Negotiating for peace in Kosovo

Article published Aug 20, 2007



Negotiating for peace in Kosovo

August 20, 2007

Dan Burton - In coming weeks, an international confrontation is likely
to occur among the United States, the European Union, and Russia over
an issue most Americans have long since forgotten: Kosovo, where a few
hundred Americans remain deployed as part of a NATO force protecting a
shaky interim peace that ended the 1999 U.S.-led intervention.


For most Americans this obscure Serbian province, with its
mainly Albanian Muslim population and its hundreds of Serbian Christian
churches and monasteries, may be a little-remembered footnote to the
breakup of Yugoslavia. However, now is the time for clear thinking
about next steps if Kosovo is to avoid revisiting its history as a
hotbed of regional instability and violence.


The international mission in Kosovo for the last eight years
has not met its original goals regarding establishment of an open,
multiethnic and multireligious society. True, there has been no return
to large-scale fighting. But remaining Christian Serbs are confined to
NATO-protected enclaves for fear of endemic Muslim Albanian violence. A
quarter of a million expellees — some two-thirds of the Serbs, Roma,
Croats, and all the Jews — still cannot return safely to their homes.
More than 150 Christian holy sites have been burned, blown up or
desecrated. Organized crime is rampant, with allegations of corruption
reaching into the upper levels of the U.N.-supervised local
administration and unemployment outside these criminal elements remains
more than 50 percent.


Even Albanian officials have expressed concern at the growth
of radical Wahhabist influence, and the reality of a dangerously
segregated society, as hundreds of Saudi-financed mosques have sprung
up to replace the destroyed churches.


Although the situation on the ground in Kosovo has been a case
study in U.N. mismanagement, there is no question of Kosovo's legal
status as part of Serbia. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, which
ended the 1999 war, reaffirmed Serbia's territorial integrity and
sovereignty while calling for substantial autonomy and self-government
for Kosovo within Serbia.


But against this clear standard for Kosovo's future, the U.S.
State Department has insisted the only possible solution for Kosovo is
not autonomy, but independence — even though Serbia refuses to give up
15 percent of its territory. Even worse, during his recent trip to
Albania, President Bush suggested that if a Russian veto blocks any new
Security Council Resolution to separate Kosovo from Serbia, the U.S.
might take the lead in recognizing a unilateral declaration of Kosovo
independence with no legitimate claim of authority at all. Within
Europe itself there are growing misgivings and decisions about this
course.


This is a terrible idea. To start with, our policy is in
contravention of international laws and will create a dangerous
precedent. Also, there is no reason to suppose an independent Kosovo
would be a viable state, either economically or politically. Terrorist
and organized crime influences, already rampant in Kosovo, would be
granted a consolidated haven for their operations. Independence would
likely be followed by renewed anti-Serb attacks, at least against the
smaller enclaves, if not against Northern Mitrovica, where most of the
remaining Serbs enjoy relative security. Unrest in neighboring
Albanian-dominated areas of southern Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia,
even Greece, could be reignited.


Perhaps most damaging, an imposed separation of Kosovo from
Serbia would send a message to other trouble-spots, not just in the
Balkans, that state borders are up for grabs.


The American relationship with Serbia would suffer badly if we
insist on inflicting on a democratic country of 10 million people an
offense they cannot accept and never will forget. An imposed separation
of Kosovo, the cradle of Serbia's national and spiritual life, would
alienate Serbs of all political stripes and could very well result in
the implosion of Serbian democracy, with incalculable negative
consequences. In short, an imposed independence of Kosovo could set the
region back another decade.


As an original cosponsor of a House resolution calling for the
U.S. to support a mutually agreed solution for the future status of
Kosovo and reject an imposed solution, I believe we can no longer
proceed on a policy that is trapped in assumptions formed years ago.
Instead of an imposed preconceived outcome, any viable solution for
Kosovo must result from give-and-take negotiations between Serbia and
the Kosovo Albanians, balancing Serbia's legitimate concern for its
sovereignty and the Albanians' legitimate right of self-governance.


It must be consistent with accepted international principles,
including guarantees of both the territorial integrity of states as
well as of human rights and self-determination. The U.S., the U.N., the
European Union, Russia, or any other interested actor must not impose a
solution on either of the parties, or bow to threats of violence if one
of the parties' demands is not met.


As with any genuine negotiation, the eventual outcome cannot
be foreseen with certainty. However, it is certain that unless we hit
the reset button and reevaluate the situation, Kosovo may once again
become a trouble-spot requiring American and NATO attention at a time
we can least afford it. As Kosovo re-emerges from years of obscurity,
we neednow to take another serious look at America's options and
long-term interests. As I stated before, the solution must come from
negotiations between Serbia and Kosovo Albanians.


Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, is ranking member of the U.S.
House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western
Hemisphere and serves on the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia
and the Pacific.


http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070820/COMMENTARY/108200019/1012&template=printart

Powered by ScribeFire.