The Times(London) May 11, 2007
Overseas news
The dark shadows hanging over Kosovo;World Briefing
Bronwen Maddox
Tony Blair mentioned Kosovo in a sub-clause of his exit speech
yesterday, coupled with Sierra Leone. He was glad that in both
cases he had "made our country one that intervened", and moved
on to Iraq, which he pronounced "bitterly controversial".
Kosovo is still controversial. The solution towards which the
United Nations Security Council is edging is enormously risky
even though it is the best available: encouraging the disputed
province to declare independence from Serbia in the hope that
the UN will then acknowledge its sovereignty.
Most of Britain's fears, as its diplomats try to shepherd this
plan through the council, have focused on Russia. On its own
it could scupper the plan, and it may do so, out of old
allegiance with Serbia, which claims sovereignty over the
Albanian-majority province. Will Russia veto the plan in the
council? Will awareness of its support fan violent resistance
on the ground the minute that Kosovo expresses independence?
Will the 100,000 Serbs in Kosovo be killed or flee?
It is perfectly reasonable, with the 78 days of war in 1999
still so fresh, that these practical questions dominate
efforts. But the questions of principle that South Africa, as
a temporary member of the council, has raised are more
troubling.
It is afraid that independence for Kosovo would set a
precedent for wiping out old state boundaries in favour of
tribal divisions. It is right that this is an ugly answer to
sectarian rifts -ask Iraq.
Sir Emyr Jones Parry, the British Ambassador to the UN,
expressed some confidence this week that the Security Council
would manage to vote later this month on a Kosovo resolution.
The resolution would mark an end to UNMIK, the UN mission;
it would authorise a continued European Union presence; and it
would, in Jones Parry's understated phrase, "have to say
something on Ahtisaari".
That is the core of the problem: reaching agreement on the
plans drawn up by Martti Ahtisaari, the EU's special envoy to
Kosovo, through which the province could declare independence
from Serbia. "I would like it to endorse Ahtisaari," said
Jones Parry, although he pointed out that even if the
Security Council did so, that would not mean it was overtly
encouraging independence.
Kosovo would still have to declare independence, and then hope
that this was backed by the UN: nine votes and no abstentions
from the 15-member Security Council, and two thirds of the
General Assembly.
Russia is the shadow looming over this. Its relations with
Europe are poor, with the US even worse, and it may choose to
block this because it can, with no cost to itself. But the
surprise in the diplomatic calculations has been South Africa,
a vocal member of the council first on Iran, now Kosovo.
Its objections may be too abstract to have much purchase on
the Kosovo row, but it has a point. Splitting nations up
-however historically debatable their borders - because
different ethnic groups decide it is intolerable to share a
nationality is an unsettling precedent.
In Kosovo's case it offers no reassurance about the future of
the tenth of the population that is Serb and living in
enclaves, surrounded by ethnic Albanians with vivid memories
of recent hostilities.
"Kosovo was never about creating a state," says Jones Parry.
"It was about taking the Serb oppression out." But the
solutions are turning out to look the same.
Iraq also appears torn between two repellent futures: one of
ethnic separation, with thousands killed on the way, or one
where the majority offers the minority few rights.
Tony Blair may have acknowledged Iraq as a controversy; he was
wrong to breeze past Kosovo, putting a tick in the box for
achievement. It is Northern Ireland that is his best claim
to have brokered peace between warring communities.
Kosovo is not close.
(c) 2007 Times Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved
Serbian News Network - SNN
[email protected]
http://www.antic.org/
