Two positive letters in today's Independent. If the first writer is correct that could prove embarrassing!
http://comment.independent.co.uk/letters/article3244679.ece Independence for Kosovo defies UN Sir: With all the talk of "coordinated" declarations and "conditional" independence (Birth of a nation: but will Kosovo spark another Balkan crisis?", 11 December), has no one thought to ask the UN what action it will take should independence be declared? The UN Mission in Kosovo has struck down a series of independence declarations by the ethnic Albanian-dominated Assembly since 1999. It is legally compelled to do so, as instructed by legal advisors at UN headquarters in New York. It will be legally compelled to do so again, with or without a unified EU policy position. As long as UN Security Council Resolution 1244 remains in force, any declaration of independence by the Assembly of Kosovo will be declared immediately invalid. That might spoil the party in Pristina. Worse, any individual or state then taking action on the territory of Kosovo outside of a UN mandate will become liable in international and domestic courts for the actions of soldiers and administrators: privatisation administrators will be sued for financial damages; peacekeepers will be unable to use force, except in self-defence. How then will the EU prevent an escalation of violence? Will the German and Italian governments, and others, give KFOR troops the necessary freedom to act, or will those troops be put in the same position as Dutch peacekeepers at Srebrenica? Little wonder that EU member states remain undecided, whatever the ministerial pronouncements. The only reason that independence "'must"' happen now is the implicit threat of ethnic Albanian violence against both exposed Serbian enclaves and international representatives. It is that ethnic violence, which we saw the beginnings of in March 2004, which caused the sensible policy of Standards before Status to be shelved. In the absence of any legal ability to either declare or recognise independence, the international community needs to get back to the job of policing the status quo. James Dancer Nottingham (The writer was Second secretary (political and economic) at the british Embassy in Belgrade, 2001-2003) Sir: The Foreign Secretary says yes to independence for Kosovo. Why stop there? How about independence for the Hungarian majority areas of Vojvodina? The Serbian majority areas of Bosnia? The Hungarian majority areas of Slovakia? Beyond the Balkans, the list is endless. After the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, it was through the British Foreign Secretary that sovereignty of the Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro over Kosovo was acknowledged. In 1914 Austria-Hungary invaded Serbia and Russia mobilised in support of Serbia. The ensuing Great War cost the lives of millions. Now, less than 100 years later, the British Foreign Secretary wants to see the break-up of Serbia. So be it. Actually, Italian-controlled Fascist Albania began the process in 1941 by expelling the then majority Serbs and bringing in Albanians from Albania. Later, it was easy for Tito's regime to break the power of Serbia by giving autonomy to Kosovo. But if independence is to be granted, it is essential it is achieved by supporting fully the rights of the new minorities that will be created. For this it is certain that additional support will be needed from UNMIK. In this endeavour Britain will once again have to do its share. Unless this matter is handled properly, the clamour for independence from other "majorities" will become deafening. Francis Hay Banstead, Surrey
