Global Policy Forum

Belgrade, Pristina Still Far Apart on Kosovo Status

Print

With talks to determine Kosovo's final status expected to begin within weeks, Belgrade and Pristina appear to have sharply opposing ideas about the province's future.

Associated Press
September 23, 2005

The head of the UN administration in Kosovo, Soren Jessen-Petersen, signaled last week that the UN would likely give the green light for talks on the province's final status after Secretary General Kofi Annan's special envoy, Kai Eide, submits a crucial report in early October. Eide's document will assess the province's progress in implementing eight internationally set standards. However, according to Jessen-Petersen, the UN will likely endorse launching the talks even if none of the standards has been fully met, as it recognizes that it cannot continue to run the province forever.


Meanwhile, remarks coming from Serbian and Kosovo Albanian officials suggest that a deal might be difficult to reach. Pristina has signaled its reluctance to even discuss the subject of the province's status with Belgrade. "We will negotiate with Serbia agreements on many issues of common interest such as the cultural and religious heritage of Kosovo Serbs, [and] guarantees for the minorities in Kosovo and refugees. [However] we can negotiate about the future status of Kosovo only with the international community," an AFP report quoted Kosovo Prime Minister Bajram Kosumi as saying.

Kosovo Parliament Speaker Nexhat Daci told the AFP that the international community should not "waste its time and money" in looking for a solution that does not meet the expectations of the people of Kosovo. A survey conducted by Index Kosova between 25 August and 31 August showed that 86 per cent of all 992 respondents supported the idea of Kosovo becoming an independent state within its current borders. Eight per cent favored unification with Albania and 6 per cent said they did not know.

Belgrade, however, remains strongly opposed to independence. "An independent state of Kosovo is not a guaranteed right but an extreme demand," Serbia-Montenegro Foreign Minister Vuk Draskovic told the UN General Assembly last week. On Thursday, Belgrade for the first time shed light on its position regarding the possible outcome of the status talks, revealing the details behind the "more than autonomy, less than independence" formula that it has been promoting for months.

What this implied, according to Sanda Raskovic-Ivic, the head of Serbia's Kosovo co-ordination centre, was that Kosovo would get its own executive, legislative and judicial power, while Serbia would retain state and territorial sovereignty over the province. Kosovo would become a demilitarized zone and Serbia would retain control over borders, customs, fiscal and monetary policies, while defense and foreign affairs policies would be centralized.

The international community must end ambiguous policies toward divided Mitrovica to resolve Kosovo's final status. It has properly decreed Kosovo should not be partitioned, but for six years, Belgrade has been allowed to do precisely that at the Ibar River, which cuts through the city. The international community must roll that back, but to attain a unified, multi-ethnic Kosovo it needs to offer Serbs there practical autonomy and security against Albanian domination, while making clear there can be no secession or return of Belgrade's rule. More resources and energy should be put behind a compromise program, beginning with appointment of a Special Commissioner for Mitrovica. The UN and NATO must regain the security initiative north of the Ibar. Mitrovica's transformation would increase chances for a unified, multi-ethnic Kosovo.


More Information on the Security Council
More Information on Kosovo

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


 

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.