World Tribune.com


Kosovo’s bid for freedom and why Beijing and Moscow care


See the John Metzler archive

By John Metzler
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM

Wednesday, April 4, 2007

UNITED NATIONS — Presenting a refreshingly realistic report on the future of Kosovo, UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari, a former Finnish president, stated emphatically that independence remains “the only viable option” for the ethnically divided region. “The time has come to resolve Kosovo’s status…I have come to the conclusion that the only viable option for Kosovo is independence,” he implored. His proposal would end the political limbo of the past eight years in which the majority Albanian ethnic inhabitants languished. At the same time the plan will need final approval by the UN Security Council which holds the key to either political freedom or possibly renewed conflict.

In 1999 the Kosovo crisis erupted into yet another Balkan war between the majority Albanians and the Serbs. A last ditch effort by Belgrade to hold onto and ethnically empty the disputed province the old-fashioned way triggered regional strife. Serbia’s Milosevic regime, combining a toxic mix of Marxism, megalomania and high-octane nationalism tragically led to ethnic cleansing. Indeed the American bombing of Serbia, later followed by NATO intervention stopped the Serbs, but the Security Council then stopped the clock. For the past eight years the region has been administered by the UN, protected by NATO troops, is legally part of Serbia, and thus remains mired in a political imbroglio over its future.

Interminable political discussion between the Albanians (95% of the population) and the Serbs (5%) bedevil compromise. An exasperated Ahtisaari stressed “It is my firm view that the negotiations potential to produce any mutually agreeable outcome on Kosovo’s status is exhausted. No amount of additional talks, whatever the format, will overcome this impasse.” He added, “Almost eight years have passed since the Security Council adopted resolution 1244 (1999) and Kosovo’s current state of limbo cannot continue.”

Kosovo’s formal reintegration into Serbia is not a viable option given what the report outlines of “a history of enmity and mistrust.” The UN mission governed both communities separately. Ahtisaari states clearly “Independence is the only option for a politically stable and economically viable Kosovo.” Significantly he stresses the importance of security for minority communities, decentralization and protection for the Serbian Orthodox Church. Not only does the plan envisage a democratic state, but would enshrine religious freedom, but importantly physical protection of historic and treasured Christian Orthodox churches and monasteries within Kosovo.

The European Union would supervise Kosovo for an initial period. Still the Belgrade government fails to be impressed. Serbia’s Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to deride the plan.

Despite the seemingly irrefutable logic of Kosovo’s case, there remain a number of realpolitik roadblocks, which still could stall this Balkan region from attaining its rightful self-determination. The Russians support the Serb position and thus are not likely to back any Security Council resolution allowing for Kosovo independence. Whether they will use their damning diplomatic veto remain a threat. Thus Russia may play spoiler well beyond the traditional historic and religious links between Moscow and Belgrade.

More than supporting the shrinking rump of ex-Yugoslavia, Russia remains more concerned over the precedent which a breakaway province will have on its own “big picture.” Specifically Kosovo may be yet another independent county which spun-off from former Yugoslavia (there are five already the most recent being Montenegro last year!). This poses a mortal blow to Serbia and a warning to Russia. The former Soviet Union having endured the geopolitical splits of (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan etc) still faces separatism from a gaggle of stans including Islamic Chechnya, Dagestan etc. Though the Kosovar Muslims are mostly quite secular, in a Balkan climate it’s very easy to morph any issue into a conspiracy, a hidden threat and a regional crisis.

In Vladimir Putin’s viewpoint, a breakaway Kosovo could set in train another set of events in Russia’s oil rich underbelly which the Kremlin can’t afford politically or economically. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov posed the rhetorical question, “If we imagine a situation in which Kosovo achieves independence, then other people, people living in regions not recognized, will ask us ‘ are we not as good as them?”

Beijing too has a curious interest in Kosovo too. The Marxist mandarins of the People’s Republic of China historically fear what they define “separatism” from Tibet to Taiwan; restive regions anywhere set a political precedent which can reverberate to the frontiers of the Middle Kingdom. Moreover Beijing holds a particular bitter memory concerning Kosovo. During Bill Clinton’s bombing of Serbia in 1999, the Chinese Embassy was hit by an American missile. Deaths, loss of face, and a bitter political row ensued with Washington. Among other things, the PRC may wish to use its Security Council veto as a backhanded “payback” to the United States.

Primarily both Putin’s Russia and the People’s Republic of China perceive independence for Kosovo in the context of triggering troubles within their own brittle frontiers. Still Ahtisaari, advised, “Kosovo’s status must be urgently resolved. Concluding this last episode in the disillusion of the former Yugoslavia will allow the region to begin a new chapter in its history—one that is based upon peace, stability and prosperity for all.” One hopes others see it that way.


John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.