KOSOVO
Squaring off for the wrong fight
Published: November 8, 2007
It's almost nine years since NATO air strikes
freed Kosovar Albanians from Serbian control, yet the official status of the
province is still undecided. A deadline of Dec. 10 has been set for the
diplomatic process to deliver. It's expected to fail, after which Kosovo's
semi-autonomous government says it will make a unilateral declaration of
independence.
While Kosovo was a defining issue of post-Cold
War global leadership, there is now a gaping silence from all global powers -
except Russia - on an acceptable way forward. Kosovo's two million citizens
interpret this as a signal that the United States and much of Europe would
support its independence.
Kosovo, therefore, is in danger of falling victim
to the type of opaque diplomacy that has been behind some of the gravest global
conflicts. One of the more recent is Saddam Hussein's belief that the United
States would not object to Iraq's 1991 invasion of Kuwait.
Too much is at stake for international policy to
be misread again. The West must declare
clearly what it will or will not do if Kosovo declares independence, and it
must avoid enveloping Kosovo in a clash with Russi
Since the NATO intervention in 1999, the United
Nations has administered Kosovo. Stability remains underwritten by a
16,000-strong international force, and apart from a surge of anti-Serb unrest
in 2004 and sporadic ethnic attacks, Kosovo is seen as an intervention success
story.
In January, the UN special envoy, Martti
Ahtisaari, put forward proposals that would allow Kosovo official separation
from Serbia. He deliberately avoided using words such as
"independence" or "sovereignty." The new nation would be
monitored by the European Union and the international military force would
stay. In many respects, it would be similar to the status quo.
Serbia rejected the proposals, saying it would never
accept Kosovo's separation. Russia gave this its full support.
Serbia insists that it should not be punished for
the atrocities of a former dictator. The brutality of the 1990s was carried out
under the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, they say; Serbia is now a democracy and
the issue should end there.
Russia's blunt declaration, however, has taken
the question of Kosovo's status to a higher level. What began as a humanitarian
mission to stop ethnic-cleansing has become part of a new balance of power in
Europe. Kosovo's future is linked to the Czech and Polish missile
defense-shield dispute, energy supplies, and a basket of issues on which a
revitalized Kremlin is testing the will of the European Union and the United
States.
Should Kosovo declare independence, it would
almost certainly not be recognized by the UN because of a veto by Russia in the
Security Council. The entire EU is unlikely to accept Kosovo's independence
because of opposition from governments in Greece, Cyprus, Romania and others.
Without UN or EU recognition, the new Kosovo might have less legitimacy than
the present one.
Opinion polls have found that more and more Serbs
are questioning where their future lies. At present, they are split 50-50
between Russia and the EU. But, increasingly, Moscow is seen to be delivering
more than Brussels, particularly by way of security and a sense of belonging.
A new illegal Serb militia group is reported to
be mobilizing to protect Kosovo's 100,000 Serbs, should independence be
declared. It calls itself Tsar Lazar after the hero of an epic Serbian poem
about reclaiming Kosovo. In Kosovo itself, the banned Albanian National Army
recruits members to fight the Serb militia. What's new is that one of these
insurgent groups believes their ultimate backer is Moscow, and the other
Washington.
Ironically though, both Kosovo and Serbia are
embryonic democracies, with an immediate goal to join the EU. That alone would
make sovereignty increasingly irrelevant.
Kosovo's argument that it cannot clear the litter
and fix the roads without independence is nonsense. It is, in essence, facing
the choice of whether it wants to resemble the bloodied Palestinian territories
or glittering Taiwan.
Serbia, too, must decide whether it wants to end
up as a client state of an authoritarian Russia or sign on to the democratic
values entrenched within the European Union.
It is time for politicians in both Serbia and
Kosovo to lead their people away from the contentious issue of independence.
The West must also send an unequivocal message that the way forward is to
deliver not nationalistic symbolism but good governance.
The legitimacy of both Serbia and Kosovo will
come not from their ability to protect historical legends, but to provide
health, education and a thriving economy for their citizens.
Humphrey Hawksley is a BBC correspondent and
the author, most recently, of "The History Book." Reprinted with
permission from YaleGlobal.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/08/opinion/edhumph.php
Powered by ScribeFire.
