"UNSC veto, Serbia's new Kosovo tactic"

If Serbia's Kosovo draft fails to garner support at the UN General Assembly this fall, Belgrade will shift the focus of its fight for Kosovo to another UN body. This is according to daily Vecernje Novosti, which said that the plan was to turn to the UN Security Council, where the country is supported by permanent members Russia and China, who, in turn, have a right to veto any decision. "UNSC veto, Serbia's new Kosovo tactic" By contrast, the newspaper says, decisions made by the UN General Assembly "have merely the moral weight", as they are not binding. All this comes in the wake of ICJ's July 22 advisory opinion in the Kosovo case, which will now be sent to the UN General Assembly. The daily quotes Serbian diplomatic sources as saying that a failure to have the Serbian Kosovo resolution adopted by the General Assembly "would mean a lost battle, not the war". International law professor Radoslav Stojanovic told the newspaper that "even if our resolution failed, this would be no setback in the continued diplomatic battle for Kosovo and Metohija". "It's hard to expect that one state can gain a majority in the UN General Assembly, so this session should not be looked at in a fatalistic mood. The General Assembly makes recommendations, and Serbia will have the UN Security Council to turn to and protect her interests," he stated. His colleague Predrag Simic agreed that the Assembly's decisions were not binding but said that Russia may find itself in a "politically more difficult position, as it would have to confront the majority" in the Council, should the draft fail. But he also noticed that Moscow would "still have a right to veto". As long as the valid UN Resolution 1244 is in force, which guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity, Belgrade will have its support, says the article, and quotes FM Vuk Jeremic who stated that the resolution represented a "safe harbor" for the country to defend its policy on Kosovo and Metohija. According to Vecernje Novosti, this is the reason why Serbia has chosen to rather have its resolution fail at the UNGA than cave in to pressure from the EU and withdraw or change the draft. "Creators of our foreign policy," continues the article, "said that giving up on negotiations on all issues (including status) with Kosovo Albanians could be interpreted as our giving up on Kosovo and Metohija." In that scenario, those countries that are on our side would receive a message that we are softening our stance under pressure, which would in turn result in a wave of recognitions of Kosovo, according to the daily. Belgrade's Kosovo strategy at this point is to remain steadfast in its policy, as it believes only this approach will guarantee strong support from Moscow and Beijing, and prevent further recognitions in case the Kosovo resolution draft fails at the UN General Assembly. Kosovo's Albanians unilaterally declared independence in early 2008, which was rejected in Belgrade as an illegal act of secession. Later that year, at Serbia's request, the UN General Assembly asked the top UN court to give its advisory opinion on the legality under international law of the proclamation. The court found that since no active provision in international law prohibited such declarations, the Kosovo Albanian UDI did not violate it. The ICJ, however, said it was not making a stance on the right to self-determination or secession. The court's opinion will be sent back to the General Assembly, to which Serbia has submitted a draft resolution. A view of the UN General Assembly (FoNet, file)

"UNSC veto, Serbia's new Kosovo tactic"

By contrast, the newspaper says, decisions made by the UN General Assembly "have merely the moral weight", as they are not binding.

All this comes in the wake of ICJ's July 22 advisory opinion in the Kosovo case, which will now be sent to the UN General Assembly.

The daily quotes Serbian diplomatic sources as saying that a failure to have the Serbian Kosovo resolution adopted by the General Assembly "would mean a lost battle, not the war".

International law professor Radoslav Stojanović told the newspaper that "even if our resolution failed, this would be no setback in the continued diplomatic battle for Kosovo and Metohija".

"It's hard to expect that one state can gain a majority in the UN General Assembly, so this session should not be looked at in a fatalistic mood. The General Assembly makes recommendations, and Serbia will have the UN Security Council to turn to and protect her interests," he stated.

His colleague Predrag Simić agreed that the Assembly's decisions were not binding but said that Russia may find itself in a "politically more difficult position, as it would have to confront the majority" in the Council, should the draft fail. But he also noticed that Moscow would "still have a right to veto".

As long as the valid UN Resolution 1244 is in force, which guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity, Belgrade will have its support, says the article, and quotes FM Vuk Jeremić who stated that the resolution represented a "safe harbor" for the country to defend its policy on Kosovo and Metohija.

According to Večernje Novosti, this is the reason why Serbia has chosen to rather have its resolution fail at the UNGA than cave in to pressure from the EU and withdraw or change the draft.

"Creators of our foreign policy," continues the article, "said that giving up on negotiations on all issues (including status) with Kosovo Albanians could be interpreted as our giving up on Kosovo and Metohija."

In that scenario, those countries that are on our side would receive a message that we are softening our stance under pressure, which would in turn result in a wave of recognitions of Kosovo, according to the daily.

Belgrade's Kosovo strategy at this point is to remain steadfast in its policy, as it believes only this approach will guarantee strong support from Moscow and Beijing, and prevent further recognitions in case the Kosovo resolution draft fails at the UN General Assembly.

Kosovo's Albanians unilaterally declared independence in early 2008, which was rejected in Belgrade as an illegal act of secession. Later that year, at Serbia's request, the UN General Assembly asked the top UN court to give its advisory opinion on the legality under international law of the proclamation.

The court found that since no active provision in international law prohibited such declarations, the Kosovo Albanian UDI did not violate it. The ICJ, however, said it was not making a stance on the right to self-determination or secession.

The court's opinion will be sent back to the General Assembly, to which Serbia has submitted a draft resolution.