User:Pocopocopocopoco/sandbox/kosovo intl/

Kosovo is the subject of a long-running political and territorial dispute between the Serbian (and previously, the Yugoslav) government and Kosovo's largely ethnic-Albanian population. International negotiations began in 2006 to determine the final status of Kosovo, as envisaged under UN Security Council Resolution 1244 which ended the Kosovo conflict of 1999. Whilst Serbia's continued sovereignty over Kosovo is recognised by the international community, a clear majority of the province's population would prefer independence.

The UN-backed talks, lead by UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari, began in February 2006. Whilst progress was made on technical matters, both parties remained diametrically opposed on the question of status itself. In Februrary 2007, Ahtisaari delivered a draft status settlement proposal to leaders in Belgrade and Pristina, the basis for a draft UN Security Council Resolution which proposes 'supervised independence' for the province. As of early July 2007 the draft resolution, which is backed by the United States, United Kingdom and other European members of the Security Council, had been rewritten four times to try to accommodate Russian concerns that such a resolution would undermine the principle of state sovereignty [1]. Russia, which holds a veto in the Security Council as one of five permanent members, has stated that it will not support any resolution which is not acceptable to both Belgrade and Pristina [2]. Whilst most observers had, at the beginning of the talks, anticipated independence as the most likely outcome, others have suggested that a rapid resolution might not be preferable[3].

Russia rejected the latest draft of a UN Security Council resolution on the status of Kosovo, circulated on Thursday 12 July 2007[4]. The draft resolution had dropped any explicit reference to the Ahtisaari plan but kept the same essential framework. The draft had also proposed a further fourth months of talks between Belgrade and the Kosovo Albanians, but this time without a formal 'automatic' trigger for independence at the end of the talks. Russia appeared not to accept the honesty of the intent to drop an automatic trigger: Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov stated that, "The problem of a decision on the independence of Kosovo has not been taken off the agenda. Behind diplomatic rhetoric, there is the conclusion that after the talks...the Ahtisaari plan comes into effect." Whilst the United States and United Kingdom continued to back rapid moves to some form of 'supervised independence', other European Union member states were quoted as saying that the outcome of the final status process should not be prejudged.

See also: Constitutional status of Kosovo

Background

At the end of the Kosovo War, the UN Security Council adopted United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, which placed Kosovo under transitional UN administration, demanded a withdrawal of Serbian forces from Kosovo and envisioned an eventual UN-facilitated political process to determine Kosovo's status (i.e., whether it would become independent or remain part of Serbia). In October 2005, a UN-commissioned report written by Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide recommended that the status process should begin, noting that "all sides need clarity with regard to the future status of Kosovo." The UN Security Council issued a Presidential Statement in November 2005 to endorse Eide's conclusions and authorize the launch of a status process.

Positions of the parties

Serbia

Belgrade's position on Kosovo status is that Kosovo should be highly autonomous, but not independent. The Belgrade negotiating platform, often characterized by Belgrade leaders as "more than autonomy, less than independence," envisions granting sweeping rights of self-governance for Kosovo, but not a role in international affairs, defense or representation in Serbia's central governing institutions. Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica has said that "...any imposed solution that would seize part of our territory would be a violation of international law."

On the 30th Sept, 2006, the Serbian Parliament unanimously adopted a new constitution which describes Kosovo as an integral part of Serbia; this Constitution was later adopted after a successful referendum on October 28-29, 2006. Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo ignored the poll.

Belgrade also calls upon the fact that Serbia is an internationally-recognized country with territories that include Kosovo, and thus that the United Nations Charter defends its territorial integrity. It also calls upon the 1244 Resolution and the Kumanovo Treaty why which the Albanian Kosovar political leadership and NATO accepted to negotiate the final status of Kosovo, but within the territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (today's Republic of Serbia). Belgrade also holds that Kosovo should not be granted independence, calling upon the fact that the United Nations Mission in Kosovo did not do a good job and that the non-Albanian population of Kosovo has been subjected to discrimination ever since NATO took over 1999, culminating with the 2004 March Pogrom; and also the fact that a significant number of refugees still is displaced outside Kosovo's borders and that their returned is almost rendered impossible.

Kosovo

Kosovo Albanians insist that Kosovo should become an independent state. They generally assert that because of the Milošević regime's repression in the 1990s, continued union between Kosovo and Serbia is no longer viable. Kosovo Prime Minister Agim Çeku has said that Kosovo's leaders seek "a Kosovo that is a democratic, stable, functional, multiethnic state and an example of coexistence amongst communities." He has also claimed that "recognizing Kosovo's independence would close the dark chapters of Balkan history, and create the opportunity for a new and sustainable regional stability."

Contact Group

In November 2005, the Contact Group countries released a set of "Guiding Principles" for the resolution of Kosovo's status. These principles notably included the requirement that there be no return to the situation prior to 1999 and that there be no change in Kosovo's borders (i.e., no partition of Kosovo) and no union of Kosovo with any neighboring state.. At a January 2006 meeting of foreign ministers, the Contact Group further declared that a settlement "needs, inter alia, to be acceptable to the people of Kosovo" and emphasized the need for the settlement to address the concerns of Kosovo's ethnic minorities.. Contact Group member, Russia's President Vladimir Putin stated in September 2006 that the world must apply the same standards to the separatist Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as it does to the Serbian province of Kosovo, where many are seeking independence. He also added that Russia may use its veto power in the UN Security Council to block a status outcome to which Moscow does not agree.

Progress of the status talks

The Kosovo future status process is led by UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari, former president of Finland; Austrian diplomat Albert Rohan is his deputy. Ahtisaari's office -- the UN Office of the Special Envoy for Kosovo (UNOSEK) is located in Vienna, Austria, and includes liaison staff from NATO, the EU and the United States. Ahtisaari is supported in his efforts by Ambassador Frank G. Wisner, the U.S. Representative to the Kosovo Status Talks. Ahtisaari holds regular meetings with representatives of the Contact Group.

The initial status negotiations focused on technical issues important for Kosovo's long-term stability, particularly the rights and protection of Kosovo's minorities (especially the Kosovo Serbs). Ahtisaari brought the parties together for the first direct dialogue in February 2006 to discuss decentralization of local government, which is an important measure to protect Kosovo Serb communities. Subsequent meetings addressed economic issues, property rights, protection of Serbian Orthodox Church heritage and institutional guarantees for the rights of Kosovo's minorities.

On July 24, 2006, Ahtisaari brought the parties together in Vienna for the first high-level talks on the status outcome itself. Serbian President Boris Tadić, Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica, Kosovo President Fatmir Sejdiu and Prime Minister Agim Çeku attended and presented their respective platforms for Kosovo's future status. Ahtisaari later told the press that the meeting resulted in no breakthroughs, but added that the discussion was "frank and candid" and the atmosphere was better than he could have expected.

Ahtisaari briefed Contact Group foreign ministers on September 20, 2006, in New York City at a meeting chaired by U.S. Secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. At that meeting, the Contact Group released a press statement that reaffirmed its desire to work towards a negotiated settlement in the course of 2006 and also endorsed Ahtisaari's plans to develop a comprehensive proposal for a status settlement.

But with the end of 2006 approaching, and despite progress on technical matters, both parties remained diametrically opposed on the question of status itself.

Special Envoy Ahtisaari, after consultations with the Contact Group in Vienna on November 10, decided to delay sharing his proposal with the parties until after Serbia holds parliamentary elections on January 21, 2007. He said he would take his proposal to the parties "without delay" after these elections.

Ahtisaari proposal

On February 2, 2007, UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari delivered to Belgrade and Pristina leaders a draft status settlement proposal. The proposal covered a wide range of issues related to Kosovo's future, in particular measures to protect Kosovo's non-Albanian communities. The proposal included provisions covering:

• Constitutional provisions
• Rights of Communities and their Members
• Decentralization of local government
• Justice system
• Religious and cultural heritage
• International debt
• Property and archives
• Kosovo security sector
• International Civilian Representative
• European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) Rule of Law mission
• International Military Presence (e.g., continuation of KFOR)
• Legislative agenda

While not yet mentioning the word "independence," the draft Settlement included several provisions that were widely interpreted as implying statehood for Kosovo. For example, the draft Settlement would give Kosovo the right to apply for membership in international organizations, create a Kosovo Security Force and adopt national symbols. Ahtisaari has said that after a period of consultations with the parties he will finalize his Settlement proposal for submission to the UN Security Council and at that stage he will also elaborate on the status issue itself.

In Belgrade, Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica refused to receive Ahtisaari. Kostunica claimed that because Serbia had still not formed a new government after the January 21 parliamentary elections he had no mandate to discuss Kosovo and therefore could not meet Ahtiaari. Nevertheless, he later denounced the proposal as "illegitimate and unacceptable" because he alleged it "violates the U.N. Charter ... by undermining sovereignty of U.N. member Serbia." President Boris Tadić did receive Ahtisaari, after which he reaffirmed his vow to never accept an independent Kosovo. Foreign Minister Vuk Drašković warned that it was "necessary to avoid an imposed solution that could cause Serbia to become a factor of instability."

In Pristina, Kosovo Albanians leaders issued a statement after meeting with Ahtisaari saying they are "convinced that the international process for the resolution of Kosovo's status led by President Ahtisaari will be concluded soon with Kosovo becoming an independent state."

The United States called the proposal "fair and balanced," while the EU Presidency noted that Ahtisaari's proposals "build on almost twelve months of direct talks between Belgrade and Pristina."

On February 21, Ahtisaari began a period of consultations with the parties in Vienna to finalize the Settlement. He made clear that his proposal was a draft and that he would incorporate compromise solutions into the final document. After this period of consultations and further modification of the Settlement, Ahtisaari convened a high-level meeting of the parties in Vienna on March 10. After this meeting, leaders from both sides signaled a total unwillingness to compromise on their central demands (Pristina for Kosovo's independence; Serbia for sovereignty over Kosovo). Concluding that there was no chance for the two sides to reconcile their positions, Ahtisaari said he intended to submit to the UN Security Council his proposed status recommendations, including an explicit recommendation for the status outcome itself, by the end of March.

Conclusion of process

On April 3, Ahtisaari presented to the UN Security Council his final package of proposals for Kosovo, which included a clear recommendation that Kosovo should become independent subject to a period of international supervision. Most international observers believe this process will result in Kosovo's independence, with a period of limits on the exercise of its sovereignty.

Pristina has accepted Ahtisaari's final Settlement, while Belgrade continues to reject it. Immediately after the proposals become public, the United States and Germany (in its capacity as EU Presidency) issued strong statements of support. The European Union's Parliament has also declared its full support to Ahtisaari's plan. Russia, however, has called for new rounds of negotiations, possibly with a new special envoy. At least one other member of the Security Council, South Africa, a non-permanent member, has expressed agreement with Russian concerns[5].

On May 11, European members of the UN Security Council, Germany and the United States circulated a draft UN Security Council resolution that would replace UN Security Council Resolution 1244, endorse Ahtisaari's Settlement and end the UN administration after a transition period of 120 days. The U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN said that the European/U.S. draft had enough support in the Security Council to be adopted unless Russia chooses to use its Security Council veto, which Russia has stated at numerous occasions that it might use unless the resolution is acceptable by both sides.

As of early July 2007 no agreement had been reached on the draft resolution despite talks between the Presidents of Russia and the United States[6]. Representatives of the states backing independence are still expressing hope that agreement can be found amongst the Security Council[7]. One Western diplomat quoted by a British newspaper offers an opinion on the state of negotiations: 'I wouldn’t say it was game, set and match to the Russians but it is game and set,' [8]

Whilst the present draft resolution on Kosovo's status has yet to achieve the support of the Security Council, senior US officials are suggesting that an agreement might be reached next year. The US assistant secretary of state for European affairs told delegates at a NATO conference in Croatia that he hoped that Kosovo's future could be resolved in the months leading up to the alliance's next summit meeting in Romania in April 2008 [9].

Russia rejected the latest draft of a UN Security Council resolution on the status of Kosovo, circulated on Thursday 12 July 2007 [10]. The draft resolution had dropped any explicit reference to the Ahtisaari plan but kept the same essential framework. The draft had also proposed a further fourth months of talks between Belgrade and the Kosovo Albanians, but this time without a formal 'automatic' trigger for independence at the end of the talks. Russia appeared not to accept the honesty of the intent to drop an automatic trigger: Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov stated that, "The problem of a decision on the independence of Kosovo has not been taken off the agenda. Behind diplomatic rhetoric, there is the conclusion that after the talks...the Ahtisaari plan comes into effect." Whilst the United States and United Kingdom continued to back rapid moves to some form of 'supervised independence', other European Union member states were quoted as saying that the outcome of the final status process should not be prejudged.

Post-status planning

The Contact Group has said in numerous public statements that regardless of status outcome a new international presence will be established in Kosovo to supervise the implementation of the settlement and guarantee minority rights..

An International Civilian Office (ICO), structured along the lines of the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, will include participation from many states, notably EU members and the United States. The ICO, as described in Ahtisaari's draft status proposal, will possess certain executive powers to supervise and enforce status settlement implementation (e.g., fire ministers or overturn laws).

At the November 2006 NATO Riga Summit, NATO leaders reaffirmed their intention to continue to provide a secure environment and help implement the security provisions of the settlement. After status is determined, the EU plans to deploy a European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) mission to focus on Rule of Law issues, namely building the capacity of the police/justice sector.

The UN refugee agency has made contingency plans for up to 70,000 further Serbian refugees in the wake of any successful independence claim by Kosovo Albanians[11][12].

See also

• Contact Group
• Standards for Kosovo

External links

• UN Office of the Special Envoy for Kosovo.
• Contact Group press statements on Kosovo.
• Ahtisaari's Proposal on Kosovo