“U.S. may postpone Kosovo settlement”

But I though they would definetly put it through next week???

Let's not antagonise further and just abandon the folly for once and for all - why delay the inevitable!!!

Looks like Kosovo Albanian independence is going to face an uphill struggle. See article below.

Kosovan independence

Jun 1st 2007
From the Economist Intelligence Unit ViewsWire
Russia is preparing to say nyet

Increasingly it is clear that Russia is poised to block Western plans to push through the UN a plan to grant independence to Serbia's breakaway Kosovo province. This poses a big dilemma for the EU which unlike the US cannot just walk away from the issue and which, not least because of its own miscalculations, is facing the prospect of yet another Balkan crisis.

Kosovo is formally still a part of Serbia but has been run as a UN protectorate since 1999. The plan of the UN envoy, Martti Ahtisaari, for the province's final status, supported by the US and main EU states explicitly recommends putting Kosovo on the road to independence. Kosovo is to have all the main attributes of an independent state, even during a transitional period of continued international (EU) supervision that is meant also to guarantee minority rights. It would be allowed to seek admission to international organisations, have its own security and defence forces, central bank, government, constitution and other trappings of statehood.

Unsurprisingly, the Ahtisaari plan has been rejected by Serbia and accepted by the Kosovo Albanians. For the latter, the prospect of continued, transitional international tutelage is seen as a small price to pay for the attainment of independence, which in time would become complete.
Security Council focus

The Ahtisaari Proposal forms the basis of a Western draft UN Security Council resolution overturning Resolution 1244 from 1999, which preserved formal Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo. However, Russia's long-standing opposition to an imposed settlement has steadily hardened in recent months, with threats of a possible veto in the Security Council becoming ever more explicit in statements by Russian officials.

The strategy of the US and other supporters of Kosovo independence has been to first achieve maximum possible unity in support of the plan among Western nations and within the UN, and then to isolate Russia and to ratchet up the pressure on Moscow to back the plan, or at least not veto it. The strategy has largely succeeded in achieving broad EU acquiescence despite reservations among some member states (many of which have their own actual or potential secessionist movements). EU divisions still exist, but Kosovo has been taken off the agenda of recent EU meetings to give a show of unity and help increase the pressure on Russia. The necessary support of at least nine members of the Security Council has also been secured, after several waverers—uncomfortable with dismembering a UN member state—have been persuaded to support the plan. Of the 15 current members of the Security Council, in addition to Russia and China, only South Africa and Indonesia have yet to come on board.
Russian opposition

Russia insists that a solution must be the result of a compromise between Serbia and Kosovo, and not be imposed on one side. It has been strongly critical of the Ahtisaari plan as being one-sided and it has complained about what it sees as blackmail at the heart of the process and urgency to resolve the issue (the threat of violence in Kosovo unless it gets independence). During his much-publicised speech in Munich in February President Vladimir Putin accused the West of trying to "play God" on Kosovo. A month late Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking to the State Duma, insisted that Russia was not afraid of wielding its veto, adding "that's a matter of principle".

The May 30th meeting of G8 foreign ministers underlined the depth of Russian-Western disagreement. Mr Lavrov insisted on direct Serbia-Kosovo talks before the UN considers independence, and questioned why long-running disputes such as Palestine were not being tackled first. Although in the meeting Mr Lavrov reportedly refused to give a direct answer to the question of whether Russia would veto, in the subsequent press conference he said he couldn’t conceive of the Security Council approving an independence resolution.
Vital interests

Russia's motives on Kosovo have been widely misunderstood. A frequent assumption has been that Moscow was only acting as a spoiler or using the issue as a bargaining chip to extract Western concessions on other matters. Another wrong assumption is that Russia would seek to use Kosovo independence as a precedent to secure the formal break-up of CIS states such as Georgia and Moldova (this is the exact opposite of what is in Russia's interest).

Russia is a conservative power that has an interest in a UN-based order (which has been heavily eroded in recent years), whose foundation stone is respect for national sovereignty. Kosovo is seen in Moscow as yet another example of the West's selective adherence to international legality. At stake for Russia are the principles of state sovereignty and the inviolability of borders. This is a much more important consideration than support for a fellow Slavic country and historic ally, Serbia. Discomfort for Russia also stems from the fact that a change in borders will have resulted from a war that NATO waged in 1999 in the face of Russian opposition and without UN authorisation.

Russia is troubled by the precedent that granting Kosovo independence would set for others with separatist aspirations in the CIS, Balkans and elsewhere. It would be the first instance since the collapse of the Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia in which a sub-republican unit became independent. Indeed leaders or spokesmen for some of the 50-odd separatist movements around the world are already drawing explicit comparisons, arguing that Kosovo will underpin their own independence aspirations.

Although not primary, other factors also help explain Russia's stance. It would not be that simple for the Russian government to abandon Serbia, even if Moscow had been more circumspect in voicing its opposition to the Ahtisaari plan. Among the Russian elite there is still a sense of humiliation that Russia was not able to protect a traditional ally from NATO in 1999.

The possibility of intra-Western and especially intra-EU discord if there is no new UN Resolution might be attractive to Russia, given its currently troubled relations with the West. Finally, Mr Putin might want a tangible foreign policy success to round of the final year of his presidency. Frustrating what Russia sees as yet another instance of the US seeking unilaterally to reorder world affairs might fit the bill.
What will Moscow do?

The Western powers seemed intent on pushing a Resolution based on the Ahtisaari plan (under Chapter VII provisions) through the Security Council in May or June. The realisation that Russia was prepared to use its veto, and the discomfort in particular of many EU states with the possible absence of a UN imprimatur, has caused a recent stepping back by the US and others, and a readiness to extend the timetable, perhaps until September in order to try to overcome Russian objections. It is thought that the Putin-Bush meeting at Kennebunkport, Maine, on July 1st-2nd might be the final opportunity to hammer out an agreement.

It is, however, very difficult to see how a Russian-Western compromise can be cobbled together even over a more extended timeframe, given fundamental disagreement on the core issue—where sovereignty resides. Russia has circulated within the Security Council elements for an alternative Resolution, close to the Serbian position, that reaffirms Resolution 1244 (and thereby precludes Kosovo independence), takes note of some elements of the Ahtisaari Comprehensive Proposal for the governance of Kosovo and calls for further Serbian-Kosovo Albanian negotiations. This might also open the way for the EU to replace UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK).

Kosovo is at present just one of many points of disagreement in the increasingly fractious relations between a resurgent Russia and the West. Although crude horse-trading over Kosovo is not on the agenda, this is the context in which the extremely difficult task of trying to achieve a Western-Russian compromise over Kosovo will take place in the coming weeks and probably months.

Possible amendments to the Ahtisaari plan that have been mooted (a Russian official to oversee minority rights and perhaps some delays in Kosovo's independence and/or UN membership) are likely to be dismissed as window dressing and will not secure Russian agreement. For Russia to accept anything that remotely resembles the Ahtisaari plan would represent an embarrassing climb-down and loss of face. It would also imply acquiescence to the opening of a dangerous "Pandora's box", from Russia's point of view, of disputed post-communist borders.
The EU's quandary

The situation poses an immense dilemma for the EU. The US can in the end sidestep the UN process, as it has before on other issues, recognise Kosovan independence unilaterally and even pull its troops out of the province. The EU, on the other hand, cannot just walk away. To follow the US in recognising Kosovo independence, in contravention of existing UN Resolutions, would split the EU and make it very difficult to assume intended responsibilities in the province. Ignoring the UN as during the 1999 NATO intervention, does not look like a palateable option for most EU states this time around. On the other hand, to back off and effectively shelve Kosovo independence for the time being risks causing a major backlash among Kosovo Albanians, whose expectations of independence are sky-high--not least because leading EU states, and especially the European Commission, ruled out other options early on in the process.

The dilemma is part of the EU’s own making and the result of miscalculation. Whereas similar intractable conflicts have defied resolution for decades, leading EU nations and the European Commission presumed that Kosovo could be resolved in a year, and that Serbian and Russian opposition could be surmounted. Some in the EU also seem to have got carried away with what they saw as an opportunity to reinvigorate a rudderless EU and impart a new sense of purpose to the EU’s fledgling common foreign policy.

Instead, the EU is stumbling headlong into yet another Balkan crisis. Despite the fact that the US and Russia have the decisive input, major EU countries have shared responsibility for the process and the EU will now be left bearing the brunt of the burden of managing the fallout.

It's increasingly looking like Kosovo won't become independent and i think this realisation is beginning to take hold in the Albanian community - hence the greatly decreased number of comments here from them about imminent independence. The albanians sorely miscalculated Russia's resolve to veto any proposal put forward to the UN for recognition, and the US's "promise" to recognise Kosovo no matter what. I ask all the Albanian contributors, if the USA is going to gve unilateral recgnition to Kosovo a) why hasn't it already done so in the face of Russian opposition, and b) why is the USA repeatedly submitting altered drafts of the Ahtisaari plan at the UN. the answer is obvious. the USA will NOT recognise Kosovo unilaterally but must obtain authorisation from the UN security council and Russia knows this. My answer to al the abanian suporters who kept askng why i only talked about the Russian veto, wel now it should be obvious. i as correct all along, Kosovo's independence rests on Russia's vote at the UN. if Russia abstains Kosovo gets independence, if Russia vetos they won't. If i were a betting man i'd say that Kosovo will not get independence unless they consult Serbia first and come to a compromise.

I think we're reaching a new stage in development in Kosovo where the issue has now clearly moved away from Serbia and the K-Albanians and towards Washington and Moscow. The key question for both countries is essentially: is Kosovo worth risking relations with the other? Will a US push to quickly "solve" the Kosovo status lead to worse relations with Russia? Will an outright Russian veto paint Moscow as an intractable element in geopolitics? Bismarck's words of the life of Pommeranian grenadier not being worth the efforts in the Balkans may very well - however condescending it may be - ring true again.

Russia the lap dog is gone. The Russian bear has awakened from a hibernation of two decades and is both hungry and ill-tempered. During that period of weakness and corruption, bankrupt Russia allowed the US pretty much a free hand around the world, particularly in the Mideast and Eastern Europe. The days of Moscow's unnatural accommodation with Washington demands are past. The US is going to have to share some of its world power with a renascent Russia and surging China. The first step is reversing the silly resolution regrading Serbian Kosovo!

Who is Obrad Kesić ?
Obrad Kesić is American citizen but he is born in Serbia,…. Hmmm he is a Serb! Meaning not worth my 3 seconds to read is anti-Albanian rhetoric.
B92 great attempted in being objective.
Pricnip what happen to your alphabetic plans A, B, C,D,… are you running out of letters?

that´s quite representative for the level of ignorance towards everything that comes from "the Serbs", I guess.

laki, maybe you should try to read between the lines...I know, it´s difficult, but maybe you could profit from it.

There is a reason why US has built the largest military base outside of US in Kosova (Camp Bond Steel). They wont give that up easy. Everyone seems to forget the thousands of Albanians, Bosnians, Croats and even Serbs killed by the Serb military. You can never tell an Albanian to live under Serbia after the masacres Serbs have done in Kosova ... all the rapes, burning, buses with deal Albanians showing up in Danube etc. How easy we forget????

Let people live in freedom where they want - this is year 2007 and everyone Serbs and Albanians want to part of EU anyway.

Serbia does not need Kosova - they need jobs and stability, but of course politicians need reasons to de-focus the population from real problems.

Will Kosova bring you a better life, more money and food? NO!!!!

Many times Serbian mendia tried to tie Albanians with terrorists --- pls look back and tell me if at any time was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil???? No - never.

Jovan I am not a fan of mythological “events” neither do I intend to study them. What Serbs did to Albanian is a fact and I have no intention or any plan to forget. I’ve lived in Prishtina and unfortunately because of Serbian state sponsored terrorism I had to leave my homeland. I was exposed to Serbian literature and history and is based fully in methodological facts fabricated by Serbian orthodox church fully approved by religious zealous from Serbian academy of science. It’s the same history you are brainwashed and you can’t see the light of day.
Explain to me why Albanian dead bodies executed by Serbian police/military/paramilitary/whetevr-military are dound in Danub? WHY WHY WHY, ask the head of your church what happen to the teaching of Serbian orthodox church for peace of harmony? Remember all military units heading to Kosovo where blessed by the Serbian church.
After NATO intervened, revenge attacks against serbs happen all over Kosova and I am not denying that. But remember 1 million Albanians were kicked out in the must brutal barbaric form of ethnically cleansing Kosova. In addition over 10 000 Albanians were massacred (until this day serbs deny this! Including every serb that posts here) .
The line of no return has been crossed and to ask Albanians to leave under Serbia is offensive in any possible angle you look at it.

Zef, there has been countless attacks on MUP and civilians on Serbian soil i.e the Serbian province of Kosovo & Metohija before NATO intervened - just as there have been attacks on a daily baisis since NATO intervened to supposedly bring peace - even against the KFOR operations recently and I need not say anything on March 2004!!!

I am certain that you are only too aware that there was an arrest just recently in Novi Pazar with links to certain elements associated in Kosovo & Metohija - read the article of what the Slovenian Intelligence have found out since taking over operations in the last few months!!!
http://www.balkanalysis.com/2007/04/19/slovenian-intelligence-confirms-kosovo-link-to-sandzak-arrests/

"was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil???? No - never."

Yes - all the time. In WWII The Kosovo Albanian 21st Waffen Gebirgs der SS "Skanderbeg" Division was stationed and operated in Serbian Kosovo and other Serbian regions almost exclusively. It is not possible to ascertain at the present time the exact number of victims of those atrocities, but it may be estimated that at least between 40.000 and 60.000 Serbs perished. Albanians were also at the forefront of the Ottoman regular, and particularly irregular terror squads (bashibozuk's) operating in Serbian Kosovo.

OP-ED from NY Times earlier this year:

JUST a few years ago, there was guarded optimism about Kosovo’s future. Checkpoints were dismantled; the process to establish governance standards was under way. But that was before the communal riots in 2004, and before Albanians’ and Serbs’ incompatible visions for Kosovo led to deadlock last year in talks over the province’s final status. And so now, more than seven years after NATO ended Serbia’s brutal dominion over the province, the international community is about to impose a solution.

Too bad it’s the wrong one. The likely plan gives too little to Albanians and takes too much from Serbs. But there’s an alternative, if only the international community would consider it: partition. Flexibility on borders could make a fully independent Kosovo easier to govern, provide more protection for minorities and make a negotiated deal attainable. Partition is possible, and possibly the right thing to do.

Yet every proposal assumes partition must be ruled out. The United Nations plan, due to be presented Friday to the Serbian and Kosovo governments but whose details leaked last week, follows the conventional wisdom. It offers a half-state on the whole territory: Kosovo will get most of the powers of a sovereign state without full independence, and with no revision of its borders. But that combination is unacceptable to Albanians and Serbs: Albanians suffered horribly under Serbian rule and deserve full independence, yet any separate status for Kosovo poses a threat to non-Albanian minorities there.

The international community’s all-Kosovo fixation has forced it to concoct complex power-sharing schemes to accommodate two mistrustful populations before considering independence. The costs of this ‘’standards before status'’ approach have been predictable: an uncertain investment environment, frustrated expectations and a fragility that destabilizes the region.

It would be one thing if these mutually suspicious populations were inextricably linked, but they aren’t. The majority of Serbs in Kosovo live in a small strip in the far north. Partition would allow them to continue living in Serbia. The remaining pockets would be less threatening to Albanians, making Kosovo more governable, and the small, remaining Serbian population safer.

Partition could break the negotiating deadlock. The Albanian leadership in Pristina might give up the Serb-populated north in exchange for immediate recognition and streamlined governance without international supervision. And Serbia might relax its resistance to Kosovo’s independence if it could retain the northern bit - which would ease international approval, since Russia has vowed to veto any plan that Serbia doesn’t accept.

Objections to partition are many, but not compelling. Some observers assume re-examining borders would destabilize other states. But suppressing talk about partition can have the same effect. Imagine the passions that would ignite if we opposed Kosovo’s separation from Serbia.

Others worry that partition would deprive Kosovo of the factories and mines in Trepca, in northern Kosovo. But far more necessary for the landlocked province are tolerable relations with Serbia and security of investment, neither of which is likely to follow from the United Nations solution.

Still others assert that letting Serbia keep part of Kosovo rewards ethnic cleansing. Yet everyone agrees we are justified in reducing Serbia’s control over Albanian areas; the real question is how much intrusion on Serbia’s sovereignty is necessary.

There is nothing magic or moral about Kosovo’s borders. They are an artifact of Tito’s Yugoslavia, and they never corresponded to ethnicity or contributed to social peace. If borders fail to ensure security or promote welfare, they should be changed. That’s why we favored separating Kosovo from Serbia in the first place. That is a partition, too. So why is severing a smaller part of Serbia inherently wrong?

Kosovo’s Albanians deserve real independence, and while Serbia must pay that price, individual Serbs should not suffer unnecessarily. Changing the border - reducing the partition we are undertaking - could make full, fair independence possible.

Partition isn’t perfect; it’s painful and carries risks. But the current plan will neither resolve Kosovo’s uncertain status nor prevent an entire Balkan people from once again taking to the road. Surely it would be better to move the border than the people trapped within it. That sounds like a moral argument for putting partition back on the table.

Timothy William Waters, a professor at Indiana University School of Law at Bloomington, helped prepare the indictment of Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes in Kosovo.

The U.S. should concentrate on its own myriad problems at home, rather than continue their nation building overseas, which has, for the most part, created innumerable more enemies against it. Kosovo, part of a sovereign state, is not for the U.S. to give away, especially to the Muslim terrorists who currently run it under U.N. approval!

Yes there was Zef. It was the attacks and muders on Serbian civilians and Serbian police by your own KLA that sparked Milosevic's crackdown. I'm sure you've heard about that.

Kosovo will be soon or later be Independent


AT the end not all of 10% Serbs from Kosovo backs Serbia

And we all in Kosovo are being just a prisoner o Serbia and know new SSSR CCCP or Putin's Russia

West should help us we dont want to be East Communist (toghether with)Serbia island like Cuba in middle of Europe

zef: "pls look back and tell me if at any time was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil????"

Nis Express massacre February 16, 2001:

http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2007/February_17/2.html

Pogrom, March 17-19, 2004:

http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2004/March_29/1.html

The lack of Albanian posting in this forum is not because they are less convinced about the independence (its actually the opposite) but because we take it as done deal and now we want to move further and resolve other major problems such as economy etc.

Regarding the Russian veto etc, Russia could not stop independence of any ex Soviet Union country in the past which are far more imp to Russia than is KS or Serbia and I don't see how they are goint to stop KS's independence. They neither have the money nor the power nor any credibility in the world politics to defeat US or EU. You can say something, believe something else but the reality is that there are very few countires in the world (such as Serbia, and Belarus, although Serbia still want to join the EU for some reason) who want to be associated in any way with Russia.

According to some of you guys strangely US has more to loose from worsening relations between US-Russia than vice versa. Its actually quite the opposite!!! Why on earth US needs Russia (a corrupt country which has completely opposite views to their own).

On the other hand does Russia needs US??? Well my answer is who doesn't!!!! considering that almost any major achievement during the last decade has come from this country (technology, wealth, industry aducation you name it...)

Maybe the reason why Russia has some sympathy about Serbia is because they experienced the same history

The US-Russian relationship is of paramount importance to both our countries and insignificant issues such as Kosovo should not be any impediment to our good relations.The US needs Russia in more ways than I can begin to count and Albanians and Serbs should not overestimate their importance in the grand scheme of things.Imagine Russian nuclear material in the hands of Islamists like the ones the FBI keeps arresting right here in my country.How about Russian nuclear missiles in Kaliningrad or Belgrade?These scenarios are much more frightening than some infantile cry babies in Kosovo.

zef,

it happens everyday. kosovo is serbian soil.

Zef and Laki you seem to forget that Kosovo is part of Serbia. You may steal it but you will never own it, When you say that you have not committed terrorist acts in Serbia it is obvious that you have not passed Geography 101. One more time Kosovo is geographically Serbia. It matters not that the NATO aggressors preach human rights and observance of international law while they break the same when it suits them, what matters is that Serbia is on the side of International Law while Albania and their surrogates in Kosovo the KLA as originally labeled by the CIA terrorists.

zef you gotta be kiding serbs kiling albanians raping, burning houses explain to me what the albanians did in march 2004 before you send you coments as for 1,000,000 refugies they were runing from american bombs.there is no independants kosovo is serbian

Zef they are slowly turning that base over to the EU. US is going to leave just like bosnia i have said this again. Iraq and Afganistan is the focus the Europeons can handle there own problems

Domino - you miss the big difference between Kosovo and the former soviet states. the former soviet states were countries before they were annexxed by russia. Kosovo never has been a country which is why it needs UN recognition - hnce the importance of the russian veto. a russian veto + no kosovo statehood whther the USA and EU recognise you or not.

Milan, how you can be so ironic talking about WWI, WWII etc. and so ignorant talking about new history and relations between Serbia and Kosovo. Kosovo was never part of Serbia. If it would have been than it would have status of Presevo Valley, isn't it??? Although, in times you are talking about and before it Kosovo was till Nis, Leskovac... I dont't believe you miss these informations, or at least you shouldn't...
Kosovo will finaly get it's indepedence not because somebody want's to give it, but because artificialy it was part of country which is not existing any more (SFRJ) and Serbia as it's inheritress didn't show readines to govern with it any more... Simply... Good luck Kosovo on your own way...

But I though they would definetly put it through next week???

Let's not antagonise further and just abandon the folly for once and for all - why delay the inevitable!!!

Looks like Kosovo Albanian independence is going to face an uphill struggle. See article below.

Kosovan independence

Jun 1st 2007
From the Economist Intelligence Unit ViewsWire
Russia is preparing to say nyet

Increasingly it is clear that Russia is poised to block Western plans to push through the UN a plan to grant independence to Serbia's breakaway Kosovo province. This poses a big dilemma for the EU which unlike the US cannot just walk away from the issue and which, not least because of its own miscalculations, is facing the prospect of yet another Balkan crisis.

Kosovo is formally still a part of Serbia but has been run as a UN protectorate since 1999. The plan of the UN envoy, Martti Ahtisaari, for the province's final status, supported by the US and main EU states explicitly recommends putting Kosovo on the road to independence. Kosovo is to have all the main attributes of an independent state, even during a transitional period of continued international (EU) supervision that is meant also to guarantee minority rights. It would be allowed to seek admission to international organisations, have its own security and defence forces, central bank, government, constitution and other trappings of statehood.

Unsurprisingly, the Ahtisaari plan has been rejected by Serbia and accepted by the Kosovo Albanians. For the latter, the prospect of continued, transitional international tutelage is seen as a small price to pay for the attainment of independence, which in time would become complete.
Security Council focus

The Ahtisaari Proposal forms the basis of a Western draft UN Security Council resolution overturning Resolution 1244 from 1999, which preserved formal Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo. However, Russia's long-standing opposition to an imposed settlement has steadily hardened in recent months, with threats of a possible veto in the Security Council becoming ever more explicit in statements by Russian officials.

The strategy of the US and other supporters of Kosovo independence has been to first achieve maximum possible unity in support of the plan among Western nations and within the UN, and then to isolate Russia and to ratchet up the pressure on Moscow to back the plan, or at least not veto it. The strategy has largely succeeded in achieving broad EU acquiescence despite reservations among some member states (many of which have their own actual or potential secessionist movements). EU divisions still exist, but Kosovo has been taken off the agenda of recent EU meetings to give a show of unity and help increase the pressure on Russia. The necessary support of at least nine members of the Security Council has also been secured, after several waverers—uncomfortable with dismembering a UN member state—have been persuaded to support the plan. Of the 15 current members of the Security Council, in addition to Russia and China, only South Africa and Indonesia have yet to come on board.
Russian opposition

Russia insists that a solution must be the result of a compromise between Serbia and Kosovo, and not be imposed on one side. It has been strongly critical of the Ahtisaari plan as being one-sided and it has complained about what it sees as blackmail at the heart of the process and urgency to resolve the issue (the threat of violence in Kosovo unless it gets independence). During his much-publicised speech in Munich in February President Vladimir Putin accused the West of trying to "play God" on Kosovo. A month late Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking to the State Duma, insisted that Russia was not afraid of wielding its veto, adding "that's a matter of principle".

The May 30th meeting of G8 foreign ministers underlined the depth of Russian-Western disagreement. Mr Lavrov insisted on direct Serbia-Kosovo talks before the UN considers independence, and questioned why long-running disputes such as Palestine were not being tackled first. Although in the meeting Mr Lavrov reportedly refused to give a direct answer to the question of whether Russia would veto, in the subsequent press conference he said he couldn’t conceive of the Security Council approving an independence resolution.
Vital interests

Russia's motives on Kosovo have been widely misunderstood. A frequent assumption has been that Moscow was only acting as a spoiler or using the issue as a bargaining chip to extract Western concessions on other matters. Another wrong assumption is that Russia would seek to use Kosovo independence as a precedent to secure the formal break-up of CIS states such as Georgia and Moldova (this is the exact opposite of what is in Russia's interest).

Russia is a conservative power that has an interest in a UN-based order (which has been heavily eroded in recent years), whose foundation stone is respect for national sovereignty. Kosovo is seen in Moscow as yet another example of the West's selective adherence to international legality. At stake for Russia are the principles of state sovereignty and the inviolability of borders. This is a much more important consideration than support for a fellow Slavic country and historic ally, Serbia. Discomfort for Russia also stems from the fact that a change in borders will have resulted from a war that NATO waged in 1999 in the face of Russian opposition and without UN authorisation.

Russia is troubled by the precedent that granting Kosovo independence would set for others with separatist aspirations in the CIS, Balkans and elsewhere. It would be the first instance since the collapse of the Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia in which a sub-republican unit became independent. Indeed leaders or spokesmen for some of the 50-odd separatist movements around the world are already drawing explicit comparisons, arguing that Kosovo will underpin their own independence aspirations.

Although not primary, other factors also help explain Russia's stance. It would not be that simple for the Russian government to abandon Serbia, even if Moscow had been more circumspect in voicing its opposition to the Ahtisaari plan. Among the Russian elite there is still a sense of humiliation that Russia was not able to protect a traditional ally from NATO in 1999.

The possibility of intra-Western and especially intra-EU discord if there is no new UN Resolution might be attractive to Russia, given its currently troubled relations with the West. Finally, Mr Putin might want a tangible foreign policy success to round of the final year of his presidency. Frustrating what Russia sees as yet another instance of the US seeking unilaterally to reorder world affairs might fit the bill.
What will Moscow do?

The Western powers seemed intent on pushing a Resolution based on the Ahtisaari plan (under Chapter VII provisions) through the Security Council in May or June. The realisation that Russia was prepared to use its veto, and the discomfort in particular of many EU states with the possible absence of a UN imprimatur, has caused a recent stepping back by the US and others, and a readiness to extend the timetable, perhaps until September in order to try to overcome Russian objections. It is thought that the Putin-Bush meeting at Kennebunkport, Maine, on July 1st-2nd might be the final opportunity to hammer out an agreement.

It is, however, very difficult to see how a Russian-Western compromise can be cobbled together even over a more extended timeframe, given fundamental disagreement on the core issue—where sovereignty resides. Russia has circulated within the Security Council elements for an alternative Resolution, close to the Serbian position, that reaffirms Resolution 1244 (and thereby precludes Kosovo independence), takes note of some elements of the Ahtisaari Comprehensive Proposal for the governance of Kosovo and calls for further Serbian-Kosovo Albanian negotiations. This might also open the way for the EU to replace UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK).

Kosovo is at present just one of many points of disagreement in the increasingly fractious relations between a resurgent Russia and the West. Although crude horse-trading over Kosovo is not on the agenda, this is the context in which the extremely difficult task of trying to achieve a Western-Russian compromise over Kosovo will take place in the coming weeks and probably months.

Possible amendments to the Ahtisaari plan that have been mooted (a Russian official to oversee minority rights and perhaps some delays in Kosovo's independence and/or UN membership) are likely to be dismissed as window dressing and will not secure Russian agreement. For Russia to accept anything that remotely resembles the Ahtisaari plan would represent an embarrassing climb-down and loss of face. It would also imply acquiescence to the opening of a dangerous "Pandora's box", from Russia's point of view, of disputed post-communist borders.
The EU's quandary

The situation poses an immense dilemma for the EU. The US can in the end sidestep the UN process, as it has before on other issues, recognise Kosovan independence unilaterally and even pull its troops out of the province. The EU, on the other hand, cannot just walk away. To follow the US in recognising Kosovo independence, in contravention of existing UN Resolutions, would split the EU and make it very difficult to assume intended responsibilities in the province. Ignoring the UN as during the 1999 NATO intervention, does not look like a palateable option for most EU states this time around. On the other hand, to back off and effectively shelve Kosovo independence for the time being risks causing a major backlash among Kosovo Albanians, whose expectations of independence are sky-high--not least because leading EU states, and especially the European Commission, ruled out other options early on in the process.

The dilemma is part of the EU’s own making and the result of miscalculation. Whereas similar intractable conflicts have defied resolution for decades, leading EU nations and the European Commission presumed that Kosovo could be resolved in a year, and that Serbian and Russian opposition could be surmounted. Some in the EU also seem to have got carried away with what they saw as an opportunity to reinvigorate a rudderless EU and impart a new sense of purpose to the EU’s fledgling common foreign policy.

Instead, the EU is stumbling headlong into yet another Balkan crisis. Despite the fact that the US and Russia have the decisive input, major EU countries have shared responsibility for the process and the EU will now be left bearing the brunt of the burden of managing the fallout.

It's increasingly looking like Kosovo won't become independent and i think this realisation is beginning to take hold in the Albanian community - hence the greatly decreased number of comments here from them about imminent independence. The albanians sorely miscalculated Russia's resolve to veto any proposal put forward to the UN for recognition, and the US's "promise" to recognise Kosovo no matter what. I ask all the Albanian contributors, if the USA is going to gve unilateral recgnition to Kosovo a) why hasn't it already done so in the face of Russian opposition, and b) why is the USA repeatedly submitting altered drafts of the Ahtisaari plan at the UN. the answer is obvious. the USA will NOT recognise Kosovo unilaterally but must obtain authorisation from the UN security council and Russia knows this. My answer to al the abanian suporters who kept askng why i only talked about the Russian veto, wel now it should be obvious. i as correct all along, Kosovo's independence rests on Russia's vote at the UN. if Russia abstains Kosovo gets independence, if Russia vetos they won't. If i were a betting man i'd say that Kosovo will not get independence unless they consult Serbia first and come to a compromise.

I think we're reaching a new stage in development in Kosovo where the issue has now clearly moved away from Serbia and the K-Albanians and towards Washington and Moscow. The key question for both countries is essentially: is Kosovo worth risking relations with the other? Will a US push to quickly "solve" the Kosovo status lead to worse relations with Russia? Will an outright Russian veto paint Moscow as an intractable element in geopolitics? Bismarck's words of the life of Pommeranian grenadier not being worth the efforts in the Balkans may very well - however condescending it may be - ring true again.

Russia the lap dog is gone. The Russian bear has awakened from a hibernation of two decades and is both hungry and ill-tempered. During that period of weakness and corruption, bankrupt Russia allowed the US pretty much a free hand around the world, particularly in the Mideast and Eastern Europe. The days of Moscow's unnatural accommodation with Washington demands are past. The US is going to have to share some of its world power with a renascent Russia and surging China. The first step is reversing the silly resolution regrading Serbian Kosovo!

Who is Obrad Kesić ?
Obrad Kesić is American citizen but he is born in Serbia,…. Hmmm he is a Serb! Meaning not worth my 3 seconds to read is anti-Albanian rhetoric.
B92 great attempted in being objective.
Pricnip what happen to your alphabetic plans A, B, C,D,… are you running out of letters?

that´s quite representative for the level of ignorance towards everything that comes from "the Serbs", I guess.

laki, maybe you should try to read between the lines...I know, it´s difficult, but maybe you could profit from it.

There is a reason why US has built the largest military base outside of US in Kosova (Camp Bond Steel). They wont give that up easy. Everyone seems to forget the thousands of Albanians, Bosnians, Croats and even Serbs killed by the Serb military. You can never tell an Albanian to live under Serbia after the masacres Serbs have done in Kosova ... all the rapes, burning, buses with deal Albanians showing up in Danube etc. How easy we forget????

Let people live in freedom where they want - this is year 2007 and everyone Serbs and Albanians want to part of EU anyway.

Serbia does not need Kosova - they need jobs and stability, but of course politicians need reasons to de-focus the population from real problems.

Will Kosova bring you a better life, more money and food? NO!!!!

Many times Serbian mendia tried to tie Albanians with terrorists --- pls look back and tell me if at any time was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil???? No - never.

Jovan I am not a fan of mythological “events” neither do I intend to study them. What Serbs did to Albanian is a fact and I have no intention or any plan to forget. I’ve lived in Prishtina and unfortunately because of Serbian state sponsored terrorism I had to leave my homeland. I was exposed to Serbian literature and history and is based fully in methodological facts fabricated by Serbian orthodox church fully approved by religious zealous from Serbian academy of science. It’s the same history you are brainwashed and you can’t see the light of day.
Explain to me why Albanian dead bodies executed by Serbian police/military/paramilitary/whetevr-military are dound in Danub? WHY WHY WHY, ask the head of your church what happen to the teaching of Serbian orthodox church for peace of harmony? Remember all military units heading to Kosovo where blessed by the Serbian church.
After NATO intervened, revenge attacks against serbs happen all over Kosova and I am not denying that. But remember 1 million Albanians were kicked out in the must brutal barbaric form of ethnically cleansing Kosova. In addition over 10 000 Albanians were massacred (until this day serbs deny this! Including every serb that posts here) .
The line of no return has been crossed and to ask Albanians to leave under Serbia is offensive in any possible angle you look at it.

Zef, there has been countless attacks on MUP and civilians on Serbian soil i.e the Serbian province of Kosovo & Metohija before NATO intervened - just as there have been attacks on a daily baisis since NATO intervened to supposedly bring peace - even against the KFOR operations recently and I need not say anything on March 2004!!!

I am certain that you are only too aware that there was an arrest just recently in Novi Pazar with links to certain elements associated in Kosovo & Metohija - read the article of what the Slovenian Intelligence have found out since taking over operations in the last few months!!!
http://www.balkanalysis.com/2007/04/19/slovenian-intelligence-confirms-kosovo-link-to-sandzak-arrests/

"was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil???? No - never."

Yes - all the time. In WWII The Kosovo Albanian 21st Waffen Gebirgs der SS "Skanderbeg" Division was stationed and operated in Serbian Kosovo and other Serbian regions almost exclusively. It is not possible to ascertain at the present time the exact number of victims of those atrocities, but it may be estimated that at least between 40.000 and 60.000 Serbs perished. Albanians were also at the forefront of the Ottoman regular, and particularly irregular terror squads (bashibozuk's) operating in Serbian Kosovo.

OP-ED from NY Times earlier this year:

JUST a few years ago, there was guarded optimism about Kosovo’s future. Checkpoints were dismantled; the process to establish governance standards was under way. But that was before the communal riots in 2004, and before Albanians’ and Serbs’ incompatible visions for Kosovo led to deadlock last year in talks over the province’s final status. And so now, more than seven years after NATO ended Serbia’s brutal dominion over the province, the international community is about to impose a solution.

Too bad it’s the wrong one. The likely plan gives too little to Albanians and takes too much from Serbs. But there’s an alternative, if only the international community would consider it: partition. Flexibility on borders could make a fully independent Kosovo easier to govern, provide more protection for minorities and make a negotiated deal attainable. Partition is possible, and possibly the right thing to do.

Yet every proposal assumes partition must be ruled out. The United Nations plan, due to be presented Friday to the Serbian and Kosovo governments but whose details leaked last week, follows the conventional wisdom. It offers a half-state on the whole territory: Kosovo will get most of the powers of a sovereign state without full independence, and with no revision of its borders. But that combination is unacceptable to Albanians and Serbs: Albanians suffered horribly under Serbian rule and deserve full independence, yet any separate status for Kosovo poses a threat to non-Albanian minorities there.

The international community’s all-Kosovo fixation has forced it to concoct complex power-sharing schemes to accommodate two mistrustful populations before considering independence. The costs of this ‘’standards before status'’ approach have been predictable: an uncertain investment environment, frustrated expectations and a fragility that destabilizes the region.

It would be one thing if these mutually suspicious populations were inextricably linked, but they aren’t. The majority of Serbs in Kosovo live in a small strip in the far north. Partition would allow them to continue living in Serbia. The remaining pockets would be less threatening to Albanians, making Kosovo more governable, and the small, remaining Serbian population safer.

Partition could break the negotiating deadlock. The Albanian leadership in Pristina might give up the Serb-populated north in exchange for immediate recognition and streamlined governance without international supervision. And Serbia might relax its resistance to Kosovo’s independence if it could retain the northern bit - which would ease international approval, since Russia has vowed to veto any plan that Serbia doesn’t accept.

Objections to partition are many, but not compelling. Some observers assume re-examining borders would destabilize other states. But suppressing talk about partition can have the same effect. Imagine the passions that would ignite if we opposed Kosovo’s separation from Serbia.

Others worry that partition would deprive Kosovo of the factories and mines in Trepca, in northern Kosovo. But far more necessary for the landlocked province are tolerable relations with Serbia and security of investment, neither of which is likely to follow from the United Nations solution.

Still others assert that letting Serbia keep part of Kosovo rewards ethnic cleansing. Yet everyone agrees we are justified in reducing Serbia’s control over Albanian areas; the real question is how much intrusion on Serbia’s sovereignty is necessary.

There is nothing magic or moral about Kosovo’s borders. They are an artifact of Tito’s Yugoslavia, and they never corresponded to ethnicity or contributed to social peace. If borders fail to ensure security or promote welfare, they should be changed. That’s why we favored separating Kosovo from Serbia in the first place. That is a partition, too. So why is severing a smaller part of Serbia inherently wrong?

Kosovo’s Albanians deserve real independence, and while Serbia must pay that price, individual Serbs should not suffer unnecessarily. Changing the border - reducing the partition we are undertaking - could make full, fair independence possible.

Partition isn’t perfect; it’s painful and carries risks. But the current plan will neither resolve Kosovo’s uncertain status nor prevent an entire Balkan people from once again taking to the road. Surely it would be better to move the border than the people trapped within it. That sounds like a moral argument for putting partition back on the table.

Timothy William Waters, a professor at Indiana University School of Law at Bloomington, helped prepare the indictment of Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes in Kosovo.

The U.S. should concentrate on its own myriad problems at home, rather than continue their nation building overseas, which has, for the most part, created innumerable more enemies against it. Kosovo, part of a sovereign state, is not for the U.S. to give away, especially to the Muslim terrorists who currently run it under U.N. approval!

Yes there was Zef. It was the attacks and muders on Serbian civilians and Serbian police by your own KLA that sparked Milosevic's crackdown. I'm sure you've heard about that.

Kosovo will be soon or later be Independent


AT the end not all of 10% Serbs from Kosovo backs Serbia

And we all in Kosovo are being just a prisoner o Serbia and know new SSSR CCCP or Putin's Russia

West should help us we dont want to be East Communist (toghether with)Serbia island like Cuba in middle of Europe

zef: "pls look back and tell me if at any time was there ever a bomb or an attack done by Albanians in Serbian soil????"

Nis Express massacre February 16, 2001:

http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2007/February_17/2.html

Pogrom, March 17-19, 2004:

http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2004/March_29/1.html

The lack of Albanian posting in this forum is not because they are less convinced about the independence (its actually the opposite) but because we take it as done deal and now we want to move further and resolve other major problems such as economy etc.

Regarding the Russian veto etc, Russia could not stop independence of any ex Soviet Union country in the past which are far more imp to Russia than is KS or Serbia and I don't see how they are goint to stop KS's independence. They neither have the money nor the power nor any credibility in the world politics to defeat US or EU. You can say something, believe something else but the reality is that there are very few countires in the world (such as Serbia, and Belarus, although Serbia still want to join the EU for some reason) who want to be associated in any way with Russia.

According to some of you guys strangely US has more to loose from worsening relations between US-Russia than vice versa. Its actually quite the opposite!!! Why on earth US needs Russia (a corrupt country which has completely opposite views to their own).

On the other hand does Russia needs US??? Well my answer is who doesn't!!!! considering that almost any major achievement during the last decade has come from this country (technology, wealth, industry aducation you name it...)

Maybe the reason why Russia has some sympathy about Serbia is because they experienced the same history

The US-Russian relationship is of paramount importance to both our countries and insignificant issues such as Kosovo should not be any impediment to our good relations.The US needs Russia in more ways than I can begin to count and Albanians and Serbs should not overestimate their importance in the grand scheme of things.Imagine Russian nuclear material in the hands of Islamists like the ones the FBI keeps arresting right here in my country.How about Russian nuclear missiles in Kaliningrad or Belgrade?These scenarios are much more frightening than some infantile cry babies in Kosovo.

zef,

it happens everyday. kosovo is serbian soil.

Zef and Laki you seem to forget that Kosovo is part of Serbia. You may steal it but you will never own it, When you say that you have not committed terrorist acts in Serbia it is obvious that you have not passed Geography 101. One more time Kosovo is geographically Serbia. It matters not that the NATO aggressors preach human rights and observance of international law while they break the same when it suits them, what matters is that Serbia is on the side of International Law while Albania and their surrogates in Kosovo the KLA as originally labeled by the CIA terrorists.

zef you gotta be kiding serbs kiling albanians raping, burning houses explain to me what the albanians did in march 2004 before you send you coments as for 1,000,000 refugies they were runing from american bombs.there is no independants kosovo is serbian

Zef they are slowly turning that base over to the EU. US is going to leave just like bosnia i have said this again. Iraq and Afganistan is the focus the Europeons can handle there own problems

Domino - you miss the big difference between Kosovo and the former soviet states. the former soviet states were countries before they were annexxed by russia. Kosovo never has been a country which is why it needs UN recognition - hnce the importance of the russian veto. a russian veto + no kosovo statehood whther the USA and EU recognise you or not.

Milan, how you can be so ironic talking about WWI, WWII etc. and so ignorant talking about new history and relations between Serbia and Kosovo. Kosovo was never part of Serbia. If it would have been than it would have status of Presevo Valley, isn't it??? Although, in times you are talking about and before it Kosovo was till Nis, Leskovac... I dont't believe you miss these informations, or at least you shouldn't...
Kosovo will finaly get it's indepedence not because somebody want's to give it, but because artificialy it was part of country which is not existing any more (SFRJ) and Serbia as it's inheritress didn't show readines to govern with it any more... Simply... Good luck Kosovo on your own way...