valentine akishkin
pre 15 godina
KOSOVO’S INDEPENDENCE SETS A PRECEDENT FOR FURTHER BLOODSHED
Russia is gradually returning its say in world matters, though recent events in Georgia, supportive of massive western propaganda, silencing or distorting the truth of what happened in South Ossetia are exhaustively labeling Russia an Empire of Evil willing to annex foreign territories.
Russia opposed providing independence to Kosovo as did over150 other countries members of the UN, quite a number bearing in mind that there are altogether 190. The decision was made by overruling international law which forbids annexation of foreign territory. Following which, strangely enough, Kosovo was not admitted to be a precedent for others by the same discussants.
So the matter of dissolving issues of this character has been left to some uncertain, obscure and ticklish procedure that no one knows of. No one can predict how things will turn out in the other numerous well-know disputes of this kind.
In reality Russia was not directly opposed to Kosovo’s independence as it was to the manner in which independence was provided. There have to be rules in this grievous game. Sometimes, laws do not provide a resolution to a given matter in which case the only way out is to set a “precedent”. Doing this, extreme apprehension should be paid to the fact that this “precedent” automatically becomes a monitor and instigator for separatism for others cases even if this precedent is not recognized by the majority of other countries. You can not say that one case in point is a precedent and other similar ones are not. The people in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and other places of similar context can not comprehend why Kosovo was granted independence and they weren’t. This being the case, the chances left for resolving such problems peacefully are left to a fading chance, whereas a more common outcome becomes warfare or waging endless onslaughts of terrorism.
The precedent was set in Kosovo by the US military blasting resistance out of Serbia. I can imagine that not all territorial disputes have peaceful resolutions; I assume that in some cases force might have to be applied to minimize even more losses. Should this be the case it must be in accord to an internationally determined procedure and not adjudicated by one country or a group of countries.
The question of Kosovo is not all about Kosovo; it is something that any country can face in any turn of its history. Georgia is a very recent and illustrious example. The Ukraine with its lack of consolidation, political deviation seems to be standing in the short line of similar problems. Both Georgia and at least the president of the Ukraine and his coalition see themselves in NATO. The real reason behind this is obvious discord drawn along ethnical lines, which places a serious and haunting threat to their integrity. The Kosovo precedent makes them worry as they anticipate a likewise outcome for themselves. The Baltic countries, having a large Russian population are in the same context; they too stand in opposition to Russia fearing that Russia might be the next one to repeat the “precedent” in the same manner as the Americans did in Kosovo. America, taciturnly backed by European ambiguity quite clearly illustrated how matters of this kind may be resolved.
That Ukraine, even if hypothetically, maintains its probability of being integrated into NATO, may tip the decrepit political equilibrium inside the country, leading to an escalation of nationalistic flag-waving spates on either side of the barricades, many of which we have seen both in Georgia and the Ukraine during their colour revolutions. It would not take much effort to instigate a growth of unmanageable of violence. We all know that it takes minutes to make a brawl and years to settle it. Signs of raveling in matters that never caused the slightest reproach in the past are becoming a bone of contention in the Ukraine. It is not an odd coincidence that the endeavour into NATO by Ukraine comes together with the glorification of former veterans who served in Ukrainian Nazi military formations during WWII. Anybody who opposed Russia at any time in history, even those who fought in the ranks of fascist Germany against Russia, are granted state honours and equaled in rights to true WWII veterans . The slogan of Yushenko and his associates reads: “Anybody who is or was against Russia is our ally”. This, with a huge proportion of the population of Russian heritage; in some regions they significantly outnumber ethnical Ukrainians; any contrived division of interests may be fatal. Russia as in the case of Georgian will again be placed before a serious dilemma of how to protect the interests of ethnical Russians in the Ukraine. Entrance to NATO would enforce one side of the opposition, namely those in confrontation to Russia. Unless the Ukraine chooses a leadership that can countervail the odds dividing the country and find uniting and consolidating ideas valued by both extremes, the shade of Kosovo and Georgia will remain in suspension. Yushenko is not a political leader in the conventional meaning of the word; he supports the interests of ethnical Ukrainians whereas Yanukovich is inclined to support the Russian orientated segment of the Ukrainian population. This division has a very serious explosive element.
Now, Germany a vital element of European stability has just announced that it will support Georgia’s entrance to NATO. Germany’s conciliatory placement in resolving Kosovo’s dispute following in the steps of transatlantic relations has poured fuel to similar conflicts exasperating either side, South Ossetia and Abkhazia that they can gain independence as a precedent of Kosovo, and Georgia repeating the “precedent” of the US applying military force as an argument in resolving its territorial and ethnical disputes. The Ukraine and the Baltic countries fear that Russia will copy the military aspect of the “precedent” if problems of this kind emerge in their countries.
It is becoming increasingly more obvious that any country that has the slightest hint of similar discord within its territory should automatically be excluded of any military block. If force is required it has to be internationalized. Otherwise, a military block such as NATO with its 5th clause obliging its member states to take active part in any warfare involving its member states or Russia, which wants its interests considered, or any other country, will place a threat to world security.
The countries that have such problems must be extremely patient and ingenious in seeking a resolution, making up for the interests of all its citizens in which case there will never be any need to rely on membership in any military block leaving things to a military toss up of who happens to be the dominating military force.
In any case, there should be a very heedful, effortful, awesome and cumbersome way, in terms of international law and time constrains, for a country to seek independence. This is what we should unite our ranks around to draw out the rules so that nothing similar to what happened in Kosovo, has repeatedly happened in Georgia since 1991, will ever happen anywhere else in the world. We have to talk it out and not fight it out.
71 Komentari
Sortiraj po: