Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Kosovo Author Daniel Serwer

1. Kosovo: The Next Steps

Author:
Daniel Serwer
Publication Date:
11-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Kosovo should not be allowed to stagnate as a "frozen conflict." There are well-established principles that can provide a basis for moving forward. Talks between Belgrade and Pristina on a framework for managing their relationship on practical issues are both possible and necessary, even if they do not happen right away. The time available should be used for careful preparations, especially by Pristina. As Belgrade and Moscow present serious challenges, a joint EU/U.S. effort has the best prospects for success to prevent a "frozen conflict."
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, and War
Political Geography:
Kosovo, Moscow, and Balkans

2. A New Kind of Balkans Drama

Author:
Daniel Serwer
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The Balkans face more trouble in Kosovo as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina unless the United States and European Union take dramatic steps to get both back on track towards EU membership. In Bosnia, the international community needs to reconstitute itself as well as support an effort to reform the country's constitution. In Kosovo, Pristina and Belgrade need to break through the barriers to direct communication and begin discussions on a wide range of issues. This brief proposes specific diplomatic measures to meet these needs.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, International Relations, Diplomacy, and Ethnic Conflict
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Kosovo, Serbia, and Balkans

3. Kosovo: What Can Go Wrong?

Author:
Daniel Serwer and Yll Bajraktari
Publication Date:
03-2007
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
At the end of the NATO/Yugoslavia war almost eight years ago, the Albanian-majority Serbian province of Kosovo was removed from Serbia's governance and placed temporarily under a United Nations protectorate, administered by the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK). Last summer, UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari was tasked by the Security Council with resolving the question of Kosovo's future status, with support from U.S. and European Union envoys (Frank Wisner and Stefan Lehne respectively). Ahtisaari's effort is now drawing to a close. He has delivered to both Pristina and Belgrade a plan that explicitly allows a great deal of protection for Serbs and their religious monuments in Kosovo but implicitly ends Belgrade's sovereignty. His plan opens the prospect of a sovereign and independent Kosovo under continuing international supervision. It is anticipated that Ahtisaari will take his plan, with some revisions, to the UN Security Council this month. This USIPeace Briefing discusses potential drivers of conflict in Kosovo during the status decision and in the period thereafter. These drivers of conflict arise from the international community, the Kosovo Albanians, Serbia and the Kosovo Serbs. They have the potential not only to make Kosovo dysfunctional but also to destabilize the region.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, NATO, Ethnic Conflict, United Nations, and War
Political Geography:
Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Serbia, and Balkans

4. Kosovo: Breaking the Deadlock

Author:
Daniel Serwer
Publication Date:
09-2007
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Kosovo was left at the end of the NATO/Yugoslavia war in 1999 in limbo. It is still there, despite Security Council Resolution 1244, which foresaw a process for deciding its status. That process has occurred, but because of a threatened Russian veto, the Security Council failed to approve the plan prepared under the leadership of former Finnish President Marti Ahtisaari, which provides for Kosovo's independence under international supervision with extensive protection for its Serb population. The UN Secretary General invited the Contact Group—France, Germany, Italy, Russia, the UK and the U.S.—to pursue further, direct negotiations between Pristina and Belgrade, but with little prospect of movement on either side. Belgrade continues to insist on maintenance of its sovereignty over Kosovo, and Pristina continues to insist on independence. On December 10, the Contact Group will report to the UN Secretary General, who in turn will report to the Security Council (UNSC). A small group of experts with long Balkans experience met at USIP September 5 to discuss the situation and suggest ways forward. Others (consulted electronically) join in associating their names with this paper. Listed at the end, all believe that Kosovo's independence must happen without further delay, in order to prevent regional instability. This USIPeace Briefing does not reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace, which does not take positions on policy issues.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Political Economy, and War
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, France, Kosovo, Germany, and Balkans

5. Kosovo: Ethnic Nationalism at Its Territorial Worst

Author:
Daniel Serwer and Yll Bajraktari
Publication Date:
08-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The international community\'s military and financial investments in the Balkans over the past fifteen years have led to substantial improvements in most of the territories of the former Yugoslavia. This progress will be put at risk if talks on Kosovo\'s status lead to de facto ethnoterritorial separation, with Serbs governed on their own territory by Belgrade without reference to Pristina. Partition, or something approaching it, could trigger another wave of violence, mass displacement of civilians, and instability in multiethnic states of the region. The international community has failed so far to reintegrate Serbs into Kosovo. Freedom of movement is insufficient, Serbs returning to their homes in Albanian-majority areas are minimal, Kosovo\'s governing institutions lack Serb representation, and Belgrade has tightened its grip on Serbs living in the north and in enclaves elsewhere. Serbia aims to govern the Serbs of Kosovo directly from Belgrade on clearly defined territory and without reference to Pristina. This is precisely the kind of ethnoterritorial separation that will cause trouble throughout the region. The Kosovo Albanian leadership has failed to improve the living conditions of Serbs living in Albanian-majority areas. Hardliners among Kosovo Albanians would also like to see ethnoterritorial separation, as it would offer them a chance to expel the remaining Kosovo Serbs south of the Ibar River and rid themselves of a “Trojan horse.” If the status talks lead to ethnoterritorial separation in Kosovo, serious instability could affect southern Serbia (Presevo Valley), western Macedonia, and Bosnia.
Topic:
International Relations, Ethnic Conflict, and Nationalism
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Serbia, Balkans, and Albania