Original Post: Saturday, December 1, 2007 - http://www.serbianna.com/columns/averko/006.shtml
By Michael Averko
My August 21, Serbianna article “A Different Settlement Plan for Kosovo” prompted some private questioning of how the proposed suggestion could work. Shortly after the article’s release, I privately stated additional points to a select few. Relative to what was said on the idea of overlapping realities, is the high profile reality that both parties (Serbs and Albanians) remain at loggerheads. A hypothetical scenario where Kosovo will be simultaneously independent and a part of Serbia would include:
- The return of refugees.
- Kosovo having full UN and Olympic representation, with the understanding that as long as there’s a Serbia, Kosovo will remain a part of it. Ukraine and Belarus had UN delegations with full UN voting rights during the Soviet period. Puerto Rico (US territory), Taiwan (recognized by most as a part of China) and Hong Kong (recognized by all as a part of China) have their own Olympic delegations (Taiwan’s going under the name “Chinese Taipai”). Palestine, a present non-nation has its own Olympic and UN observer representation. In the hypothetical Kosovo instance, Kosovo’s residents can choose between representing Serbia or Kosovo.
- For consistency and fairness sake, Republika Srpska (the predominately Serb portion of Bosnia) would be offered the same option (in Republika Srpska’s instance, a continued affiliation with Bosnia and the status as an independent nation). Based on the existing circumstances, the whereabouts of Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic (two Bosnian Serbs leaders wanted by an overly politicized legal body, who are thought to be residing in either Republika Srpska and-or Serbia) isn’t a valid counter-argument against Republika Srpska’s inclusion. The dubious trio of Hasim Thaci, Ramush Haridnaj and Agim Ceku are considered acceptable leaders for Kosovo. Like Kosovo, Republika Srpska’s territory was part of former Yugoslavia. Unlike Kosovo, Republika Srpska has the status of a republic and shows itself capable of governing a multi-ethnic land at peace.
This settlement plan is close to the current one favoring very broad autonomy for Kosovo as it remains part of Serbia. The bottom line is that the Albanians want a nation, with the Serbs seeking Kosovo to remain part of Serbia. The above August 21, article and addendum work those two desires in a proposed settlement. As previously noted, this hypothetical plan isn’t enthusiastically endorsed by yours truly. Rather, it was thought out as alternative to break the diplomatic impasse.
On another issue, a somewhat bemusing exercise is to review the political psychoanalysis of what’s motivating Russia to sympathize with the Serb position on Kosovo. This take frequently assumes that the official Western slant is reasoned and without any need of rebuke. For newsworthy purposes, a perfectly legitimate story would individually study each of the disputed former Communist bloc territories respective claims for independence. Such a feature would compare the historical and human rights issues of these troubled lands. Rather than do this, outlets like The New York Times (”the paper of record”) will babble on about how Kosovo must become independent, while showing no willingness whatsoever to consider the view that one or more of the disputed lands have better claims for independence. A point that has been credibly detailed by others besides myself.
