[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070803/COMMENTAR
Y/108030021

 

The Washington Times


Kosovo as part of Russia's design


Janusz Bugajski
August 3, 2007 

For the Russian administration the Kosovo imbroglio has developed into an
important strategic weapon. Due to the indecision exhibited by Western
powers in confirming Kosovo's final status, Moscow views Kosovo as a
valuable boost for its regional and global ambitions. By effectively vetoing
Kosovo's supervised independence under the Western-sponsored Ahtisaari plan
and maintaining an indefinite status quo in the region, Russia raises its
international stature in several ways.

First, by denying statehood for Kosovo, the Kremlin can claim Russia is a
major defender of international legality by its insistence on working
through the United Nations Security Council. Of course, Russia would not
allow the UNSC to interfere in its own neighborhood; for example, by
approving a U.N. mission in territories that Moscow covets in Moldova and
Georgia, let alone in pro-independence Chechnya.

Russia exploits the hesitation of the Bush administration to bypass the
U.N., as it did before launching the Iraqi war. The U.S. seeks to rebuild
its alliances and does not want to be condemned again as a hegemonic
unilateralist. Meanwhile, many European Union governments do not want to act
outside the U.N. framework as this could discredit their own global
influence.

Second, Russia is posing as a promoter of multilateralism, where the U.N.
process can serve its interests and undercut those of the U.S.
Multilateralism can be a cover for inaction as multilateral institutions
such as the U.N. are not only slow and cumbersome in making decisions but
operate according to the lowest common denominator where the resistance of
one capital can deny the interests of the majority.

Third, Moscow is posturing as a staunch protector of state sovereignty and
national integrity by opposing the imposed breakup of a U.N. member state,
Serbia. It thereby appeals to many U.N. members, especially authoritarian
governments who preserve territories primarily by bullets and not ballots.
At the same time, the U.S. is cast by Moscow as a maverick interfering in
the internal affairs of allegedly vulnerable victims.

Simultaneously, Russian support for minority separatism in Moldova and
Georgia and its manipulation of Russian ethnic grievances against indigenous
governments in the Baltic States is depicted as a defense of human rights
and valid support for self-determination.

Fourth, Kosovo forms part of a wider strategic agenda enabling Russia to
elevate its international position, interpose in Balkan developments,
promote splits within the EU, aggravate weaknesses in Western decisionmaking
and construct a Eurasian "pole" as a counterbalance to the United States.

For the Putin administration, the birth of new pro-American states and the
expansion of democracies in former communist territories presents a
long-term threat to Russia's strategic designs. Democratic governments
invariably seek membership in NATO and the EU to consolidate and enhance the
reform process and provide permanent security and the assure independence.
For Moscow, such steps undercut its influences in neighboring countries,
shrink its regional power projection, and retard its ambitions as a revived
superpower.

Russia feels more confident in realizing its aspirations where its neighbors
are either predictable authoritarian states, isolated and marginalized
countries with populist governments, weak states internally divided that
cannot qualify for NATO or EU membership, or countries ruled by outright
anti-American governments. A "frozen conflict" in Kosovo thereby reinforces
Moscow's broader strategic objectives.

In addition, the Kremlin fears that an independent and pro-Western Kosovo
may become a potential attraction for nations in the north Caucasus that
increasingly resent centralized rule from Moscow and may seek their own
statehood. The wide perception of Kosovo as a "Muslim" entity feeds Russia's
anxieties that Kosovo may act as a model among its own Muslim populations.
Hence, Kremlin propaganda depicts Kosovars as fundamentalists and terrorists
to undercut international sympathy and support for the aspiring state.

Given the current feebleness of Western strategy, there is little reason for
Russia to compromise over any plan for Kosovo, however many amendments are
offered by Washington and Brussels. Opposition to the Ahtisaari plan has
become a measure of Russia's newly found strength from which it is unlikely
to back down unless some major concessions are offered or strategic retreats
are initiated by the White House in other arenas.

In such circumstances, the U.N. Security Council process not only blocks
Kosovo's statehood and may hinder the progress of Euro-Atlantic integration
for the Western Balkans, but also allows Russia to restore its position as
the pre-eminent anti-American power and a pretender to international
leadership.

Unless the trans-Atlantic alliance stands firm and united to implement a
credible plan for Kosovo's independence, Russia will increasingly benefit
from Western division and indecision.

Janusz Bugajski is director of the New European Democracies Project at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Reply via email to