Kosovo is restless again The international community's policy of 'supervised independence' is looking ever more untenable
* Comments <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/31/kosovo-supervised-independence?commentpage=1> (76) Under the "supervised independence" obtained in February 2008, Kosovo <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/kosovo> is restless again. The institutional architecture that oversees the Republic of Kosovo – an international civilian <http://www.ico-kos.org/?id=2> representative (ICR), the EU rule-of-law mission (Eulex) <http://www.eulex-kosovo.eu/> , and the UN mission (Unmik) <http://www.unmikonline.org/> – always looked delicate. It is now beginning to crack. For the first time since March 2004 the deep-seated public disaffection for the international presence in Kosovo is coming to the surface. Five years ago violent riots redirected the escalating Albanian frustration with the UN protectorate against the Serb minority. Then as now, officials misread early signs of tension. Last week the Vetevendosje (Self-determination) movement damaged several Eulex <http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/21807/> cars. The spark for this action was a "protocol on police co-operation" signed by Serbia and Eulex. Eulex badly needed the agreement. It was supposed to establish the rule of law and public order. Instead it has faced local Serbs' violent obstruction in the northern region of Kosovo, and has done neither. Kosovo government officials did not appreciate what they believe is a breach of sovereignty. It did not help that the Serbian minister for Kosovo, Goran Bogdanovic, said in an interview <http://www.novosti.rs/code/navigate.php?Id=1&status=jedna&vest=155034&title_add=Dokaz%20da%20je%20%3Cbr%2F%3ESrbija%20cela&kword_add=kim%2C%20goran%20bogdanovic&search=%20Kosovo> that the protocol is evidence that Kosovo is Serbia. It is very worrisome that a movement such as Self-determination, not so long ago committed to peaceful tactics of protest, has now embraced violence. More worrisome is that most Albanians who wholeheartedly condemned Self-determination's actions share the same deep contempt for the international presence in Kosovo. They see it as arbitrary and undemocratic. They have a point. In Pristina, activists of Self-determination responsible for vandalism have been promptly arrested, and with unusual displays of police brutality. At exactly the same time, in the northern village of Kroi I Vitakut/Brdjani, Eulex police made no arrest among the armed Serb mobs that attacked the builders of Albanian homes, torched in 1999. Not only that – police cordoned off the area and halted the reconstruction. This behaviour is unacceptable by any standards. Even if Eulex must remain status-neutral, as Ian Bancroft has recently commented on Cif <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/29/kosovo-eu-un-serbia> , and disregard the constitution of the <http://www.kushtetutakosoves.info/repository/docs/Constitution.of.the.Republic.of.Kosovo.pdf> Republic of Kosovo, it still must protect the right of refugees to return home, as stated in Security Council <http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1244> resolution 1244. But it does not do that for the Albanians in northern Kosovo, because it lacks control on that region. With the ICR and Unmik, it has authority only over the southern part of Kosovo. This mix of double standards and arbitrariness dangerously legitimises a way of thinking about the law as a subjective artifice in the hands of the powerful. The fight is against power, and its artifice is the first victim. The radicals who damaged Eulex cars do not see themselves as vandals, but as the only possible opposition to power. They are a minority on this particular choice of tactic, but the majority agrees with them on one main point: Eulex, Unmik, the ICR and even the Kosovo Force <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Force> are an oppressive colonial system. International officials repeat their refrain: "We are here for your own good". This is precisely the benevolent attitude that all locals find offensive. The youth who last week hacked the Eulex website wrote: "We invited you here to help us, not to decide for us … as we welcomed you, we can also tell you 'so long'." The larger majority is silent, but is fed up with supervision of any sort. As Mitrovica and northern Kosovo remain a flashpoint, any provocation there could spark mass protest with unforeseeable consequences. Between the non-acceptance by Serbia and the fatigue experienced among Albanians, the international community finds itself in an untenable position. Kosovo authorities also face a challenge: as they respect the international rule, they lose popular legitimacy. The same was true in 2004, when a weak local leadership could not stop the violence of a population exasperated with Unmik's paternalistic government. It should be clear, by now, that an "independent protectorate <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/mar/08/annadilellioandbesnikpula> " is no way to engineer a new state. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/31/kosovo-supervised-independence
