Columbia Missourian

  _____  


Lack of clear solution for Kosovo


By BYRON SCOTT 

August 13, 2007

Byron Scott: Our discussion today is about a crisis that some experts say began 
20 years ago this month with a speech in the Field of Blackbirds, where in 1389 
a Serbian army lost to an Ottoman army but where 20 years ago a man named 
Slobodan Milosevic declared the unity, the independence and the pride of 
Yugoslavia. We’re talking about the last chapter of that, what threatens to 
become a stalemate in the Balkans, efforts to stabilize the region of Kosovo 
and perhaps give it independence. Let’s begin with a status report. Where do 
efforts currently stand to resolve the situation in Kosovo, a region of about 2 
million people?
Dukagjin Gorani, director of development, Kosovo Institute of Journalism, 
Pristina, Kosovo: A stalemate is taking place now. Negotiations took place last 
year in Vienna, Austria, among the international community, which resulted in a 
proposal for a form of supervised independence. However, it was hotly rejected 
by Belgrade at the local level and was strongly rejected by Moscow at the 
international level. We are about to see a continuation of negotiations and 
eventually a period in which something acceptable to all parties would be 
defined.
Scott: When we mention the international community, we mean specifically the 
United Nations, which has helped govern Kosovo since the 1999 NATO bombings, 
the European Union, the United States and Russia, which along with Serbia 
opposes the current plan. Why is there opposition?
Dragan Stavljanin, Balkan service broadcaster, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 
Prague, Czech Republic: When negotiations about Kosovo started about a year and 
a half ago, Russia was relatively calm, but about six months ago Russian 
President Vladimir Putin stated that an independent Kosovo would set a 
precedent and therefore Russia is strongly opposed. Many see Russian opposition 
as political leverage in its international approach.
Scott: When you speak of precedent you mean, for example, Chechnya?
Stavljanin: Russia probably sees Kosovo’s independence as a precedent for all 
countries, not only Chechnya.
Scott: Wasn’t such a precedent set about a year ago with the separation of 
Montenegro from Serbia? Is a similarly peaceful process possible in Kosovo?
Gorani: Belgrade’s Serb side would remark that the situation in Montenegro 
wasn’t exactly the same because Montenegro was already a republic, which was 
already in a union with Serbia under the former Yugoslavia. It did have the 
same constitutional rights, while Kosovo was an autonomous province deemed 
undividable from Serbia proper. However, the aggression and the repression 
since 1989 did change the political topography. Kosovo’s independence is seen 
as a logical outcome for a future stability. There can’t be any natural 
discussion about Kosovo returning to Serbia in any way that is also accepted by 
the Belgrade government when it came up with the option of Kosovo having an 
independent status within Serbia. In Russia, Kosovo is seen as a lever to be 
used to call shots in the international scene.
Scott: Another player that we haven’t mentioned yet is Albania. I believe about 
90 percent of Kosovars are ethnic Albanians. What is the potential or imagined 
role of Albania?
Gorani: Historically, there were attempts to identify Kosovo-Albanians as an 
amputated part of the state Albania, but there is no political program or 
willingness to see Kosovo united with Albania to create a pure nation-state of 
Albanians. Kosovo-Albanians were basically pushed to become an independent 
entity because of the aggression that took place that destroyed Yugoslavia. The 
question now is how Kosovo can become independent and still retain levels of 
power in the region. For Belgrade, that means how to reassure the Serbian 
public that with Kosovo gone there would still be life in Serbia. For 
Kosovo-Albanians, the most important thing is how to retain power, although 
independence for Kosovo would not automatically mean a creation of another 
nation-state but simply an internationally supervised civilian state in which 
people would be defined as citizens rather than being looked on through ethnic 
lines. Also, partition of Kosovo would open up very serious territorial issues 
throughout former Yugoslavia and could very easily become an issue of 
redefinition of the borders of former Yugoslavia along ethnic lines. If it 
comes to partition, northern Kosovo, the bulk of which is inhabited by 
predominately the Serb community, would go back to Serbia. But there are 
several really serious areas which are inhabited by Albanians in Montenegro, 
Serbia proper and Macedonia which will seek to unite in one single country and 
eventually destroy the stability of the region. So, the question is how to 
create an independent Kosovo that everybody is happy with.
Scott: As the diplomats say, what is “the way forward”? How do we get out of 
this stalemate?
Stavljanin: If Kosovo is to become independent and be able to maintain control, 
the only solution is not redoing the Albanian territory along ethnic lines but 
is for the European Union on the day Kosovo becomes independent, to admit 
Kosovo as a full member.
Scott: Is the ball in the EU’s court?
Gorani: Kosovo and the former Yugoslavia were always an issue for Europe. The 
problem was that Europe, at the time of the conflict in Yugoslavia, was 
incapable of intervening, which made the wars in Yugoslavia a global and 
international issue. Again, the ball is being brought up into the EU’s yard. 
The Balkan region, the region of the former Yugoslavia, will have to be 
systematically ushered into the EU, which could put an end to conflicts based 
on ethnic intolerance and nationalism. However, the EU process is slower than 
was predicted a few years ago. There have been setbacks with the EU 
Constitution with issues of enlargement. That means that there would be a 
vacuum of some years until the region falls within the EU as an integral part. 
In the meantime, there has to be some sort of a temporary status and guaranteed 
stability for Kosovo. Having a status agreement would help all parties, 
primarily the international community which also has to heal some of the wounds 
caused by military intervention and overlooking of international law. But it 
doesn’t take more than a few years of instability and intolerance to have yet 
another volatile and hostile situation.
Scott: What should we expect to be the status of this situation a year from now?
Stavljanin: Probably a solution will be brought about, but it will not be a 
clear solution. It will be a temporal solution in which Kosovars will have a 
right to govern themselves, but legally it will not mean exactly that. There 
won’t be a sustained or enforceable solution.
Gorani: By next year, Kosovars will live in the belief that they have gained an 
independent state, but it will be a matter of interpretation. For 
Kosovo-Albanians, that will mean having an independent state of their own while 
waiting to become part of the EU. To Serbs, that could be a very fluid and very 
unacceptable form of some autonomy, which would be internationally supervised. 
To Belgrade, Kosovo would still be perceived as an area that was hijacked 
through military intervention of the West. Kosovo’s status will become a matter 
of interpretation until this whole region finally starts the accession process.
Scott Afterword: Every time the West forgets the Balkans, the age-old tensions 
seem to erupt. The Kosovo stalemate is a real test for the EU but not something 
for the U.S. to forget. “Kosovo Polye” otherwise known as “The Field of 
Blackbirds” is where we all, to some extent, live.

Producers of Global Journalist are Missouri School of journalism graduate 
students John Amick, 
Devin Benton and Catherine Wolf.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2007/08/13/lack-clear-solution-kosovo/

Reply via email to