In an interview with the Russian news agency Ria Novosti the president of the International Court of Justice, ICJ, Hisashi Owada said that the Court’s advisory opinion on whether Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence went against international law will not be "a clear yes or no".
I am still looking for the Russian original - as far as I can see Ria Novosti hasn't published an English translation - so that I can see the quote in context (I don't speak Russian but Google Translate might help). Please help me find it!
On itself it is not a surprise. I had heared similar rumors from people who have contacts at the ICJ here in Holland. Yet there are some strange elements in this interview. First of all it is unusual that a president of a court give an indication of the verdict while the data gathering is still going on. For the rest it looks like there will be some vague general text with the addition of more clear individual opinions of the diverse judges. The question is why the court would lend itself to such a charade.
In my opinion the best outcome would be when the court stated that they can understand why the Western countries did what they did (some face saving) but that it is not legal and there have to be real negotiations. Otherwise the most probable end will be a Kosovo without minorities (they keep being marginalized and leaving) and with a dubious international status for a long time.
3 comments:
The best outcome would be to recognize the fact that Kosovo is an independent nation, and that that the temporary association with Serbia that was forced on it in the early 20th century is definitely over.
The nations of Serbia and Kosovo should resolve all matters as equals. It does the situation no good that Serbia is still in old-fashioned aggressive imperialist mode and considers Kosovo to be its property (with all the implications of slaughter, plunder, and oppression that such an empire-vs-colony relationship engenders).
Resolving issues might include Kosovo ceding the almost-all-Serb enclaves near the border with Serbia in return for Serbia paying reparation for the damage it inflicted on Kosovo in the 1990s (and the Kosovar property which the Serbian government carted off by the truckload).
Sure, all these things would come up in negotiations. Plus the fate of the possessions that the minorities who fled had to leave behind. Plus their right for a living. Plus Presevo. Plus Strpce.
Problem is that the international community until now has blocked any negotiations that implied border changes. They only allowed the subject for a very short time under the Troika negotiations after Ahtisaari had failed. Given the situation in Bosnia I expect them to create difficulties again when negotiations might bring up border changes later on.
I expect the outcome of the negotiation to be that Serbia will recognize Kosovo as an independent state (it isn't a nation). But only from that point on and with stronger minority guarantees.
"Problem is that the international community until now has blocked any negotiations that implied border changes."
I think that's a shame, and needs to be done more often. I'd read earlier that minor border changes between the United Kingdom and the nation of Ireland would ease a lot of tensions there, too.
"I expect the outcome of the negotiation to be that Serbia will recognize Kosovo as an independent state (it isn't a nation)."
Many other nations recognize it is one. When the disputes get resolved (if?) and Kosovo is recognized by the UN, there won't be anything left of claims that it is not a nation.
Post a Comment