Kosovo Status Process

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses.

See also: Constitutional status of Kosovo

Contents 1 Background 2 Positions of the Parties 3 Progress of the Status Talks 4 Ahtisaari Proposal 5 Conclusion of Process 6 See also 7 External links 8 References

[edit] Background

At the end of the Kosovo War, the two warring sides (Belgrade and the Albanian shadow political leadership) signed the Kumanovo Treaty in Kumanovo, Republic of Macedonia, which adopted United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. The resolution guaranteed the territorial integrity of the then Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and an eventual UN-led political process to decide the question of Kosovo's status within FRY. In October 2005, a UN-commissioned report^[1] written by Norwegian diplomat Kai Eide recommended that the status process should begin, noting that "all sides need clarity with regard to the future status of Kosovo." The UN Security Council issued a Presidential Statement^[2] in November 2005 to endorse Eide's conclusions and authorize the launch of a status process.

[edit] Positions of the Parties

SERBIA: Belgrade's position on Kosovo status is that Kosovo should be highly autonomous, but not independent. The Belgrade negotiating platform, often characterized by Belgrade leaders as "more than autonomy, less than independence," (designed as per the Zagreb 4 peace plan for the War between Croatia and the seceding Republic of Serbian Krajina from 1995) envisions granting sweeping rights of self-governance for Kosovo, but not a role in international affairs, defense or representation in Serbia's central governing institutions.^[3][4] Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica has said that "...any imposed solution that would seize part of our territory would be a violation of international law." ^[5]

Belgrade also calls upon the fact that Serbia is an internationally-recognized country with territories that include Kosovo, and thus that the United Nations Charter defends its territorial integrity. It also calls upon the 1244 Resolution and the Kumanovo Treaty why which the Albanian Kosovar political leadership and NATO accepted to negotiate the final status of Kosovo, but within the territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (today's Republic of Serbia). Belgrade also holds that Kosovo should not be granted independence, calling upon the fact that the United Nations Mission in Kosovo did not do a good job and that the non-Albanian population of Kosovo has been subjected to discrimination ever since NATO took over 1999, culminating with the 2004 March Pogrom; and also the fact that a significant number of refugees still is displaced outside Kosovo's borders and that their returned is almost rendered impossible.

On the 30th Sept, 2006, the Serbian Parliament unanimously adopted a new constitution which describes Kosovo as an integral part of Serbia^[6]; this Constitution was later adopted after a successful referendum on October 28-29, 2006.^[7] The UN Civilian Administrator in Kosovo, Joachim Rücker, has argued that this move will have no effect on the final political status of Kosovo.^[8] Meanwhile, before the referendum, a poll conducted by the Centre for Free Elections and Democracy (CeSID) on Aug 26 though Sept 5, 2006 in Serbia suggested that 36 percent expected independence, 29 percent were unsure, 17 percent thought the territory would be split, and 12 percent though it would remain an autonomous region of Serbia. ^[9]

KOSOVO: Kosovar Albanians insist that Kosovo should become an independent state. They generally assert that because of the Milošević regime's repression in the 1990s, continued union between Kosovo and Serbia is no longer viable.^[3] Kosovo Prime Minister Agim Çeku has said that Kosovo's leaders seek "a Kosovo that is a democratic, stable, functional, multiethnic state and an example of coexistence amongst communities." ^[10] He has also claimed that "recognizing Kosovo's independence would close the dark chapters of Balkan history, and create the opportunity for a new and sustainable regional stability." ^[11]

CONTACT GROUP: In November 2005, the Contact Group countries released a set of "Guiding Principles" for the resolution of Kosovo's status.^[12][13] These principles notably included the requirement that there be no return to the situation prior to 1999 and that there be no change in Kosovo's borders (i.e., no partition of Kosovo) and no union of Kosovo with any neighboring state..^[3][14] At a January 2006 meeting of foreign ministers, the Contact Group further declared that a settlement "needs, inter alia, to be acceptable to the people of Kosovo" and emphasized the need for the settlement to address the concerns of Kosovo's ethnic minorities.^[15][3]. Contact Group member, Russia's President Vladimir Putin stated in September 2006 that the world must apply the same standards to the separatist Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as it does to the Serbian province of Kosovo, where many are seeking independence. He also added that Russia may use its veto power in the UN Security Council to block a status outcome to which Moscow does not agree.^[16][17]

[edit] Progress of the Status Talks

The Kosovo future status process is led by UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari, former president of Finland; Austrian diplomat Albert Rohan is his deputy. Ahtisaari's office -- the UN Office of the Special Envoy for Kosovo (UNOSEK) is located in Vienna, Austria, and includes liaison staff from NATO, the EU and the United States.^[18] Ahtisaari is supported in his efforts by Ambassador Frank G. Wisner, the U.S. Representative to the Kosovo Status Talks.^[19] Ahtisaari holds regular meetings with representatives of the Contact Group.

The initial status negotiations focused on technical issues important for Kosovo's long-term stability, particularly the rights and protection of Kosovo's minorities (especially the Kosovo Serbs). Ahtisaari brought the parties together for the first direct dialogue in February 2006 to discuss decentralization of local government, which is an important measure to protect Kosovo Serb communities. Subsequent meetings addressed economic issues, property rights, protection of Serbian Orthodox Church heritage and institutional guarantees for the rights of Kosovo's minorities.^[18][3]

On July 24, 2006, Ahtisaari brought the parties together in Vienna for the first high-level talks on the status outcome itself. Serbian President Boris Tadić, Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica, Kosovo President Fatmir Sejdiu and Prime Minister Agim Çeku attended and presented their respective platforms for Kosovo's future status. Ahtisaari later told the press that the meeting resulted in no breakthroughs, but added that the discussion was "frank and candid" and the atmosphere was better than he could have expected.^[14][20]

Ahtisaari briefed Contact Group foreign ministers on September 20, 2006, in New York City at a meeting chaired by U.S. Secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. At that meeting, the Contact Group released a press statement that reaffirmed its desire to work towards a negotiated settlement in the course of 2006 and also endorsed Ahtisaari's plans to develop a comprehensive proposal for a status settlement.^[21]

But with the end of 2006 approaching, and despite progress on technical matters, both parties remained diametrically opposed on the question of status itself.^[22]

Special Envoy Ahtisaari, after consultations with the Contact Group in Vienna on November 10, decided to delay sharing his proposal with the parties until after Serbia holds parliamentary elections on January 21, 2007. He said he would take his proposal to the parties "without delay" after these elections.^[23][24]

[edit] Ahtisaari Proposal

On February 2, 2007, UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari delivered to Belgrade and Pristina leaders a draft status settlement proposal. The proposal covered a wide range of issues related to Kosovo's future, in particular measures to protect Kosovo's non-Albanian communities. The proposal included provisions covering:

• Constitutional provisions
• Rights of Communities and their Members
• Decentralization of local government
• Justice system
• Religious and cultural heritage
• International debt
• Property and archives
• Kosovo security sector
• International Civilian Representative
• European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) Rule of Law mission
• International Military Presence (e.g., continuation of KFOR)
• Legislative agenda

While not yet mentioning the word "independence," the draft Settlement included several provisions that were widely interpreted as implying statehood for Kosovo. For example, the draft Settlement would give Kosovo the right to apply for membership in international organizations, create a Kosovo Security Force and adopt national symbols. ^[25] Ahtisaari has said that after a period of consultations with the parties he will finalize his Settlement proposal for submission to the UN Security Council and at that stage he will also elaborate on the status issue itself. ^[26]

In Belgrade, Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica refused to receive Ahtisaari. Kostunica claimed that because Serbia had still not formed a new government after the January 21 parliamentary elections he had no mandate to discuss Kosovo and therefore could not meet Ahtiaari. Nevertheless, he later denounced the proposal as "illegitimate and unacceptable" because he alleged it "violates the U.N. Charter ... by undermining sovereignty of U.N. member Serbia." ^[27][28] President Boris Tadić did receive Ahtisaari, after which he reaffirmed his vow to never accept an independent Kosovo. ^[29] Foreign Minister Vuk Drašković warned that it was "necessary to avoid an imposed solution that could cause Serbia to become a factor of instability." ^[30]

In Pristina, Kosovo Albanians leaders issued a statement after meeting with Ahtisaari saying they are "convinced that the international process for the resolution of Kosovo's status led by President Ahtisaari will be concluded soon with Kosovo becoming an independent state." ^[31]

The United States called the proposal "fair and balanced,"^[32] while the EU Presidency noted that Ahtisaari's proposals "build on almost twelve months of direct talks between Belgrade and Pristina."^[33]

On February 21, Ahtisaari began a period of consultations with the parties in Vienna to finalize the Settlement. He made clear that his proposal was a draft and that he would incorporate compromise solutions into the final document. After this period of consultations and further modification of the Settlement, Ahtisaari convened a high-level meeting of the parties in Vienna on March 10. After this meeting, leaders from both sides signaled a total unwillingness to compromise on their central demands (Pristina for Kosovo's independence; Serbia for sovereignty over Kosovo). Concluding that there was no chance for the two sides to reconcile their positions, Ahtisaari said he intended to submit to the UN Security Council his proposed status recommendations, including an explicit recommendation for the status outcome itself, by the end of March.

[edit] Conclusion of Process

On March 26, Ahtisaari distributed to the UN Security Council his final package of proposals for Kosovo, which included a clear recommendations that Kosovo should become independent, subject to a period of international supervision. Most international observers believe this process will result in Kosovo's independence, with a period of limits on the exercise of its sovereignty. ^{[34] [35][3]}

Pristina has accepted Ahtisaari's final Settlement, while Belgrade continues to reject it. Immediately after the proposals become public, the United States and Germany (in its capacity as EU Presidency) issued strong statements of support. The European Union's Parliament has also declared its full support to Ahtisaari's plan. Russia, however, has called for new rounds of negotiations, possibly with a new special envoy. Ahtisaari will present his recommendations to the UN Security Council on 3 April 2007, after which discussions will begin on a new UN Security Council Resolution to replace Resolution 1244.

The Contact Group has said in numerous public statements that regardless of status outcome a new international presence will be established in Kosovo to supervise the implementation of the settlement and guarantee minority rights.^[3]. An International Civilian Office (ICO), structured along the lines of the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, will include participation from many states, notably EU members and the United States. The ICO, as described in Ahtisaari's draft status proposal, will possess certain executive powers to supervise and enforce status settlement implementation (e.g., fire ministers or overturn laws).^[36]

At the November 2006 NATO Riga Summit, NATO leaders reaffirmed their intention to continue to provide a secure environment and help implement the security provisions of the settlement. ^[37] After status is determined, the EU plans to deploy a European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) mission to focus on Rule of Law issues, namely building the capacity of the police/justice sector. ^[38]

[edit] See also

• Contact Group
• Standards for Kosovo

[edit] External links

• UN Office of the Special Envoy for Kosovo.
• Contact Group press statements on Kosovo.
• Ahtisaari's Proposal on Kosovo

[edit] References

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L03377293.htm