Global Policy Forum

By Damir Cosic*

Apparently, this is a year for close referendums in the Balkans. Earlier this year, Montenegrins voted for independence from Serbia with a 0.5 percent margin of victory. The "yes" vote needed to be 55 percent for the tiny republic to become an independent state. The "yes" campaign carried the day with 55.5 percent. On the weekend of Oct. 28-29, the citizens of Serbia voted in a referendum to approve Serbia's first non-communist constitution in 60 years. It was another close one.

For the constitution to be approved, at least 3.3 million people needed to vote for it, or 50 percent plus one vote. Some 6.6 million people were registered to vote in the referendum. According to Serbia's Election Commission, 51.4 percent of the electorate voted to approve the new charter. The statisticians have calculated that the margin of victory was about 100,000 votes. The lawyers have pointed out that this is Serbia's 13th constitution in two centuries of Serbian statehood, with an average life of 16 years each.

The most important and most controversial part of the new constitution is its preamble, which enshrines Kosovo as an "inalienable part of Serbia." This comes at a time when the U.N.-sponsored talks on the future of the Albanian-majority province are nearing their end. Kosovo has remained a U.N. protectorate since June 1999, after NATO fought a 78-day air campaign against Slobodan Milosevic's forces. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, which established the protectorate, stated that Kosovo is formally a part of Serbia, but also said Kosovo's "final status" would be determined at a later date.

Despite Serbian leaders' eagerness to claim Kosovo as a part of Serbia, they excluded some 2.2 million Albanians living there from the voter registration lists. Had they included them, the Albanians in all probability would have boycotted the vote, and the Referendum would have failed, as the turnout threshold would not have been met.

The reactions to the results were predictable.

Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica and Serbian President Boris Tadic congratulated the public. "This is a historic moment for Serbia. . . . This is a beginning of a new era," said the Prime Minister. The President called the results, "very good news."

Kosovo's leaders and head of the U.N. mission in the province claimed that the referendum would have no legal impact on the U.N.-led negotiations over establishing Kosovo's final status. Joachim Ruecker, head of U.N. mission in Kosovo, said that the referendum and the final status negotiations are "two separate things."

Serbia's opposition Liberal Party, which led the boycott of the campaign, claimed that "massive fraud" occurred at polling stations in the final hours of voting, with individuals allegedly voting several times and without identification documents.

So, the stage has been set for the final resolution of the political map of the Balkans. The negotiations on the final status of Kosovo will end the process that began with the break up of former Yugoslavia 15 years ago, which led to wars in Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and, finally, Kosovo.

The negotiations, led by former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari, were supposed to see the parties come to a mediated settlement. But they were doomed from the start. Serbian leaders were ready to offer Kosovo Albanians the highest form of autonomy within Serbia, short of independence. But Kosovo Albanians want nothing short of full independence. If the parties don't agree on a solution, Ahtisaari has the authority to propose one. What happens next will be critical for the future of this unstable region.

The process is supposed to unfold as follows:

Over the next couple of months, The Balkans Contact Group -- the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and Russia -- will consider Ahtisaari's recommendations and possibly propose a solution to the Security Council for a final decision. The United States and some its allies have informally told the two parties that they will propose independence this year. Russia and China are opposed to an imposed solution, and few governments favor dividing up another country's territory, whatever the circumstances involved.

The new constitution, with its preamble, serves two purposes for Kostunica. Domestically, it is intended to show voters that his government did everything it could to "save Kosovo." Otherwise, his party might loose the upcoming elections to the ultra-nationalistic Radical Party. That party's leader, Tomislav Nikolic, has already asked the military to draw up plans to "defend" Kosovo should it get independence. Internationally, the vote on the new constitution can be used to ask for postponement of the Contact Group's decision until after the planned Serbian elections in December 2006, to avoid the Radicals' taking power. Moreover, the Serbian government has encouraged the leaders of Bosnia's Republika Srpska to threaten their own referendum on a separation from still fragile Bosnia and Herzegovina. This enables the Serbian government to claim that granting independence to Kosovo will destabilize the region. Just this past week, Kostunica accused Montenegro's leadership of violating Serbia's sovereignty "in a most direct way" by treating Kosovo as an independent neighbor during a recent visit to Montenegro by Kosovo Prime Minister Agim Ceku.

Serbia's delay tactics might be working.

Over the weekend, U.N. General Secretary Kofi Annan said the United Nations "might not stick to the deadlines as we had originally planned." The interview was published Nov. 4 in Vijesnik, a Croatian Daily. He went on to say, "Considering the referendum, and the fact that they want elections in Serbia, we have to be cautious. Ahtisaari also has to be cautious so that the issue of the final status of Kosovo is not used for pre-election purposes. . . . A proposal on Kosovo must be presented at the right time, that's the key."

Kosovo Albanian leaders will not welcome such intimations of delay, as they worry that impatience for independence and high unemployment might spark violence in Kosovo. Should any delay prove more than a short term pause, the Kosovo leadership might declare independence unilaterally and force countries to decide whether they will recognize the new country. At minimum, the Serbs of North Kosovo would then declare their own independence and Serbia would campaign strongly against recognition of Kosovo as an independent state.

The delicate balancing act of the Untied Nations and Western diplomats will be even harder to sustain in the future. Any action -- or inaction - on the question of Kosovo's status risks sparking outbreaks of potentially violent nationalism.

About the Author: Damir Cosic is a political and economic analyst based in Sarajevo.

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.