B92 - News - Comments - Zannier: UNMIK's jurisdiction narrowing

Lamberto Zannier (Tanjug, archive)

UNMIK Chief Lamberto Zannier says his mission is no longer able to fully implement its authorities.

He added that it no longer had instruments to exercise its rights under UN Resolution 1244.

Addressing the Permanent Council of the OSCE, he said that the scope of UNMIK's authority, defined by this resolution in a status-neutral form, had become narrower in practice.

Zannier reiterated that the Albanian majority did not accept the application of its authorities, and that it referred only to the Kosovo Constitution, while, formally, UNMIK still had to continue exercising its mandate in keeping with Resolution 1244.

The Italian diplomat underlined that UNMIK could perform its duties only if all sides accept it.

When it came to the Kosovo Serbs, Zannier said that they did not accept cooperation with the Priština authorities, only with UNMIK.

He said that the changes UNMIK was going through “because of the status divergences” were an opportunity and a challenge for the OSCE—a chance because the OSCE would be in the front line as far as monitoring, consultation and, if necessary, alarm raising, were concerned.

The UNMIK chief advocated a greater role for the OSCE throughout the territory of Kosovo, stressing that it was necessary to reassess the organization’s activities on the ground. In terms of new realities, he stressed that it was also necessary to appraise the role of the new OSCE mission, which was vital during the transition period.

“The OSCE’s role will become even more important, particularly on the ground, and not just in terms of filling gaps, but, even more crucially, in consolidating the accomplishments we’ve made together,” he stressed.

The OSCE mission to Kosovo is the organization’s biggest with some 800 members.

Zannier said that the OSCE had advantages such as neutrality, central access and a decentralized network of regional offices, stressing that the organization had already played a significant role in applying Resolution 1244.

The UNMIK chief added that his mission was considering strengthening joint activities with the OSCE in the area of minority rights and the return of displaced persons.

@Peggy - about "the guy with the gun ruling" - that's really what it comes down to: the side willing to fight, wins. In this case, the Albanians were willing to fight, and to take help from large, clumsy allies (war is not neat, and losses to 'friendly fire' seem to be inevitable), while the Serbs weren't willing to risk fighting that could have extended to what they actually considered to be their own land, Serbia proper. It would have been hopeless, but if they'd really believed that 'Kosovo is Serbia' they would have fought for it, even it meant losing, as happened in Georgia. By fighting, the Georgians established their claim to the territories.
(Amer, 7 September 2008 03:40)

Recommend (0)

Poor comment (0)

What's this
Resolution 1244 states that Kosovo is still a part of Serbia so where is this neutrality coming from?
If he cannot function because of "reality" on the ground, then that "reality" has to be changed. UN is like the police. They are there to uphold the law.

It's like the police passing by looters and not doing anything because the judiciary (SC) are not going to care and just simply say, that's how things are on the ground.

Looks like America has returned to the days of the old west where the guy with a gun rules.
The settles will just have to band together and fight this outlaw.
Before anyone jumps up and down and says I am suggesting a gun fight, that's not true. I am talking about showing the outlaw that he is outnumbered and yes they are prepared to fight if he chooses it, but like all bullies he will not choose it when he sees the size of the opposition.
(Peggy, 4 September 2008 22:46)

Recommend (+6)

Poor comment (0)

What's this
bye bye UNMIK...thank you for your help!!!
(blue and gold, 4 September 2008 18:02)

Recommend (+7)

Poor comment (-1)

What's this

bye bye UNMIK...thank you for your help!!!
(blue and gold, 4 September 2008 18:02)

Recommend (+7)

Poor comment (-1)

What's this
Resolution 1244 states that Kosovo is still a part of Serbia so where is this neutrality coming from?
If he cannot function because of "reality" on the ground, then that "reality" has to be changed. UN is like the police. They are there to uphold the law.

It's like the police passing by looters and not doing anything because the judiciary (SC) are not going to care and just simply say, that's how things are on the ground.

Looks like America has returned to the days of the old west where the guy with a gun rules.
The settles will just have to band together and fight this outlaw.
Before anyone jumps up and down and says I am suggesting a gun fight, that's not true. I am talking about showing the outlaw that he is outnumbered and yes they are prepared to fight if he chooses it, but like all bullies he will not choose it when he sees the size of the opposition.
(Peggy, 4 September 2008 22:46)

Recommend (+6)

Poor comment (0)

What's this
@Peggy - about "the guy with the gun ruling" - that's really what it comes down to: the side willing to fight, wins. In this case, the Albanians were willing to fight, and to take help from large, clumsy allies (war is not neat, and losses to 'friendly fire' seem to be inevitable), while the Serbs weren't willing to risk fighting that could have extended to what they actually considered to be their own land, Serbia proper. It would have been hopeless, but if they'd really believed that 'Kosovo is Serbia' they would have fought for it, even it meant losing, as happened in Georgia. By fighting, the Georgians established their claim to the territories.
(Amer, 7 September 2008 03:40)

Recommend (0)

Poor comment (0)

What's this

bye bye UNMIK...thank you for your help!!!
(blue and gold, 4 September 2008 18:02)

Recommend (+7)

Poor comment (-1)

What's this
@Peggy - about "the guy with the gun ruling" - that's really what it comes down to: the side willing to fight, wins. In this case, the Albanians were willing to fight, and to take help from large, clumsy allies (war is not neat, and losses to 'friendly fire' seem to be inevitable), while the Serbs weren't willing to risk fighting that could have extended to what they actually considered to be their own land, Serbia proper. It would have been hopeless, but if they'd really believed that 'Kosovo is Serbia' they would have fought for it, even it meant losing, as happened in Georgia. By fighting, the Georgians established their claim to the territories.
(Amer, 7 September 2008 03:40)

Recommend (0)

Poor comment (0)

What's this
Resolution 1244 states that Kosovo is still a part of Serbia so where is this neutrality coming from?
If he cannot function because of "reality" on the ground, then that "reality" has to be changed. UN is like the police. They are there to uphold the law.

It's like the police passing by looters and not doing anything because the judiciary (SC) are not going to care and just simply say, that's how things are on the ground.

Looks like America has returned to the days of the old west where the guy with a gun rules.
The settles will just have to band together and fight this outlaw.
Before anyone jumps up and down and says I am suggesting a gun fight, that's not true. I am talking about showing the outlaw that he is outnumbered and yes they are prepared to fight if he chooses it, but like all bullies he will not choose it when he sees the size of the opposition.
(Peggy, 4 September 2008 22:46)

Recommend (+6)

Poor comment (0)

What's this