Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another

Precedent

What the pending International Court of Justice decision on Kosovo’s independence will mean for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Print Email
Hanging posters in Pristina, Kosovo’s capital, in the days before the declaration of statehood. (Dimitar Dilkoff/AFP/Getty Images)

The International Court of Justice will soon issue an opinion on the legality of Kosovo’s independence from Serbia, which was unilaterally declared in February 2008 and has been recognized by 65 of the U.N.’s 192 members. A decision to recognize Kosovo’s independence will likely have a significant influence on separatist movements around the world, and on the future of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Serbia’s Foreign Minister, Vuk Jeremic, recently told an interviewer, “Kosovo is our Jerusalem.” The question for Israel is whether Jerusalem will soon become its Kosovo.

Kosovo’s majority-Muslim population suffered during the reign of former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic, and the idea of an independent Kosovo attracted the firm support of the Clinton and Bush administrations, as well as 29 states belonging to the European Union and/or NATO. Pressures on states that were once cool toward the secession of Kosovo have intensified in advance of the Hague’s forthcoming ruling. Even the former Yugoslav republic of Montenegro, which had close ties to Serbia, decided at the end of last year to accept an ambassador from Kosovo in the hope of furthering its application to join the European Union. Many states that support Kosovo’s independence for religious, political, or idealistic reasons are enthusiastic supporters of unilaterally establishing a Palestinian state on territory now controlled by Israel.

During a visit to Serbia last summer, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas explained that the Palestinians are very interested in what goes on at the ICJ. “The case of Kosovo is before the ICJ and I believe it is the right way to solve problems,” Abbas told Serbian President Boris Tadic. The Palestinian Authority has been lobbying for months for more robust engagement by the United States and other powers and for increasing the role of international institutions, especially international courts. “Kosovo is not better than us,” Abbas aide Yasser Abed Rabbo said days after Kosovo declared its independence. “We deserve independence even before Kosovo, and we ask for the backing of the United States and the European Union for our independence.” The Kosovo principle would imply not only that a Palestinian state could be created by international courts acting at the behest of an international community sick of failed negotiations. It would imply also that any such decision would be subject to future revision based on the changing demography of individual regions of the rump state of Israel, such as the majority-Arab Galilee.

The disputed province of Kosovo, which Serbs have historically referred to as Kosovo and Metohija, was one of two autonomous ethnically mixed provinces of Serbia and the part of the country that saw the heaviest fighting during the Balkan wars of the 1990s. Positioned in the heart of the Balkan peninsula, next to Pan-European Transport Corridor 10, a key roadway for commerce between the east and Western Europe, Kosovo is the cradle of medieval Serbia, and a home to the old monasteries of Gracanica, Decani, Banjska, and St. Archangel. Kosovo’s Albanians do not use the full name of the province because the word metohija—which means land of churches—is thought to legitimize Serbia’s historical claim to the province.

Nationalist tensions between Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo began in the 19th century and escalated with the eviction of thousands of Serbs from Kosovo at the beginning of World War II. In the mid-1990s, Kosovo became a battleground between Serbs and Albanian separatists and attracted the attention of Western media and NGOs embarrassed by the West’s failure to stop ethnic cleansing and warfare in Bosnia. After a U.S.-led force bombed Serbia, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1244, which placed Kosovo under interim U.N. administration and reaffirmed the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which included Montenegro, Serbia, and its autonomous provinces, Vojvodina and Kosovo.

In the years that followed, Serbia asked for negotiations over the legal status of Kosovo. In 2006, U.N. Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari led a round of talks that resulted in a 2007 draft settlement proposal, which Russia and China opposed, forcing the U.N. Security Council to support another failed round of negotiations.

In February 2008, the Assembly of Kosovo declared its independence from Serbia. Objections from Russia, China, and other countries made it impossible for the United Nations to endorse the province’s independence. Pressed by the possibility of having to choose between losing its territorial integrity and severing its newly established ties with most NATO and E.U. members, the Serbian government decided to shift the problem to the international courts. In October 2008, the U.N. General Assembly voted to encourage the ICJ to issue an opinion on the question, “Is the independence of Kosovo in accordance with international law?” Meanwhile, the leaders of more than 90 recognized secessionist movements in the world, as well as states like Spain and China—which have reason to fear the international legitimization of secessionist movements—are closely following the Kosovo story.

There are three plausible outcomes to the ICJ case:

The first would be for the court to state that the declared independence of Kosovo violates international law.

The second would be for the court to rule in favor of Kosovo’s independence. The U.N. Charter does not approve secession on an ethnic basis except in cases involving colonial rule. But supporters of Kosovo’s independence hope the ICJ might make a special allowance because of the violent history of the province. The cost, though, of making such an allowance is that it would affirm for states and separatist movements across the globe that international justice grows out of the barrel of a gun.

The third and most widely expected outcome is for the court to issue an opinion each party can interpret as it pleases, a result unlikely to increase international stability.

Whatever opinion the ICJ reaches will establish the court’s power to solve other such disputes, and the degree to which the ruling is influenced by outside pressures will set an important precedent that will be applied to other cases—beginning with Palestine. Unlike Kosovo’s Albanians, who in centuries past had been only a minority in the province, Arabs had for centuries been a majority in Palestine and already possess the embryo of a state.

In both Palestine and Kosovo, demands for statehood have been accompanied by violence, most notably by Serbs. But the picture in Kosovo is much richer and more complex than the simplified images of violent and disgusting Serbian criminals that captivated Western media in the ’90s. From the beginning of World War II to the mid-1980s, Albanian separatists used murder, kidnapping, and forced property buyouts to expel several hundred thousand Serbian citizens. Albanians were killed not only by Milosevic’s thugs but also by their own people—members of the Kosovo Liberation Army—who murdered the disobedient among them and turned large areas of the country into war zones.

Because Palestine, too, has suffered from decades of bloody conflict, one might expect the same arguments that are likely to prevail in the Kosovo case—that the prevention of violence justifies an internationally imposed secession—will quickly be applied to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Tzipi Livni, who was Israel’s foreign minister during last year’s military campaign in Gaza, has already been issued an arrest warrant by a British court for her role in the offensive. (The warrant was withdrawn after Livni canceled a planned trip to Britain.)

In this light, one might recall Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo last summer, which sent a clear message that further construction of Jewish settlements in occupied territory must be stopped—a message that has been repeated by Hillary Clinton and other key U.S. policymakers. A recent report by STRATFOR, a geopolitical risk-analysis firm, stated that “in order to institute the two-state solution, Obama must establish the principle that the West Bank is Palestinian territory by right and not Israeli territory on which the Israelis might make concessions.” Israel has already lost an ICJ battle over its West Bank barrier. After Kosovo’s independence, it could lose much more.

Milena Miletic is a political correspondent at Akter, a Serbian political weekly, and a contributor to the Serbian magazines Odbrana (Defense) and Bezbednost (Security).

Print Email
FlaGuy954 says:

When Kosovo gets its independence, the Kurds should cecede from Turkey and Iraq..why not…what’s good for the goose is good for the gander! And don’t forget Tibet! Hear that, China? Or the Basques…hear that, France and Spain? It is not just the Israeli – Palestinian issue. There are many, many more like it around the world!

steve albert says:

This article does not deal with the principle cause of the conflict over Kosovo,and Kosovo’s subsequent independence.

Slobodan Milosevic rose to power by stirring up Serbian nationalism over the issue of Kosovo. Kosovo was a semi-autonomous region of Yugoslavia, until he took away its autonomy.

A Communist apparatik, Milosevic turned nationalist in order to conserve his hold on power. He exploited ethnic tensions in Kosovo to attain his goals. After taking away Kosovo’s autonomy, he turned his attention to Slovenia where his repressive moves were met with a successful campaign of passive resistance. He attacked Vukovar and shelled Dubrovnik in attempt to carve out a Serbian Republic in Croatia.He then turned to Bosnia,,where he waged a genocidal war against non-Serbs.

NA.T.O. intervened when his attacks on the Kosovars seemed to portend a similar fate to that of the Bosnians. Milosevic’s deportation of the Kosovars made continued Serbian rule in Kosovo impossible. Serbia lost effective control of Kosovo over ten years ago.

Milosevic’s wars of aggression are the cause of the break up of Yugoslavia. The independence of Kosovo is the final chapter in that break up.

Successive Israeli governments have agreed to the necessity of an independent Palestinian state. An international court recognizing Kosovo independence will not affect Israeli -Palestinian negotiations.

This has nothing to do with Gaza. Israel voluntarily withdrew from Gaza. Milosevic withdrew from Kosovo after he was defeated by N.A.T.O.

Its Serbia, not Kosovo that brought this issue before the ICJ. The independence of Kosovo is an established fact. The independence of Palestine can only occur through negotiations between the two parties. It will surely not be adjudicated in a court of law.

marko g says:

Steve Albert’s version of history is comic. Several well-financed PR companies have created and spread that version of events, which gets the real guilty parties for destroying Yugoslavia off the hook. In reality, Milosevic took away Kosovo’s federal status, not its autonomy, was entirely uninterested in Slovene secession (probably a pity), supported the right of the Krajina Serbs not to be coerced into a Croat (Tudjman) secession, avoided taking Dubrovnik (which Tudjman’s forces had turned into a military provocation, in which they did their best to incite the Yugoslav Army to fire on it). The ICJ has already cleared Serbia of any genocidal Bosnian role. And the idea of a kindly, humanitarian NATO intervening in Kosovo is a dangerous joke, one which led the US and GB to try the same trick regarding Iraq. NATO’s incitement and support of the KLA terrorists was purely self-interested. If their alibi hadn’t been believed re Kosovo, the world since then would have been a considerably safer place.

marko g says:

Steve Albert’s version of history is comic. Several well-financed PR companies have created and spread that version of events, which gets the real guilty parties for destroying Yugoslavia off the hook.

In reality, Milosevic took away Kosovo’s federal status, not its autonomy, was entirely uninterested in Slovene secession (probably a pity), supported the right of the Krajina Serbs not to be coerced into a Croat (Tudjman) secession, avoided taking Dubrovnik (which Tudjman’s forces had turned into a military provocation, in which they did their best to incite the Yugoslav Army to fire on it).
The ICJ has already cleared Serbia of any genocidal Bosnian role. And the idea of a kindly, humanitarian NATO intervening in Kosovo is a dangerous joke, one which led the US and GB to try the same trick regarding Iraq. NATO’s incitement and support of the KLA terrorists was purely self-interested.
And if NATO’s ‘humanitarian’ alibi for this crime of aggression had failed to fool the public, then the world would have been a considerably safer place.

The following time I read a blog, I hope that it doesnt disappoint me as much as this one. I mean, I know it was my choice to read, however I actually thought youd have one thing fascinating to say. All I hear is a bunch of whining about one thing that you would repair in case you werent too busy searching for attention.

Your blog was tweeted by a friend yesterday. Decided I’d check it out. Best decision ever.

hey there and thank you for your information – I’ve certainly picked up anything new from right here. I did however expertise a few technical points using this web site, since I experienced to reload the site a lot of times previous to I could get it to load correctly. I had been wondering if your web host is OK? Not that I am complaining, but sluggish loading instances times will often affect your placement in google and can damage your high-quality score if ads and marketing with Adwords. Well I am adding this RSS to my email and can look out for much more of your respective interesting content. Ensure that you update this again very soon..

I have been exploring for a little for any high quality articles or blog posts on this sort of area . Exploring in Yahoo I at last stumbled upon this web site. Reading this info So i am happy to convey that I have a very good uncanny feeling I discovered exactly what I needed. I most certainly will make certain to don’t forget this website and give it a look on a constant basis.

I truly wanted to post a brief remark in order to express gratitude to you for all the fantastic hints you are sharing on this site. My time consuming internet research has now been honored with really good suggestions to share with my pals. I ‘d believe that many of us readers are undoubtedly endowed to live in a useful site with so many wonderful individuals with valuable points. I feel very privileged to have used your entire web pages and look forward to tons of more cool minutes reading here. Thanks a lot again for a lot of things.

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

Precedent

What the pending International Court of Justice decision on Kosovo’s independence will mean for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

More on Tablet:

The True Story of Thanksgiving

By Zachary Schrieber — A new historical account was recently discovered. It is recorded here.