Will the Real Serbia Please Stand Up?

INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP - NEW BRIEFING

Will the Real Serbia Please Stand Up?

Belgrade/Brussels, 23 April 2008: The international community should refrain from counter-productive intervention in Serbia's 11 May elections, including offering to sign a Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA).

Will the Real Serbia Please Stand up?,* the latest policy briefing from the International Crisis Group, examines the situation after Kosovo's independence and ahead of parliamentary and local elections. The vote is unlikely to change Belgrade's policy towards the new state, even in the unlikely event a pro-Western government comes to power.

"Public anger over Western support for Kosovo's independence is such that any attempt by the EU or US to support pro-Western parties prior to the elections risks strengthening the nationalist vote", says James Lyon, Crisis Group Senior Adviser.

Kosovo's independence declaration on 17 February 2008 sent shock waves through Serbia's politics and society. Rioting led to attacks on nine Western embassies, destruction of foreign property and looting. The government fell on 10 March, split over whether to pursue a nationalist or pro-Western path. Belgrade's efforts to create a de facto partition of Kosovo's north threaten the new state's territorial integrity, challenge deployment of EU missions there and complicate implementation of the Ahtisaari Plan.

There is a real likelihood the Serb Radical Party will win the elections and form a coalition government. If that happens, Euro-Atlantic integration would halt, and nationalists could be expected to support a more belligerent response in Kosovo, including use of low-level violence by Kosovo Serbs. The nationalists might also encourage Republika Srpska to leave Bosnia-Herzegovina and meddle in Macedonia. A backlash against pro-Western activists and increased media repression could likewise be anticipated.

Yet Serbia could also remain without a government until September. Kostunica would stay caretaker premier and continue to define Kosovo policy. He is likely to play a significant role in forming a new government, perhaps even as premier once again.

At best, the West will have limited influence for many months. Meanwhile, any attempt before the 11 May elections to pressure or induce Belgrade into more cooperation risks strengthening the nationalist vote.

"In the run-up to 11 May, Brussels and Washington would be well served to lower levels of rhetorical support for the pro-Western parties", says Sabine Freizer, Crisis Group's Europe Program Director. "In particular, EU leaders should not appease nationalist forces by offering a Stabilisation and Association Agreement before Serbia has met the long-standing condition for it: full cooperation with the Hague Tribunal".

---

Contacts: Andrew Stroehlein (Brussels) +32 (0) 2 541 1635
Kimberly Abbott (Washington) +1 202 785 1601
To contact Crisis Group media please click here
*Read the full Crisis Group briefing on our website: http://www.crisisgroup.org

---

The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation covering some 60 crisis-affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

---

International law experts debate Kosovo independence legality

International law experts debate Kosovo independence legality

Source: VOA Albanian

Tuesday, 15 April 2008

Kosovo's independence debated One of the arguments of those who reject the independence of Kosovo is that it violates the international law based on the UN Resolution 1244. However, a group of international law experts who think otherwise is discussing the issue in a conference organized by The American Society of International Law in Washington DC. The legality of the declaration of Kosovo independence on February 17 has been discussed when it occurred, and it is still being discussed in the international debates. However, what effects will this act have in the future of the international law? The question has been discussed by The American Society of International Law whilst a thorough lecture to this question was given by the internationally well-known lawyer of international law, Richard Goldstone. Mr. Goldstone, who was a former chairman of an investigative committee on Kosovo’s future status in 1999, said “Even at that time when Kosovo future status was being discussed ‘we unanimously recommended the supervised independence for Kosovo’ because we knew there was neither any legality nor any fairness to ask Kosovars to return under the Belgrade rule, after considering the fact how they were heinously treated, mass murdered and ethnically cleansed by Serbia.” The preposition was rejected by Russia which has demanded to preserve the sovereignty of Serbia over Kosovo.  Mr. Goldstone explains that "here is a contradiction because while Russia was demanding to preserve Serbia’s sovereignty over Kosovo, simultaneously Russia was supporting the UN resolution to implement the deployment of the UN administration to run Kosovo." The resolution 1244, which has become the basic law of the UN mission in Kosovo, was one of the main discussions at the conference. Paul Williams, a professor of the international law at the American University in Washington DC, said that “Resolution 1244 does not preserve the sovereignty of Serbia over Kosovo. If we make a thorough analysis of the UN Resolution 1244, it does not state that the Former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has to be asked or decide over the future status of Kosovo on whether it will be independent or not”, added Paul Williams, a noted professor of international law. According to Professor Williams, “the declaration of Kosovo independence does not set a precedent, because in the last 15 years we have encountered at least 26 cases of countries that declared independence and became sovereign countries without any agreement with the country they lived under, and the Republic of Kosovo is among them.” John Bollinger, the legal attorney at the US State Department who presented his argument during the discussion said that ”the United States had tried to reach a new resolution over Kosovo but unfortunately it was not possible due to objections from Russia.” He does not agree that Kosovo declared its formal independence in a unilateral way. “This is not a unilateral act but it is a coordinated act by the effort of a large number of countries that worked on achieving this solution, the independence of Kosovo,” added Bollinger, the legal attorney at the US State Department. The act of Kosovo independence continues to be discussed in various circles. Additionally, one of the experts said that Kosovars will have to work hard to fight all the myths created following the independence of Kosovo. Professor Williams said to VOA that the government of Kosovo should not ignore this debate. “This is a serious debate which the government of Kosovo must participate in a very active way. There are a few myths being created that reject the international recognition of Kosovo independence. Among them is that Resolution 1244 does not permit independence and that the independence is a unilateral act and so forth. All of these are myths, fabricated by the chauvinistic leadership of Serbia that ignores to understand and learn the international law and resolutions,” said Professor Williams.

New Kosova Report - International law experts debate Kosovo independence legality

Blogged with the Flock Browser