With the independence of Kosovo, it seemed that Russia had backed down on its threats to recognize other separatist regions and indeed it did. But it was unlikely there would be no reaction which left analysts wondering when the second shoe would fall. It has:

The breakaway Abkhazia region in Georgia has called on the UN and other international bodies to recognise it as independent. The appeal was made by the separatist Abkhaz parliament on Friday, a day after Russia said it was lifting trade restrictions on the territory. [...]

On Wednesday, Georgia’s other breakaway region, South Ossetia, asked the UN and other international bodies to recognise its independence. [...]

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Denisov said the situation regarding Abkhazia had completely changed. He denied the move had anything to do with recognition by some states of Kosovo’s independence. Russia says Kosovo remains part of Serbia.

In lifting trade restrictions and thus withdrawing from a 1996 treaty which bans trade, economic, financial, transport, and other links with Abkhazia, Russia opens the door to openly support the Abkhaz with weapons among other things. The treaty was signed by 12 CIS members and it remains to be seen whether any others can be cajoled into following Moscow’s lead. Indeed, as RFERL notes, the timing was meant to coincide with the recent NATO meeting and remind Europeans, wary of NATO expansion, that Russia will do whatever necessary to block its march eastward.

The move by Russia could be a first step towards annexation of the territory, a move that would essentially go unpunished unless Georgia were a member of NATO. After all, Moscow has already issued Russian passports to Abkazians and South Ossetians in a clever move to provide cover for future involvement to “protect its citizens.” In fact, both regions even voted in Russia’s recent elections. One thing is for sure, although Russia has nothing to offer the world, it can and will continue to play the spoiler.

[Part I]

Last week, I argued that Kosovo did not actually set a legal precedent for other breakaway regions but instead finally officially asked a question that has been asked for decades but never answered, namely, who gets to become a state?

From Non-Existent to Status Quo

Although the idea of a nation-state is taken by most to be axiomatic, it wasn’t always. In fact, nationalism itself only arose in the late 1800s. Indeed, one of the reasons attributed to World War I was the rise of nationalism which set off a series of small conflicts in, ironically, the Balkans. As we discussed in the last post, nationalism is a political ideology stating that a nation of people has the right to constitute an independent or autonomous political community based on a shared history and common destiny. Most nationalists believe the borders of the state should be congruent with the borders of the nation.

However, with the constant talk of tribes and ethnic and religious conflict today, most don’t stop to remember the days when the same was prevalent in Europe. Throughout most of history, most countries were in fact multiethnic empires. The great empires of history that we know, the Persian, Mongol, British, Austria-Hungary and Roman were comprised of many peoples and religions. In those days, the idea of a state having sovereignty over its own territory much less being ruled by the ethnic group that was the majority in it was unthinkable or even unimportant.

The Industrial Revolution

Some anthropologists argue that ethnicity is a constructed identity which arose out of contact with other groups of people and competition for resources. An isolated or remote village has no reason to think of itself as Apache, Persian, or Zulu. For ethnic identity to exist, there must be an “other” with which one can contrast himself. It is therefore natural that as the world became more connected, a new ethnic awareness arose among peoples all over the globe. Indeed, major countries like Germany and Italy were united very late in history (1871 and 1861) and were previously no more logically one nation than say Americans and Malaysians would seem to be. But the Industrial Revolution changed everything.

With the onset of the industrial revolution, two major changes occurred in societies around the world: the migration from rural to urban living and communications and transportation technology. Surviving on a farm and surviving in a city were two very different things. Being Armenian or Irish didn’t help you much in the country but it could give you a line on a job, the right neighborhood to live in, helpful neighbors and more in a city. In the vast impersonal new cities springing up, the same social and family networks no longer existed or functioned as in a rural setting. Even today, one finds Chinatown, little Italy, a Turkish quarter or Latino section of cities all over the world. In the impersonal and territorially neutral city, your people became your home.

It is therefore no surprise that ethnicity quickly became an issue in the late 1800s and early 1900s as Europe rapidly industrialized and urbanized. Indeed, as ethnic awareness grew, so too did idea of nationalism all over Europe and with it, violence and instability. What did it mean to be a German if you’d never met an Italian or Frenchman?

But before we continue, what exactly does ethnicity mean and what has the main organizing principle been for humans? After all, states are relatively new historically speaking. All this and more in the next post!

NOTE: Due to a high workload at the moment, posting will be somewhat sparse, but fear not the series will continue, albeit slowly.

Kosovo’s independence has created a whirlwind of diplomatic activity, worries, news articles and discussion. But let me say it in no uncertain words: Kosovo does not set a precedent for others.

Kosovo’s February 17th declaration of independence was perhaps the most carefully orchestrated, controlled and cautiousl independence ever. The declaration itself mentions the UN, international law, EU and a number of other parts of the Ahtisaari plan. For example:

3. We accept fully the obligations for Kosovo contained in the Ahtisaari Plan [...]

4. We shall adopt as soon as possible a Constitution that enshrines our commitment to respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all our citizens, particularly as defined by the European Convention on Human Rights. The Constitution shall incorporate all relevant principles of the Ahtisaari Plan [...]

5. We welcome the international community’s continued support of our democratic development through international presences established in Kosovo on the basis of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999). We invite and welcome an international civilian presence to supervise our implementation of the Ahtisaari Plan, and a European Union-led rule of law mission. We also invite and welcome the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to retain the leadership role of the international military presence in Kosovo and to implement responsibilities assigned to it under U.N. [...]

If that was a controversial declaration of independence then I’d like to see an acceptable one. While most media outlets are talking about precedents and naming every tiny conflict under the sun like Transdniester or a secessionist movement in Vermont, the real problem is that Kosovo has finally raised a question people have been asking for decades and nobody was answering: Who gets to be a state?

Indeed, what constitutes acceptable demands for independence that the international community will recognize? People in Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Basque Country, Catalonia, northern Italy, Turkey, Nagorno-Karabagh, Abkhazia, Northern Iraq and more all want to know. In 1900, there were approximately 57 countries in the world. In 2000, there were around 192. What happened?

Countries, Nations, Nation-States and Nationalism

A number of major events happened within the 20th century that led to the proliferation of the current form of country, the nation-state. First of all, we must be firm with our definitions, namely that:

A country is a sovereign state that controls internationally recognized territorial borders, has a government which provides public services and police power, and has sovereignty.

A nation is culturally homogeneous groups of people, larger than a single tribe or community, which share a common language, institutions, religion, and historical experience.

A nation-state exists when a nation of people have their own independent country. An example would be Germany, France or America. It is also possible to have nations without states, such as the Kurds who are clearly a distinct nation but have no country of their own.

Nationalism is a political ideology stating that a nation of people has the right to constitute an independent or autonomous political community based on a shared history and common destiny. Most nationalists believe the borders of the state should be congruent with the borders of the nation. (via wikipedia)

So Who Gets to be a State?

Over the next week, I’ll be discussing the nation state, nationalism and whether we’ve reached a post-nation-state era and trying to answer the question posed by an independent Kosovo.

As expected, Kosovo declared its independence today. Leaving political analysis for the moment, I just returned from downtown Stuttgart where a large crowd of Kosovars held an independence celebration. There was champagne, dancing and Albanian and American flags as far as the eye could see. Your trusty correspondent naturally had his camera to capture this historic day.

I met many Kosovars who repeated the joyous handshakes, hugs and praise that I’d heard while visiting last year. American flags were second only to Kosovar flags of course and several German and British flags were flown as well in recognition for their role in the NATO liberation of Kosovo.

After 9 years and many false starts, Kosovo’s day has finally come and although independence will be supervised, political problems will persist and life won’t be transformed overnight, I believe that for today at least, we should all stop to celebrate and reflect on the very good deed done by NATO and the very real, positive and long lasting effect it has had on a people and a new country. With all the conflicts and problems that we have today, and that we constantly discuss on this site, I was truly moved by the outpouring of emotion and celebration and seeing Kosovars declaring their independence today and was especially proud that my country took part in an act of good in our troubled world. Every American should be.

So here it is, Kosovar Independence as celebrated in Germany:

As of this afternoon, map makers will be forced to add yet another country to their product: Kosovo. At 15:00 today in Kosovo, the parliament will convene and vote on independence but that is merely a formality. The outcome has long been certain as I found out quickly while visiting in May.

By tonight we should expect a flurry of recognition by the US, UK and most of the EU. Cyprus and Romania will stay out. Yet, the real question isn’t as much what will become of Kosovo as the thousands of international troops there leave little to the imagination. No, the real uncertaintly is that of Russia’s reaction. Will Moscow suddenly recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both breakaway regions in Georgia?

In addition, although the massive international troop presence will contain and hopefully prevent violence within Kosovo, I worry that civil unrest could take hold in Serbia as the government is powerless to react with substantive measures. A blockade and perhaps even power cuts have been predicted. We’ll soon find out.

‘”No Negotiations. Independence!” (in Albanian) is a slogan spraypainted all over Kosovo. I’ll leave readers with some of my collection of pictures of that.

Read the rest of this entry »

This weekend’s elections in Serbia brought a sigh of relief to those all over the EU. Boris Tadic was victorious over nationalist Tomislav Nikolic. While most news outlets are emphasizing Serbia choosing Europe and pro-Western, it would behoove them to remember that with regard to Kosovo, the entire country is of one mind. Tadic, who supports Serbia’s joining the EU is just as anti-Kosovar independence as his challenger. His victory means only that Europe and America can likely expect someone a bit more levelheaded and less likely to make any sudden and dangerous moves.

Yet, Kosovo’s breaking away will present an enormous challenge for both Tadic and his party. Should they not deal with the move in a way that satisfies the general public, or rather should Serbs not be pleased with how they think the government handled it, Tadic could be out not and another dangerous “stabbed in the back” myth could be created by Serbian nationalists as happened in post WWI Germany.

Serbia remains the key to stability in the Balkans precisely because it is torn between integration and revenge. While the rest of the former Yugoslavia has come to terms with its past and is confidently moving forward, Serbia has not. Indeed, another real danger largely disregarded in the media is not only the chance for violence after Kosovar independence but the chance for civil unrest and violence within Serbia. Only time will tell. Kosovo claims to be ready to declare independence in the next few days.

While Americans ponder Pearl Harbor Day, December 7th, Europe is pondering December 10th, the day that will finally end negotiations over Kosovo and either on which, or shortly after which, Kosovo is expected to unilaterally declare independence. While around 15,000 NATO troops will remain in Kosovo to maintain peace regardless of what happens, a great deal of speculation exists as to what will happen. Large scale war has been ruled out by Serbia itself although other routes such as boycotts of countries recognizing Kosovo, shutting off services such as water and electricity and low level guerrilla fighting between Serbs and Albanians in northern Kosovo are all possibilities.

As things stand at the moment, the Contact Group has officially turned in their report stating that no compromise could be reached between the two sides. The report will be forwarded to the Security Council tomorrow and will be officially discussed on the 19th. Let’s see what tomorrow brings.

In the mean time, I invite you to browse the archives on past articles related to Kosovo such as “Could Kosovo Make or Break Europe” and “But What Kind of Multilateralism.”

Almost two decades after the Cold War and with some looking to Europe to play a larger role in world affairs, a pesky little province of two million just refuses to go away. Eight years after the Kosovo War in which NATO troops largely consisting of the US and Germany intervened to protect Kosovar Albanians from genocide at the hands of the Serbs, progress on the ground moves constantly forward while political progress remains stalled.

As negotiations, if they can be called such, remain stalled on the final status of Kosovo, the December 10th deadline looms. As previously reported, talks have been moved outside of the United Nations and are currently underway in the Contact Group. The deadline for resolving Kosovo’s final status has been set for December 10th, 2007, barely a month away. While some reports in the German news claim more progress is being made than most expect, the world continues to expect independence. The little experiment called Yugoslavia will finally, finally be laid to rest.

Slovenia is gone. Croatia is gone. Bosnia is gone. Macedonia is gone. Montenegro is now gone. Only Kosovo remains and historical arguments aside, if Balkan borders were politicians, they’d be the worst flip-floppers of all time. The time of large scale violence is over. There will be no war. Serbia will be angry. There will be a nationalist backlash. Yet, the price of isolation will ultimately be too high as regional integration and development accelerates.

As the deadline looms and Prishtina has made clear it plans to declare independence with or without the world’s blessing, a more interesting and indeed more important question arises: Will Europe start deciding its own future? Or will one of the most important decisions of recent years be made by the United States?

If talk is cheap, then Europe is a low-cost-country for political idealism and empty rhetoric. Kosovo will be a test not of the UN, international law or even of one wills, one that demands action and the greater and long term assuming of responsibility. It is a line in the sand. Is Europe ready to cross it?

Reading the news daily can often be as funny as the comics section. Today was no exception when I came across the following article in Der Speigel’s English edition:

Serbia Says Use of Force Is an Option in Kosovo

Kosovo’s Albanian-dominated government seems set to declare its independence from Serbia. Some Western governments appear to back this move, but now Serbia is weighing its options—and military options—in such an event. Serbia is prepared to use force to prevent Kosovo gaining independence. Serbia is ready to use force to prevent Western states from recognizing Kosovo as an independent state, a senior Serbian official warned on Wednesday.

Dusan Prorokovic, Serbia’s state secretary for Kosovo, outlined an array of tough measures to squeeze Kosovo that he said Serbia was ready to take in the event that Kosovo’s Albanian-dominated government declared independence and was recognized by Western governments. These included the possible deployment of Serbian forces to the province, the sealing of its borders, and a trade embargo.

Any military action against Kosovo would naturally involve both Kosovar and foreign forces there including the French, Germans, Italians and Americans. So setting aside the absurdity of a poor and already badly beaten Serbia starting a war it has no chance of winning, what in the world are politicians thinking?

Serbia must on one hand, continue to act tough not only to save face but to appease its population and maintain support for the government. On the other hand, although Serbia has a less than 0% chance of winning, the threat of force may be enough to make some European states back down or rethink their options. The last thing most EU states want is another mess in Balkans and a violent one at that and could be willing to compromise as both governments and their citizens have little stomach for foreign deployments and war given the ongoing hostilities in Iraq.

As absurd and hollow as the threat seems, counting on European cowardice isn’t necessarily a bad bet.

An interesting development in the forever-stalled final status of Kosovo. Back in July, RFERL reported that the issue may be moved from the UN to the Contact Group for the Balkans, formed back during the war in Bosnia.

However, the move to turn to the Contact Group may be inspired less by the hope of reviving talks between Serbia and Kosovo, than an attempt to outmaneuver Russia. Unlike in the UN Security Council, Russia has no veto power in the Contact Group.

Alain Deletroz, a vice president of the International Crisis Group, an influential think tank, says that resorting to the Contact Group may also help the EU to circumvent its own internal divisions on Kosovo. Several EU member states are thought to harbor doubts on Kosovo’s independence, although a tenuous consensus exists at the EU level to support it.

Deletroz said in a briefing in Brussels on July 17 that the “key EU member states” in the group—Britain, Germany, France, and Italy—could assume the responsibility for an EU decision, allowing skeptics to lie low.

A few days ago, RFERL sat down with the US envoy to the Contact Group who made it clear that this is the final step as far as the United States is concerned.

US and EU recognition of an independent Kosovo is essentially all that UN approval is, minus Russia. The UN will continue to be the primary forum of debate and discussion, however ad hoc groups of like minded (i.e. Western) powers will continue to be the real engine of decision making (NATO, EU, G8). Evoking TS Eliot, this is the way the UN ends, not with a bang but a whimper.