Spring Break
Resolution of Kosovo necessary
Michael Bain
Issue date: 1/30/07 Section: Editorials
Eight years after the war between NATO and Serbia, the United Nations is preparing to place Kosovo under the auspices of the European Union, an important step toward future U.N. recognition of Kosovo as an independent state. The expected move has proved controversial even before a policy decision has been reached. While the EU and the United States have vocalized their support of Kosovo's right to self-determination, the Belgrade government remains firmly opposed to any such recognition of sovereignty. Many of the Western powers are eager for a resolution to this issue, viewed as a source of continued instability in the heart of Europe. However, while EU support for Kosovo's transition to independence could be a major step toward solving the age-old political dilemma of the Balkans, the West must remain cognizant of the international and domestic implications associated with an independent Kosovo.
Kosovo's history in the late 20th century has been defined largely by ethnic politics. Under Tito's regime the province was a part of Orthodox Christian Serbia, then a federal republic within greater Yugoslavia. In the late 1970s, the region of Kosovo underwent a demographic shift with the Muslim Albanian population soon far out numbering the Serbian Christian population. Not surprisingly, a nationalist movement took hold among ethnic Albanian students who desired federal autonomy within Yugoslavia. Violence erupted throughout the 1990s between the Kosovo Liberation Army and Serbian forces, and by the time of NATOs intervention in 1999, the region had undergone massive population displacements and reports of ethnic cleansing.
Because any immediate attempt in the United Nations to declare Kosovo's independence would fail under the weight of a Russian veto, placing the region under EU supervision is a positive intermediary step. The EU can serve a dual role, having a strong institution-building track record in Eastern Europe, and acting as a symbol of international support for Kosovo's independence ÂÂÂ- possibly dissuading any attempts by Belgrade to exert control over pockets of territory that will inevitably be in dispute.
A strong institutional infrastructure must be in place prior to any official declarations of sovereignty in order to ensure a stable start for the young government. Because transitional stability is vital, the Western European states are correct in supporting a temporary delay until Serbia's government steadies itself domestically. By supporting Kosovo's independence, interesting questions will be raised concerning the legitimacy of other nationalist movements, such the Kurds in northern Iraq and eastern Turkey. Nonetheless, the importance of achieving a peaceful resolution to the lingering Balkans crisis implies that the interests of the great powers will continue to have the final say.
Kosovo's history in the late 20th century has been defined largely by ethnic politics. Under Tito's regime the province was a part of Orthodox Christian Serbia, then a federal republic within greater Yugoslavia. In the late 1970s, the region of Kosovo underwent a demographic shift with the Muslim Albanian population soon far out numbering the Serbian Christian population. Not surprisingly, a nationalist movement took hold among ethnic Albanian students who desired federal autonomy within Yugoslavia. Violence erupted throughout the 1990s between the Kosovo Liberation Army and Serbian forces, and by the time of NATOs intervention in 1999, the region had undergone massive population displacements and reports of ethnic cleansing.
Because any immediate attempt in the United Nations to declare Kosovo's independence would fail under the weight of a Russian veto, placing the region under EU supervision is a positive intermediary step. The EU can serve a dual role, having a strong institution-building track record in Eastern Europe, and acting as a symbol of international support for Kosovo's independence ÂÂÂ- possibly dissuading any attempts by Belgrade to exert control over pockets of territory that will inevitably be in dispute.
A strong institutional infrastructure must be in place prior to any official declarations of sovereignty in order to ensure a stable start for the young government. Because transitional stability is vital, the Western European states are correct in supporting a temporary delay until Serbia's government steadies itself domestically. By supporting Kosovo's independence, interesting questions will be raised concerning the legitimacy of other nationalist movements, such the Kurds in northern Iraq and eastern Turkey. Nonetheless, the importance of achieving a peaceful resolution to the lingering Balkans crisis implies that the interests of the great powers will continue to have the final say.
Be the first to comment on this story