U.S. takes wrong tack with Kosovo

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_8427117

SAN JOSE MERCURY-NEWS (USA)

OPINION

U.S. takes wrong tack with Kosovo
By Mark Kramer

Article Launched: 03/02/2008 01:38:59 AM PST

Kosovo's decision to declare independence was a bad idea. The U.S. decision
to recognize it was worse - and not because it prompted a crowd of angry
Serbs to torch the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade.

Even if the pint-size chunk of the Balkans does not degenerate into failed
statehood like Sudan or Somalia, it almost certainly will remain in its
current perilous condition and become a European bastion of criminality and
human trafficking. Recognizing Kosovo also sends a bizarre message to
separatist movements around the world: If you resort to violence, the West
might support you; if you're peaceful, you haven't got a prayer.

That was certainly the message to Ibrahim Rugova and his Democratic League
of Kosovo.

Rugova, a former professor of literature who used to hand out stones from
his rock collection to visiting dignitaries (the more he liked you, the
better the rock), formed his movement in late 1989 to offer peaceful
resistance to Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic had rescinded
Kosovo's autonomy and clamped down on its majority Albanian population as
part of his murderous plan to carve a "Greater Serbia" from the ashes of the
former Yugoslavia. But for nearly a decade, Rugova received no support from
Western countries, which largely ignored the region. The Dayton Agreement of
1995, ending the bloody war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, made no mention of
Kosovo.

Not until the Albanian-run Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) came on the
scene in 1997 with a guerrilla campaign and terrorist attacks against
Serbian troops and civilians did the Clinton administration begin to pay
attention to Kosovo, inadvertently rewarding the KLA and its terrorist
violence. The KLA deliberately sought to provoke Serbian reprisals, and
Milosevic, with his usual obtuse brutality, readily obliged.
As the fighting escalated, the United States and other NATO countries agreed
to take military action to halt Milosevic's campaign of ethnic cleansing.
But instead of dispatching ground troops, President Clinton decided to rely
solely on air power. The KLA in effect became NATO's boots on the ground. So
when Milosevic agreed in June 1999 to withdraw Serbian forces from Kosovo,
the KLA, empowered by NATO's pixie dust, filled the vacuum. For the next 15
months, the KLA-led government alienated most of the 2.5 million people in
Kosovo - Albanians and Serbs alike - by engaging in violence, extortion and
other abuses, including widespread drug- and gun-running.

In October 2000, the situation finally seemed to improve when protesters
across Serbia overthrew Milosevic, and Rugova's party won overwhelmingly in
Kosovo's parliamentary elections, far eclipsing the KLA and paving the way
for Rugova's emergence as president. Rugova sought close ties with the
United States, and for a while U.S. officials provided him with valuable
economic and diplomatic support.

But the KLA refused to disappear and sought to weaken Rugova's position by
provoking violence against the region's Serb minority, roughly 10 percent of
the population. The United States, preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan,
mostly stood by and allowed the KLA to re-emerge through intimidation and
force.

Then in January 2006, Rugova died of lung cancer. And in elections last
November, the KLA regained power, seeming just as intolerant as ever. The
new prime minister, Hashim Thaci, who hid out in the woods with Albanian
guerrillas in the late 1990s, not only was involved in terrorist acts as a
KLA leader but is also known for his ruthlessness.

So why, out of all the groups in the world that are seeking independence
(the Tibetans, the Kurds, the Tamils and others), do the Albanian Kosovars
deserve to be singled out and accorded this prize?

Apparently, in the wake of last year's elections, many Western leaders
feared that violence might erupt in Kosovo unless independence was granted
soon. As such, Washington's recognition of the newly named Kosova once again
gives the impression that the Kosovars are being rewarded solely because
they might otherwise turn violent. Other independence-minded minorities will
realize that if they rely on peaceful tactics, they will risk being ignored.

The poisonous impact of this whole episode on Serbian politics was
underscored by the embassy attack in Belgrade. Although moderate Serb
politicians, including President Boris Tadic, swiftly condemned the
violence, even they now feel compelled to emphasize nationalist themes.
Those who spearheaded the peaceful overthrow of Milosevic's murderous regime
are now in danger of being accused of facilitating the country's
dismemberment. And resentment over the forced relinquishment of Kosovo is
bound to simmer for many years and stoke regional tension.

Another risk is that Kosova, the poorest region in Europe, will become a
failed state and possibly a terrorist haven. Its economy would have stopped
functioning long ago without life support from the United Nations, the
European Union and the United States. Even if Kosovar officials were
economic wizards, they would have a hard time meeting popular expectations,
which have soared with independence. Moreover, the ethnic divide will likely
intensify. The prospect of further violent clashes between Serbs and
Albanians seems all too real, and Thaci's government may respond with ethnic
cleansing.

Having recognized Kosova's independence with almost no public debate,
Washington and its friends in Western Europe should be on their guard. Be
careful what you wish for.

MARK KRAMER is director of Harvard University's Cold War Studies Program and
a senior fellow of Harvard's Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies.
He wrote this article for the Washington Post.