I know the Russians and Serbs are close, but does Kosovo really mean that much to Putin?  Sure he can do real short term damage to the EU, but does he really want a new cold war?

Index of Frank's Diaries

The answer is no.. but I get your point...

I do not think people will go very far wit that.. there is no oil..

.oh we all as always me the leftists talking about the same stuff.. oil here, oil there, oil everywhere.. sigh...

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

I find it once again amazing to see how the American hawks, entirely supported by America's so called "progressive" currents, manage to systematically paint an image of the Russians stirring up tensions. From the cost of gas sold to Ukraine to Georgia to Moldova... it's always the Russian's fault. Here again, these same hawks are pointing to Russia as the paragon of tension, whereas the tension isn't coming from Russia. It's coming from Washington (again). In the case of Kosovo, Russia is in favor of respecting international law. Washington is in favor of might making right (chaos). Russia wants a diplomatic solution. Washington wants a military solution (war).

The hypothesis that Russia would benefit from tensions with Western Europe because it would be able to sell more weapons seems far fetched. Sell more weapons to whom? The Serbs? Oh sure, the Serbs are so loaded with cash to invest in missiles that that their buying more weapons could easily make up for lost energy & metal revenues. The Russian military could buy more weapons, yes, but that's diverting state funds from investments in the economy, the infrastructure, etc. to the military - and it's already the case - without tensions (war) in Europe.

Now how would Washington benefit from chaos?

RIA

Moldova's breakaway republic of Transdnestr will seek independence from Moldova, if the Kosovo issue is resolved in favor of Albanian separatists, the Transdnestr parliament speaker said on Wednesday.

Transdnestr, a separatist republic with a large ethnic Russian population, proclaimed its independence from Moldova after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

"We see that a decision is being made under the UN aegis to transform Kosovo from a country with an indefinite status to a country governed by international law. We would like our Transdnestrian state to be recognized as well, if such a decision is made," Yevgeny Shevchuk said.

I hardlt think Russia will make much trouble over Kosovo.

Especially not by using gas as a political tool. IIRC Russia and before that the Soviet Union has never ever broken a gas export contract with the West. I hardly see that happening now. If it did happen the French, Germans etc would freak out and go hard down the nuclear/coal route. No one would ever trust the Russians as reliable suppliers again. And while Stratfor might be right in that Germany need Russian gas more than Russia need German euros this winter, in the longer term the opposite is true. Russia is far more reliant on Europe as a market than Europe needs Russia as a supplier.

Indeed, if the EU could ever get its act together we would here see the real energy weapon: us threatening the Russians with lowering our consumption if they make trouble over eg. Kosovo.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

The one thing that even the alarmists are discounting is the reaction of Kosovo Serbs. For my amateur reading of the situation, that's my only concern. I don't think Serbia proper is going to do anything. But if the Serbs in Kosovo revolt (I'm not even talking about arms) it could be enough to send the Albanians over the bridge.

And somehow I can't see the peacekeepers keeping the peace. If that happens, you can bet that paramilitaries will trickle over the border while the new Albanian militias enter into the fray as well.

17,000 troops in a boundary encircling 2 million people?

Reminder: the Serbs are in enclaves, they are not huddling behind a border. 17,000 troops could keep a region safe, but we're talking about pockets of Serbs all over Kosovo.

Military confrontation is of course not possible over Kosovo, it's just hot steam. Europeans and Americans repeatedly threaten  recognise Kosovo independence unilaterally thinking - we are international community, the international law is in our hands.
Russia is determined to block it in principle as this would give to the West dangerous precedent, too much leverage over the international law.

The compromise seems unlikely too, so what is left? It depend on the choice of the West - if Western countries will proceed with recognition without Serbia's consent I think Russia after some time will unilaterally recognise some de-facto independent states which she will consider worthwile (of course Georgian regions will be the first) and will invite third world countries to do the same.

As the West has more friends in the world, Kosovo will gain recognition easier than Georgian breakaway provinces but with hurdles - remember Taiwan had occupied China's seat in UN several decades before Kissinger's ping pong diplomacy. The same will be fate of Kosovo - long long waiting before formal recognition in UN.

What about Georgian republics? They will be in position of Turkish part of Cyprus or somewhat better as Russia wields veto-power in SC. About recognition of these countries by third world countries - I don't know, Hugo Chavez (and other anti-Western leaders) or former Soviet republics which are very close to Russia may well be the first to follow Russian recognition. Iran's reaction may be interesting as well.

I see only one possibility of indirect military confrontation between Russia and the West - Russia's recognition may provoke Georgian leaders to launch fresh offensive against breakaway regions. There may be piquant situation if Georgia is admitted into NATO before this happens. Direct Russian-Georgian war is hardly possible but Russia already did a lot to arm and train secessionists to defend themselves.

17 December 2007

The situation in Kosovo settlement has reached the critical line.

The authorities in Kosovo unambiguously speak of an intention to unilaterally declare their independence in violation of UN Security Council resolution 1244. Instead of putting an end to the provocative statements we are becoming witnesses of connivance by a group of countries at this illegal move which may lead to serious adverse consequences for regional and international stability. In substantiation of that position they forlornly suggest that the province's independence is inevitable, supposedly having been brought about by all events of the previous period.

This evolving situation is a direct consequence of the serious distortions in Kosovo settlement, to which the Russian side has invariably drawn the partners' attention. The key objectives of achieving high politico-democratic standards of life in the province, proclaimed by the international community and flowing from UNSCR 1244, were replaced with a policy of accelerated sovereignization of Kosovo. The non-Albanian population, primarily the Serbs, still have not got minimum guarantees of security and the ensuring of their rights, and the problem of refugees' return to Kosovo is in no way being tackled. The declared slogan of building a multiethnic society actually turns into its opposite.

By encouraging the separatist aspirations of Pristina, the US and some EU nations openly ignore the useful ideas and suggestions resulting from the talks held between the sides under the aegis of the mediation troika. The fact that in the 120 days of dialogue a final compromise has eluded the parties is being used for absurd claims that the negotiation potential is exhausted. What will happen in the world if the same yardstick is applied to other conflicts?

The reality, however, is that the parties were successfully drawn into a close direct dialogue, the most substantive since 1999. Belgrade and Pristina embarked on overcoming their alienation, and the talks themselves became a serious factor working for stability in the region. The results would have been more impressive if destructive signals had not been continuously sent from certain capitals that they support the idea of Kosovo independence. The launched process, in our firm conviction, offers a chance of eventually arriving at a solution. But one gets the impression that this is why somebody would like to wreck the dialogue as soon as possible in order to fulfill their promises to the Kosovo separatists.

The situation is fraught with a downward slide to an uncontrolled crisis unless settlement stays on an international legal course. Instead of this we see a feverish search for pseudo-legal arguments as a smokescreen for unilateral actions in Kosovo affairs. Now there are attempts to completely distort UNSCR 1244, from which our partners have got used to singling out only the obligations of Belgrade, but not of Pristina. They claim that it does not close the way for Kosovo independence and allows for changing international presences bypassing the UNSC and without the consent of the sides. Such tightrope walking and such unilateral interpretation of SC resolutions undermine the authority of the decisions of the Security Council in crisis settlement.

Behind-the-scenes maneuvering is going on around the United Nations leadership, whom they want, in breach of their prerogatives, to induce towards legitimizing future illegal moves. We are convinced that no one will succumb to blackmail. The authority of the UN is at stake. Kosovo settlement cannot occur outside the Security Council, the UN's main body responsible for international peace and security.

Equally worrying are the Kosovo Force plans for repressive measures in the province against those who will not want to put up with Kosovo independence. Instead of restraining the separatists, KFOR is getting ready to suppress their opponents. This is a direct violation of its mandate, ruling out actions in favor of one side; it is a path leading to a direct confrontation of the force with the province's non-Albanian population.

We call on the UNSC permanent members, the Contact Group partners and the EU countries to once again consider all the consequences of a unilateral sovereignization of Kosovo, retain the settlement process in an international legal field and refrain from hasty decisions fraught with a destructive precedent for the entire system of international relations.

We stand for the continuation of dialogue between the sides and are open for discussion of its format and modalities. In the interest of stimulating the negotiation process, as in the resolution of other crisis situations, we suggest developing a roadmap in whose framework the well-substantiated interests of the sides and the priorities of leading international factors of Kosovo settlement could be taken into account and the landmarks outlined for movement by the sides towards agreement, including on lines of their Euro-integration perspective.

The Kosovo settlement Rubicon should be passed without tragic upheavals. Responsibility for this lies on all of us.

This may sound very naive, but what about a deal where everyone recognises Kosovo in return for both Serbia and Kosovo being admitted to the EU at the same time and under the same conditions.  Thus a new boarder is created and made less important at one and the same time.  An EU high Commission would be created to safeguard minorities on either side of the boarder and ensure all administrative bodies act in a non-discriminatory way.  Over time, we might get back to a situation similar to Tito's Yugoslavia, where there were regional tensions, but not much by way of bloodshed, and the region was able to function reasonably successfully.

Index of Frank's Diaries