Kosovo: No endgame in sight By Boba Borojevic <http://www.serbianna.com/columns/borojevic>
August 16, 2007 The alleged dilemma “Kosovo or the EU” is both artificial and mendacious. It was stated by Herr Ischinger, but it is not in his power to make the offer. Even if Serbia were to give up Kosovo, which it will not do, according to the former German ambassador in Belgrade, Andreas Zobel, it could subsequently hope to enter the EU in 20 to 25 years… Dr Srdja Trifkovic analyzes the troika initiative on Kosovo status. The Contact Group “troika” – Aleksandar Botsan-Harchenko representing Russia, Frank Wiesner representing the United States, and Wolfgang Ischinger representing the European Union – visited Belgrade and Pristina on August 10 – 11, marking a new start in the search for a solution to the vexed problem of Kosovo-Metohija. Dr. Srdja Trifkovic, one of the leading experts on the Balkans, threw some light on the background to the visit of the troika, in his interview on August 14 to “Monday’s Encounter” on CKU 93.1 FM in Ottawa. ST: In late July we witnessed the collapse of Western efforts, led by the US, to present a Security Council resolution that would be essentially in line with the Ahtisaari’s proposal – which is to say, that would grant Kosovo-Metohija independent statehood, under whatever name and through whatever procedure. The decision by the US and the EU to give up on further efforts at the UNSC and to return to the auspices of the Contact Group may be seen as a victory for the Russian diplomacy. Indirectly it was a victory for Serbia, too, except that all Serbian efforts in and of themselves would not have been sufficient, were it not for the strategic decision that the government in Moscow had made that this was an issue on which they would make a stand. Within the Contact Group, and now within the Troika, there is disagreement between the participants on what should be the final objective and also how it should be obtained. The Russians are particularly insistent that the whole process needs to remain under the control, guidance and auspices of the UNSC. The US, and some countries of the EU, would like to transform the Contact Group into a decision-making body in its own right, subjected to majority vote, which would not only mediate between the parties but also initiate particular models for the solution, and then actively encourage the parties to embrace them. Imposition of the US will The key issue is whether the US will follow the path of unilateral recognition if there is no agreed solution at the end of the four moths’ period – and in my view it is obvious that there is not going to be one. For as long as the Albanian side believes that the US will embark on unilateral recognition, we are not going to see any progress. Hard-line terms in which Agim Ceku outlined the Albanian position when the Troika arrived in Pristina over the weekend is indicative both of the domestic political pressures which the Albanian leaders feel, and the fact that the US regards the issue of Kosovo independence as a test of strength, as a test of its ability to impose its will in spite of Russian objections. To the Bush administration this is important in the light of a string of failures of US foreign policy in the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea etc. Within the Troika we have a tenuous situation, with three parties with widely different objectives pretending to be acting unanimously: · The Americans want to recognize an independent Kosovo broadly in line with Ahtisaari plan, for reasons that are either bad or unfathomable. · The EU does not have an agreed policy – or, rather, it has the pretence of a consensus on the acceptance of the Ahtisaari plan provided it is adopted through the UN. In another words, if it doesn’t happen and if the U.S. press the Europeans to follow the unilateral path, I am confident that there will be divisions within the EU. The fabled common foreign policy will prove to be a mirage. · Finally we have the Russians, very firm in their insistence that there cannot be no solution that would bypass the Security Council, and who are opposed to any solution that would be imposed against the will of the parties concerned, including of course the Republic of Serbia. Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica and Belgrade's position Dr. Trifkovic, who met with the Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica in July, says that he does not expect a great deal of movement in the forthcoming negotiations. “But I am sure,” Trifkovic says, “that Kostunica is rock-solid on the assumptions and principles on which those negotiations are to be conducted, and on the outcome that would be acceptable to the Serbian side”: ST: That outcome can be a model of a very high autonomy that would include all of the most advanced features of autonomous status enjoyed by other minorities around the world. Independence is completely unacceptable to Kostunica, however. Right now he may be contemplating the reaction that Serbia would be forced to adopt in case the US and other countries extend independence unilaterally. Obviously, Serbia has to take stock of its options very seriously. Serbia’s reaction would depend to some extend on the balance of forces within the ruling coalition in Belgrade. Within the ruling coalition we still have an ongoing tension between the “pro-Western reformists” – i.e. the Democratic Party of Boris Tadic, which keeps talking of Euro-Atlantic integrations (in other words not only EU but also NATO) – and Prime minister Kostunica and his party, the Democratic Party of Serbia, which is very careful to avoid the “Atlantic” part of this equation; they call only for “European” integrations. They are aware that it is inconsistent to expect Russia’s support in keeping Kosovo on the one hand, and at the same time talking about the integration into a military structure that is geopolitically by nature and of necessity anti-Russian. NATO does not have any other purpose in life any more, except to act as the geopolitical Cordon Sanitaire that seeks to surround Russia and reduce her to the level of the Grand Duchy of Moscow of 500 years ago. http://www.serbianna.com/columns/borojevic/061.shtml
