17.05.2007 Andrei ARESHEV
Kosovo and the Post-Soviet "Unrecognized" - Time for Moscow to Make Up Its Mind 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: <http://en.fondsk.ru> "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
