International relations and conflicts influenced by Kosovo

From: jameskerlindsay

The issue of Kosovo has been one of the most divisive in modern international relations [00:00:00]. Its 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia split world opinion and continues to affect discussions on other conflicts, including Ukraine [00:00:06]. Critics argue that Kosovo’s declaration violated the long-held principle that parts of states cannot unilaterally secede [00:00:17], a claim rejected by supporters who consider it a special case [00:00:27].

International Division and Impact

The international community remains deeply divided over Kosovo’s status [00:01:06]. While about half of all UN members recognize Kosovo as a sovereign independent state, the other half still regards it as Serbian territory, albeit formally under UN administration [00:01:11].

The effects of the Kosovo case are far-reaching:

• Justification for Separatist Movements Many separatist groups point to Kosovo as a justification for their right to break away from a country [00:01:27].
• Russian Actions Russia has used the Kosovo example to justify its actions in eastern Ukraine [00:01:34], arguing that if Western states could declare Kosovo’s right to secede from Serbia, then Russia could make the same case for Crimea and the Donbas [00:01:40].
• Self-determination Debate Kosovo highlights problems regarding secession and self-determination [00:01:50]. While self-determination grants a right to independence in colonial contexts, for existing states, it generally means a right to meaningful self-rule, not unilateral secession [00:02:11]. Kosovo has been presented as an exception to this rule [00:02:28].

Historical Background

Kosovo’s situation is rooted in a complex history [00:02:38].

• Early History Although there has long been an ethnic Albanian presence, Kosovo became part of the medieval Serbian Kingdom before being conquered by the Ottoman Empire in the 15th century [00:02:43].
• Balkan Wars to Yugoslavia The Balkan Wars in the early 20th century forced the Ottomans out [00:02:53]. While an independent Kingdom of Albania was created, Kosovo was conquered by the Kingdom of Serbia [00:03:01]. Consequently, it became part of the new Kingdom of Yugoslavia after World War I [00:03:09]. At this stage, its population was generally accepted to be mostly ethnic Albanian [00:03:19].
• Communist Yugoslavia Following World War II, Josip Broz Tito reconstituted Yugoslavia as a communist federation [00:03:30]. Tito distinguished between “nations” (e.g., Serbs, Croats) who received their own federal republics, and “nationalities” (e.g., Albanians, Hungarians) [00:03:44]. As Albanians were considered a nationality, Kosovo was never made a separate federal republic [00:04:18]. Instead, it became an autonomous province of Serbia [00:04:25].
  • Kosovo steadily gained more powers, including an individual seat on the Federal Executive Council [00:04:30]. However, under the 1974 Constitution, Kosovo and Kosovo Albanians did not receive the nominal right to break away from Yugoslavia, unlike the nations and republics [00:04:43].

Collapse of Yugoslavia and Path to Conflict

After Tito’s death in 1980 [00:04:56], Yugoslavia weakened. By the late 1980s, ethnic Serbs in Kosovo claimed growing discrimination by the ethnic Albanian majority [00:05:00].

• Loss of Autonomy In March 1989, Serbian president Slobodan Milošević abolished Kosovo’s autonomy [00:05:17]. This fueled opposition, and in 1991, Kosovo Albanians organized an unofficial referendum showing overwhelming support for independence [00:05:23].
• Legal Standing During Collapse As Yugoslavia collapsed with Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Macedonia breaking away [00:05:36], questions arose over Kosovo’s status [00:05:45]. While Kosovo Albanians argued for independence, an EU commission concluded that, as Kosovo was not a formal republic, it did not have the right to secede and gain independence, and would have to remain part of Serbia [00:06:01].
• Armed Insurgency In 1995, ignored calls for independence led Kosovo Albanians to launch an armed insurgency against Serbian rule [00:06:15]. By late 1998, fighting intensified, leading to growing civilian casualties [00:06:30].
• NATO Intervention A peace conference in early 1999 failed to reach an agreement, and NATO began bombing Serbia [00:06:40]. In June 1999, Serbia agreed to withdraw its forces [00:06:55]. Kosovo was placed under UN administration (Resolution 1244) pending a final settlement, but officially remained under Serbian sovereignty [00:07:02].

Declaration of Independence

Tensions continued in Kosovo, with strong pressure for independence among the ethnic Albanian majority, culminating in major interethnic rioting in 2004 [00:07:20].

• Status Talks Formal status talks began in early 2006, led by Martti Ahtisaari [00:07:33]. Serbia was willing to offer extensive autonomy, but the Albanian population insisted on full sovereign statehood [00:07:49].
• Decision for Independence To avoid a new outbreak of violence, the United States and leading EU members agreed that independence was the only realistic outcome [00:07:58]. They argued that Kosovo’s independence was a “unique case” in international relations [00:08:13], based on three features:
  1. Systematic human rights violations by Serbia [00:08:25].
  2. Its status within Yugoslavia [00:08:35].
  3. Its period of self-rule under UN authority [00:08:39].
• Declaration Following failed UN-led talks, Kosovo declared independence in February 2008 [00:08:43]. The US, UK, France, and most of the EU immediately recognized Kosovo [00:08:56]. However, Russia, China, and much of Africa and Asia refused, arguing that Serbia must agree to its independence [00:09:01]. Even 15 years later, Kosovo is recognized by only half the world and Russian and Chinese opposition prevents its UN membership [00:09:11].

Legal and Political Challenges

Many observers regard Kosovo as a prime example where the principle of the territorial integrity of states has been violated [00:09:30].

• Legal Arguments From a strictly legal point of view, Kosovo’s independence was contrary to established international relations principles regarding self-determination and the territorial integrity of states [00:10:01]. The right to independence applies primarily to colonial territories or areas under military occupation, not to territories or peoples within existing states [00:10:11].
  • An International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion stated that Kosovo’s declaration of independence did not violate international law [00:10:38]. However, the court clarified it was only referring to the declaration itself, not its effects, and took no position on whether Kosovo was, in fact, a state [00:10:51].
• “Unique Case” as Precedent The “unique case” justification is considered meaningless or dangerous, as breaking a rule, even with good intentions, sets a precedent [00:11:17]. The effects have been profound: Russia used it to justify recognizing South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia [00:11:32], and as a pretext for annexing Crimea and eastern Ukraine [00:11:43]. Russia also uses Kosovo’s unilateral declaration as propaganda, arguing that the West bends international law to its needs [00:11:55].
• Serbia’s Self-Defeating Position While Kosovo may not have had an automatic legal right to independence, Serbia’s continued insistence on retaining it has been self-defeating in political terms [00:12:25]. In the context of Yugoslavia, Kosovo amounted to a republic in all but name [00:12:47]. Without Tito’s decree that only nations had a right to republics and thus secession, Kosovo would have been Yugoslavia’s seventh republic [00:12:52].
  • Any Serbian claim became unrealistic after Montenegro’s independence in 2006 [00:13:02]. Expecting Kosovo to remain with Serbia, given their differing ethnic, linguistic, and religious affinities compared to Montenegro, was unrealistic [00:13:09].
  • Serbia’s offer of extensive autonomy was unlikely to be accepted, given Kosovo’s period of extensive self-rule under UN supervision [00:13:28]. Granting the necessary autonomy would have been costly and required substantial representation in Serbian government and institutions [00:13:42].
  • Maintaining control over Kosovo, despite its historical and religious significance to Serbs, could have been more effectively managed through an amicable agreement for independence [00:14:17].
• Impact on Serbia’s Foreign Policy Kosovo has become a deep source of antagonism between Serbia and the European Union [00:14:41].

Future of the Conflict

There is little room for compromise at the extremes [00:14:52]. Many Serbs insist “Kosovo is Serbia,” ignoring context, while many Kosovo Albanians and their Western supporters cling to the “unique case” idea, refusing engagement with Serbia on substantive questions of status, thereby keeping Kosovo out of the UN [00:15:01].

A shift in perspective is needed:

• Kosovo Albanians need to acknowledge that their independence is built on an anomaly in international relations that requires compromise with Serbia for universal recognition [00:15:35].
• Serbs need to accept the reality that, despite wounded pride, expecting Kosovo to remain under Serbian sovereignty is unrealistic in the broader context of Yugoslavia’s breakup [00:15:57]. Allowing Kosovo to go its own way would be better for Serbia [00:16:11].
• The West needs to recognize its mistakes in imposing a settlement against international principles and its 15 years of pressuring Serbia [00:16:23]. This has bred resentment in Serbia and provided Moscow with an opportunity to highlight Western hypocrisy and justify its own territorial seizures [00:16:51].

Potential solutions involve a settlement allowing Serbia to accept Kosovo’s independence, possibly through considerable autonomy or even redrawing the border to keep Serbian areas within Serbia [00:17:11]. A fair, equitable, and mutually agreed separation would restore balance to the international order and set no precedent for other territories [00:17:29].

However, a significant challenge remains: would Russia allow any deal reached between Kosovo and Serbia to pass through the UN Security Council without securing a similar arrangement for the territories it seized in Ukraine [00:18:05]? This suggests that the effects of the Kosovo case may continue to be felt for a long time [00:18:17].