Western
countries continue to push persistently for the adoption of the
Ahtisaari plan for Kosovo. Russia’s initiative to send a UN Security
Council mission to the province was no more than a temporary and
tactical success of Moscow. The possibility of Kosovo’s independence
remains on the agenda, and the Western community appears to be
concentrating its efforts in this direction. Condoleezza Rice was
expected to attempt to coerce Russia into accepting the “final
resolution” on the Kosovo problem before the end of May during her May
14-15 Moscow visit, so as to prevent Russia from vetoing the UN
Security Council Resolution granting independence to Kosovo.
Washington is in a hurry. In this context, all of the previous
steps taken by international organizations, including the UN Security
Council Resolution 1244, which has been adopted in 1999 and declared
Kosovo an inseparable part of Yugoslavia (Serbia), merely seem to
disguise the many-years-long process of putting to practice a plan to
cut off Kosovo from Serbia and to expel the Serb population from the
province. Currently, we witness a phase of the plan’s implementation.
The Moscow leadership is expected to “convince” the Serbs as former
Russian PM V. Chernomyrdin has done in the past.
At the same time, Western politicians keep telling that the
Kosovo independence will by no means set a precedent for the
unrecognized post-Soviet Republics. It is hard to say whether the
notion is a case of a self-hypnosis or of a downright cheat. Clearly,
the resolution on Kosovo, proposed by Washington, will require an open
demonstration of a total disregard for the international law, and will
inevitably have a long-term effect on the entire international legal
framework.
The contours of the Kosovo independence are getting
increasingly obvious, and the West has to explain why residents of
South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transdnistria, Karabakh, or of a number of
cultural and historical regions of the “old” Europe (the May 3 triumph
of Scotch nationalists sends a clear message) are not allowed to get
what Albanian terrorists and drug dealers have.
Alla Yaz’kova writes: “A surge of crime was all that Europe got
from the Kosovo conflict. There is nothing in Kosovo except for drug
trafficking and other illegal businesses. Perhaps, the reason why the
US supports the plan is that some 500,000 Albanians reside in it, and
this diaspora has an influential lobby in the US Congress”. But this is
no news. We no longer hear the old promises that both Albanians and
Serbs will benefit in case Kosovo is recognized, since, allegedly, this
will open for them the way to Europe, where they will eventually live
in peace and happiness in the common European home.
It must be admitted that, by backing the current Pristina
authorities, the supranational Brussels organizations, together with
the US, prepare the old Europe for a surge of “drug trafficking and
other illegal businesses”, as Mrs. Yaz’kova now realizes. Previously,
she had no doubts concerning the “conditional independence” of Kosovo:
“… what is conditional independence? Chiefly, it means not being a
subject of the international law – that is, Kosovo will not be
represented in the UN as an independent country, which will limit
dramatically its potential to carry out international activities… As
for the complete independence, Kosovo will be able to gain it only upon
joining the EU together with other West-Balkan countries including
Serbia.”1 Nothing of the kind is going to happen!
The post-Soviet states which project the developments around
this Serbian province on their own unsettled ethnic conflicts are
waiting for the resolution of the Kosovo problem with great concern.
Recently, Moscow was visited for consultations by Araz Azimov,
Azerbaijan’s Deputy Foreign Minister. In a lecture given at the Moscow
Institute of Foreign Relations he said: “Azerbaijan has concerns
related to the Kosovo problem. Naturally we are worried both by the
geopolitical divorce with Serbia in the middle of Europe and by certain
tendencies originating from the Ahtisaari plan. However, from my point
of view, the Ahtisaari plan is gradually dying. I hope that many of the
EU members understand that a great mistake is made or is proposed to be
made by a plan of a de facto stimulation of separatism, since the
perspective of Kosovo’s joining the EU and of a EU patronage over
Kosovo, inherent in the Ahtisaari plan, can foster likewise tendencies
in other contexts. Naturally, we cannot but worry about this… ”
Any direct analogies between Kosovo and Karabakh, which are
commonplace in papers dealing with the “unrecognized states” issue, are
entirely artificial, but in a number of respects juxtaposition is
inevitable. For example, the tragedy of the Serbian historical and
cultural heritage in Kosovo makes one recall the destruction of the
Armenian landmarks in the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic. Similarly,
the Armenians in Karabakh avoided the destiny of the Krajna and Kosovo
Serbs solely because they had protected their right to live freely on
their lands in an armed conflict …
Nevertheless, nothing good can be expected from searches for
analogies which every side still sees in a different light. What is
necessary is a new complex approach to the complicated problem of the
“unrecognized”. The Russian expert community has suggested a number of
times that the principle of not using force, as well as of not
threatening to use it, must be adopted as a basic one in resolving
conflicts, and that a universal scale of criteria for recognizing or
not recognizing specific state and quasi-state formations must be
developed2. Any attempts to resolve problems of unrecognized
states by force and rough political pressure, or using unilateralist
politically-motivated (non-legal) arguments, have no future.
What will Condoleezza Rice be told about this in Moscow?
D. Sedov, a political writer, wrote in a paper published at the site of the Strategic Culture Foundation:
“It is time for Moscow to decide on its position on self-proclaimed
states. The future of these territories depends largely on Moscow’s
ability to take decisive steps. Nobody doubts that everything actually
depends on Moscow… In case we choose not to accept the option proposed
by the US and to assert that Kosovo sets a precedent, a more open and
active position will be needed… However, this interpretation is flawed.
Kosovo absolutely cannot be compared with the problematic territories
of the post-Soviet space… Today’s Kosovo is nothing but a criminal
enclave led by terrorists and murderers… Kosovo “politicians” are
bandits hired by the US in order to turn the territory into a US ground
aircraft carrier. This was the main objective of the offensive against
Yugoslavia, and this was why they needed to make Kosovo independent
from Belgrade… The US, inspired by the chimerical goal of the global
dominance, will soon crack down on Iran. A new global drama will begin.
And what about us – shall we watch the developments from a distance
even in the areas crucial to Russia’s national interests – in
Transdnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and so on?”
_________________
1 Research Notes of the Eastern Europe Institute. Issue 1. Unrecognized States. P. 56.
2 V. Kazimirov. The “Political Atlas” of Conflicts and the Two Helsinki Principles. http//www.regnum.ru/news/814011.html
http://en.fondsk.ru/print.php?id=736
Powered by ScribeFire.
