Kosovo’s Independence and Its Discontents

[Editor's note: Earlier today, a mass anti-American and anti-Kosovar protest broke out in Belgrade. Protesters set fire to the US embassy.]

Remember when Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol (there they are again) condemned the majority party in Congress for not supporting the President’s war? Remember when Zbigniew Brzezinski and John McCain both agreed about the utility and necessity of American military intervention on behalf of a Muslim population to protect (and, yes, liberate) them from a murderous tyrant? Yes, who could forget those halcyon days: the Clinton administration’s adventure in the Balkans. You forgot? Well, here’s Richard Holbrooke (more on him later) to refresh your memory about what’s been going on since the United States’ last military “Victory.”

Kosovars march for independence Now recall a few weeks ago when President Bush described the current state of the union. During the “foreign policy” segment he warned how, given our extensive involvement in Iraq, the United States is in an awkward and painful position regarding the status of certain ethnic groups and their right to create their own nation-states. For instance, he talked about the irony of the US helping Turkey attack the Kurds (our allies in Iraq). And he also mentioned the fact that Russia’s attempt to reassert itself as a great power presents a troublesome predicament for the current (and next) administration.

Oh, wait. He didn’t talk about any of that.

Nonetheless, reality still refuses to bend to the president's will. This week, Kosovo declared its independence from Serbia. Thousands of Albanians celebrated in Pristina.

Is this an opportunity to breathe a sigh of relief, applaud the birth of a nation-state, and watch an oppressed minority manifest its right to self-determination? Is it okay to be a neoliberal (or, for that matter, neoconservative) again? No.

While these developments seem nice and The Economist plays it cute with a graph that shows the national football team rankings for small, budding countries, this is the Balkans.

In December, the Serbian government issued a warning that they opposed this potential outcome. Despite being offered accelerated admittance into the European Union as a way to assuage any animus, the Serbs maintained:

Serbia must "reconsider" diplomatic ties with Western countries that recognize Kosovo's statehood… because of NATO's alleged support for Kosovo independence, Serbia must remain outside the Western military alliance… [and] the possible signing of a pre-membership trade-and-aid deal with the European Union in January "must be in the function of preserving the country's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

So far, the Serbs have kept their promise:

Serbia is preparing to ask the UN Security Council to condemn Kosovo's declaration of independence as illegal, and last night it recalled its ambassador to the U.S. in protest against Washington's recognition of the breakaway state.

But it’s not the Serbian qua Serbian outrage and opposition to Kosovo’s independence that makes this event a quagmire: it’s the role that Putin’s Russia may play that ought to cause concern. Putin’s regime was vindicated with the December 2007 elections that gave his party a resounding majority in the Duma. Russia’s election for President is scheduled for March 2. Dmitry Medvedev, Putin’s handpicked successor, is poised to win and has indicated that he will appoint Putin as Prime Minister.

Russia was humiliated by the NATO intervention in the late ‘90s. Essentially, the Clinton/Holbrooke State Department botched the peace process when extricating the US from its involvement in the Balkan wars. George Friedman, over at Stratfor (in “Russia: Kosovo and the Asymmetry of Perceptions,” subscription required), explains:

The United States needed a war-ending strategy. This is where the Russians came in… Russia was weak and ineffective, but it was Serbia's only major ally. The United States prevailed on the Russians to initiate diplomatic contacts and persuade the Serbs that their position was isolated and hopeless. The carrot was that the United State agreed that Russian peacekeeping troops would participate in Kosovo… This ended the war, but the Russians were never permitted -- let alone encouraged -- to take their role in Serbia. The Russians were excluded from the Kosovo Force (KFOR) decision-making process and were isolated from NATO's main force… In effect, NATO and the United States reneged on their agreement with Russia.

Now that Russia’s regional power has increased during Putin’s tenure, their initial response has been to condemn Kosovo, organize the UN Security Council into an emergency session, and threaten to support, overtly, the destabilization of Georgia.

The point of the first two actions is to convince world leaders that Kosovo’s actions violate international law. Thus far, the UN Secretary General has not assented to these appeals:

Ban Ki-moon, UN secretary-general, resisted an appeal by Russia and Serbia to declare the move illegal. Mr Ban said the administration, UNMIK, would continue to regard resolution 1244 as the legal framework and noted that the declaration pledged continued adherence to the resolution.

Russia’s newfound support for separatist groups in Georgia is a complex and clever tactic. Primarily, it takes advantage of the West’s strategic hypocrisy when recognizing specific ethnic groups as having the right to create their own nation-states. Examples: while supporting Albanians in Kosovo, the US hasn’t allowed the Kurds to create their own country in Iraq (out of deference to Turkey) and US doesn’t support Chechen independence. Russia is aware of this selectivity and is converting this into an opportunity to intimidate neighboring governments. Specifically, they are reminding Georgia that Russia still considers Georgia’s secession from the motherland illegitimate.

The EU met Monday to figure out its response to this situation. Spain is opposed to recognition (remember those pesky Basques?), but France and Germany support Kosovo’s action. The UK also supports secession. According to the US:

"The Kosovars are now independent," President Bush said during a trip to Africa. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Bush "has responded affirmatively" to Kosovo's request to establish diplomatic relations.

With a super-power and three great powers of Europe supporting independence, the issue that becomes pressing is how far are these Western nation-states prepared to go to maintain their position despite Russian opposition? Russia’s next move is imminent and Friedman speculates that things may get rough:

… the Russians would actually welcome a crisis. Putin wants to demonstrate that Russia is a great power… The Russian view is that the West has not reviewed its policies in the Balkans since 1999 and has not grasped that the geopolitics of the situation have changed. Nor… has Washington… grasped that a confrontation is exactly what the Russians are looking for.

In the US, the Bush administration will be involved in an important and delicate round of diplomatic negotiations. The EU will have to decide if it would be willing to back some sort of military option if Russia chooses to push the West’s commitment to Kosovo (because, given Iraq and the geography of the Balkans, the US isn’t a viable candidate for this role).