key role in the solution of the Kosovo crisis.
According to Pesic, minority problems can be solved in only two ways: either the borders of the existing states should be respected and corresponding institutions for the solution of minority problems developed within them, or the borders should be changed such that new Balkan ethno-states have only small ethnic minorities and thus can rule over them more easily. From the beginning of the Yugoslav crisis, reminded Pesic, the Civic Association of Serbia fought for the respect of the territorial integrity of new national states, above all Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina, believing that minority questions can be successfully resolved through so-called internal self determination.
"Today, the borders in Europe have become fixed, but also very transparent," emphasized Pesic adding that every change of borders leads to a chain reaction and causes new clashes. "If that principle is violated once, then the other borders will not be respected. In that case, why should the integrity of Kosovo be respected [if that of Serbia isn't]?" emphasized Pesic.
The presentation of a theoretical model that explains (im)possibility of negotiations between certain ethnic groups about the solution of minority problems received a lot of attention. Drawing, as she said, from the analyses by contemporary sociologists Brubecker and Burdieux [the Serb version of Serbocroatian uses phonetic spelling for foreign names, so that the spelling of these names is only approximate], Pesic offered a new dynamic model for the understanding of inter-ethnic conflicts. Pesic calls the model the model of triangles. According to the model, during the change of configuration of a certain region, three national policies can be identified and they make up a triangle with a certain type of dynamic. One of the policies is the policy of an ethnic minority; this policy can, but does not have to, be clearly defined. It can range from moderate, when a minority demands to be publicly recognized and to be given the rights to education, press, cultural institutions, all the way to the extreme policy, when a minority demands secession.
Another sort of national policy is led by countries where the ethnic minority lives, in their attempts to turn themselves into nation states. These states have a strong desire to confirm themselves as national states, as for example Poland between the two wars and Croatia today.
The third national policy is usually called the policy of the external homeland. It can also range from the lack of interest for the ethnic brethren in other countries to the integration of all members of the same ethno-nation in a single state, as was attempted by Serbia.
The choice of moderate or extreme policy depends on the situation that is defined through the interaction of the three national policies. In each of these three fields there are political battles about who should represent national interests in each one of them. The outcome of these battles is strongly influenced by the policy in the remaining two fields of the mentioned triangle.
Pesic emphasizes that this triadic model seems much more appropriate for the interpretation of events in this region than usually accepted dual model. In the former Yugoslavia, it is possible to identify four such magic triangles. The first one is made up from Croatia, Serbia and Serb minority in Croatia. In each one of the fields there were different political options which fought to represent national interest, but in each field the extremists with maximalist demands eventually won. This led to a bloody conclusion. Bosnia represents a second magic triangle.
Serbia, Albania and the Albanian minority constitute a third triangle. This triangle will most likely be resolved as the previous two. "As a rule, the proposals seek that a community be given enough statehood elements to represent a state within a state; that is why the term entity is used for such a unit. It can be predicted that Kosovo will become some sort of an entity in order to avoid the use of the terms autonomy or republic and thus satisfy the Serb side," predicts Pesic. However, the break-up of the former Yugoslavia will not end there, believes Pesic, but will continue in Macedonia, with the activation of the fourth triangle.
Pesic concluded by emphasizing that according to the presented theory, this scenario is not unavoidable, since a lot depends on the kind of policy in each one of the fields. Namely, there is always a chance that a moderate policy will turn into extreme and the other way round. Thus the creation of a national program is a very complex problem, although that fact is usually ignored by the nationalists, asserts Pesic.