The few unpleasant, and sometimes dramatic, developments in Kosovo and Serbia, and in their relations with the EU were predictable. It was predictable that Serbia would react strongly to the recognition of an independent Kosovo by the majority of EU member states; predictable that an independent Kosovo would not be formed as an already viable state and that the United States would be delighted to leave the task of making it so to the EU; predictable that the Serbs of Kosovo should become restless at what the future holds for them. We had to be ready for all of this, and we have to face up to it. Criticising, now, the attitude adopted by the EU and most member states is simply pandering to public opinion: it is easy to criticise without having any alternative to bring forward. Without recognising two fundamental realities, it will be impossible to clarify the situation and calm the different populations.
1. The independence of Kosovo was inevitable. It is not possible to force two groups, which have demonstrated through their actions the extent to which they reject common citizenship, to live in a single state. Every possible diplomatic avenue was tried, every possible compromise examined and negotiated, without success. Even the Serbian authorities themselves are aware that consensus is not feasible.
European diplomacy has brought about miracles on the ground, by avoiding the degeneration of differences into new bloody conflict and getting both sides to undertake not to use violence. That, in itself, is an extraordinary achievement, if we look back over the dramatic situations marking the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia in many places.
2. The Serbs of Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina must now also have the right to choose their futures. Pristina's claim that the borders of Kosovo have been recognised by the UN and cannot be altered does not hold water, because Serbia's borders were equally legally inviolable. What was allowed to happen to Serbia's borders, must, necessarily, be allowed to happen to Kosovo's. Why should the right to choose that was allowed the Kosovars be denied the Serbs who live in the same spot and in an identical situation? The argument that it was a one-off which did not create any precedents cannot be valid for the people who live there. Nor, in my opinion, can it be for Bosnia-Herzegovina. In a region where each ethnic group is calling for its independence, an artificial state made up of three groups will never be efficient or even viable. Far be it from anyone to tell the Serbs what to do, but they should have the right to choose for themselves in those areas where they form every bit as much a majority as the Kosovars in their new state.
Conditions for independence. It is true that there is a danger of similar claims elsewhere from other peoples, but his would happen anyway. Artificial diplomatic solutions are ineffective and allowing states to survive through aid and subsidies is inept and unjust. Each has a right to EU support and aid, and that is fine and proper; but each has to merit, and meet the challenges of, independence. Time and understanding are needed, but the principle must be clear: any state wanting to be independent must control and fund its justice system, its police and its activities, and assume responsibility for them. Indeed, the latest European Commission document clearly set out the conditions under which the countries of the former Yugoslavia could become members of the EU, highlighting the support and advantages the EU offers them, and, at the same time, the conditions they themselves have to meet (see our newsletter N° 9616). The requirements of gradual self-sufficiency and combating illegality and illegal or criminal activities must be stated clearly and firmly at the highest political level.
The real priority. For other thoughts on Kosovo, I would direct you to newsletters 9609, 9610 and 9612. To these can be added the initiative of the foreign ministers of France, Bernard Kouchner, and Sweden, Carl Bildt, calling on the EU immediately to grant Serbia applicant for accession status and, in the meantime, to conclude the stabilisation and association agreement already negotiated. I believe they are right: no matter the moral importance of bringing those responsible for past war crimes to justice, relations with today's Serbia, with the new generation of Serbs must prevail. If, in the forthcoming elections in Serbia, a pro-European majority is elected, who, then, could say that arresting a former general is more important than opening up to a country which has called for and merited it?
(F.R.)