There is great danger in Kosovo.
The danger is not just a physical one, however fundamental that danger is. Because there has been no major eruption of violence for about two years, many who do not keep a close eye on the situation in the troubled territory may believe that the status quo is an enabling environment for peace. This view is mistaken. None of the profound issues within Kosovo have been solved. The lid is being held on the situation by the international community. While a form of peace is being maintained by foreign military and police forces, a range of issues are quietly festering. An obvious issue is that of the future status of Kosovo. Another is the question of the rights of ethnic minorities within the territory. Further, the situations with regard to under-development and poverty, and human rights, may have worsened rather than improved, notwithstanding the holding action and the monitoring by the international community.
There can be no question that there is a certain urgency to resolving the question of the future status of Kosovo. Yet, as the opening episodes of the current process of consultations and negotiations have shown, there can be no prospect of the situation ever becoming less complex. Nor is the situation assisted by the fact that the two principal parties - those connected to the Serbian community, and the Albanian ethnic majority in Kosovo - have mutually exclusive positions. Serbia has vowed never to sign off on independence for Kosovo; the Albanian Kosovars will accept nothing less.
These are what may be termed the internal dangers for Kosovo; that a continuation of the status quo, or failure of the negotiations process, will unleash a new round of violence from which no victors may emerge.
Yet, there is a broader issue, and a broader danger. The future of Europe is linked to the future of Kosovo, and similarly troubled territories. Within the current process of political and diplomatic engagements, it may reasonably be expected that the European Union should play a leading role. This is a major challenge to the EU, and raises, in a way different to the debate about EU expansion, the deeper question about “what kind of Europe?” The parameters that have applied to the process of EU expansion thus far, including the EU’s engagements with Bulgaria and Romania, cannot be applied in the same way. The most constructive level of engagement possible on the part of the EU will be required to ensure a European future for Kosovo. If it is accepted that the EU accepts as members those states that are functioning according to the criteria for accession, a special effort will be required to ensure a European future for the people of Kosovo, who are and always will be Europeans in the geographical sense, whatever the outcome of the status talks.
What role can there, and should there, be for Bulgaria? This country thus far has been careful to emphasise that it cannot and will not play the role of mediator, and nor will it put forward a solution that is separate to that emerging from the process in which the United Nations and the European Union, among others, are engaged. However, if it is true that Bulgaria is viewed as a good neighbour both by those in Belgrade and in Pristina, while being viewed as a partner of European leaders in Brussels, Bulgaria can do much to keep alive the rounds of negotiations. As much diplomatic energy as is available should be dedicated to this. To help keep the process on track, including by fully supporting efforts by the UN, EU and the US to keep the parties at the negotiating table and steering them towards genuine progress, would be fully justified, for the sake of all the people of Kosovo, for the Balkans and the South East European region, and for Europe as a whole.
No comments:
Post a Comment