International Law & Kososvo

murrayp4

Any international lawyers on the forum eagerly awaiting the ICJ decision??

murrayp4

No? I'll go back to bed so....

Amazotheamazing

I actually am interested in the topic, just don't know enough about it to really engage with it. My understanding is Kosovo was part of the Serbian homeland, a lot of Albanians were moved/settled there, tipping the population 75%+ to Ethnically Albanian, Kosovo declared independence, Serbia refuses to recognise it (and tried to secure the area militarially in the late 1990's), some see Kosovo eventually becoming a province of Albania?

Can kinda see both sides of it, if a bunch of Albanian's (or whoever, let's say lowland Scots) rocked up in Meath (or say, six counties of Ulster) and after a time declared it a separate country, I imagine we'd be less than delighted either.... On the otherhand, if an area wants self-determination and has legitimate grievances with the Government in power, then is historical ownership really enough to justify keeping a fictional state intact? I can see why this could crop up in Ulster, Basque country, Catalonia, Flanders, Wallonia (?), there's even a Cornish separatist movement (not too serious though?) and these area places within the traditional heart of the EU.

Like I say, I don't know much about it but I am interested in the area, if you could recommend any reading material I'd appreciate it.

Btw, a great book for insights in the internal Russian republics (you might have an interest) is Imperium by Ryszard Kapuscinski. It's a journalist's account of the various internal republics at the time the USSR fell apart, very readable. Nothing to do with law however.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Imperium-Ryszard-Kapuscinski/dp/1862079609/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1280029666&sr=8-3

Dandelion6

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

I actually am interested in the topic, just don't know enough about it to really engage with it. My understanding is Kosovo was part of the Serbian homeland, a lot of Albanians were moved/settled there, tipping the population 75%+ to Ethnically Albanian, Kosovo declared independence, Serbia refuses to recognise it (and tried to secure the area militarially in the late 1990's), some see Kosovo eventually becoming a province of Albania?

That's basically accurate although the movement of Albanians to Kosovo happened gradually and over a long period. It's hard to sort out the details of this exactly because there is so much bias in the reports from both sides, but the "neutral" accounts I've seen have generally placed the shift from Serb to Albanian majority around the end of the 19th century. So in sheer historical terms it's probably the case that the Serbs have the better claim to the land - but the reality on the ground now is that it's overwhelmingly Albanian and they simply will not live in a Serbian state.

The question really is what this means for other places with similar issues eg South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabagh, the Serbian parts of Kosovo and Bosnia. The international community has had to engage in a lot of mad scrambling to explain why those territories are different and so far they haven't been particularly convincing. Those territories are all going to see the ICJ decision as bolstering their own claims so it's really opening a huge can of worms. Does anyone have a link to the text of the decision BTW? (I understand it didn't go quite as far as it's been portrayed but I'd like to see exactly what it says.)

Misha Glenny's books on the collapse of Yugoslavia are generally very good. I don't think he's done a full one on Kosovo but he does address it to some extent in The Balkans.

Amazotheamazing

Dandelion6 wrote: »

That's basically accurate although the movement of Albanians to Kosovo happened gradually and over a long period. It's hard to sort out the details of this exactly because there is so much bias in the reports from both sides, but the "neutral" accounts I've seen have generally placed the shift from Serb to Albanian majority around the end of the 19th century. So in sheer historical terms it's probably the case that the Serbs have the better claim to the land - but the reality on the ground now is that it's overwhelmingly Albanian and they simply will not live in a Serbian state.

The question really is what this means for other places with similar issues eg South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabagh, the Serbian parts of Kosovo and Bosnia. The international community has had to engage in a lot of mad scrambling to explain why those territories are different and so far they haven't been particularly convincing. Those territories are all going to see the ICJ decision as bolstering their own claims so it's really opening a huge can of worms. Does anyone have a link to the text of the decision BTW? (I understand it didn't go quite as far as it's been portrayed but I'd like to see exactly what it says.)

Misha Glenny's books on the collapse of Yugoslavia are generally very good. I don't think he's done a full one on Kosovo but he does address it to some extent in The Balkans.

Cheers, I'll keep an eye out for those books, the decision makes Russia's conflicts with Checyna and Georgia more complex from what I can see, it seems to support Checyna's side against Russia and Russia's side against Georgia? Will also be interesting to see how it plays out in the Kurdish regions of Iraq, and also Tibet and Kashmir? Could Kashmir use it as a pretext to declare independence?

Like I said, it's not something I know a huge amount about but as you say it has can of worms written all over it. In my limited knowledge of former Eastern block countries, the Russian community left behind in places like the Ukraine and Estonia want to be part of a Russian federation (or part of Russia itself). Will what's acceptable for Kosovars suddenly lead to eastern Ukraine (the most Russified part?) declaring themselves independent? How does it play out in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

What grounds did the Court use to decide Kosovars were a separate people from the Serbs? And from the Albanians for that matter?

As an aside, I read there's a growing number of Northern Irish Catholics who view Northern Irish as being distinct from Southern Irish and are seeming to support an independent Northern Ireland as a viable option, we're not so far removed from these decisions.

Our man in Havana

Is Kosovo issuing its' own passports? Are they recognised by the UN?

Dandelion6

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

What grounds did the Court use to decide Kosovars were a separate people from the Serbs? And from the Albanians for that matter?

As I said I haven't read the decision but I don't think there's ever been any question that the Kosovar Albanians are a separate people from the Serbs. Serbia, and the former Yugoslavia for that matter, never claimed they were Serbs. (There is however a small minority of ethnic Serbs in Kosovo, primarily in a small northern area over which the Kosovan state has almost no de facto control).

There was a time when Kosovo's separation from Serbia was seen by a lot of people on both sides as a stepping stone on the way to unification with Albania. That doesn't really seem likely at present though. I'm not even sure there is still significant support for it within Kosovo.

Haddockman wrote:

Is Kosovo issuing its' own passports? Are they recognised by the UN?

Yes they do issue their own passports. I stand to be corrected on this but I don't think the UN "recognises passports" per se, I think it's up to the individual member states to make that decision. Kosovo isn't a member of the UN at present, but many UN members do recognise its independence and those countries also recognise Kosovo passports. Presumably the countries that don't recognise Kosovo's independence also don't recognise its passports.

Amazotheamazing

Dandelion6 wrote: »

As I said I haven't read the decision but I don't think there's ever been any question that the Kosovar Albanians are a separate people from the Serbs. Serbia, and the former Yugoslavia for that matter, never claimed they were Serbs. (There is however a small minority of ethnic Serbs in Kosovo, primarily in a small northern area over which the Kosovan state has almost no de facto control).

Everyone might agree that Serbs and Kosovars are as different as apples and oranges, I'm more curious as to what was the distinction that the Court used which carried them over the line to give them independent status, as opposed to say, Basques in Spain? Is it broadly defined or tightly defined, could it be argued (for example) that a person from the Gaeltacht in Kerry is culturally different to a person from Louth.

Victor

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

My understanding is Kosovo was part of the Serbian homeland

That in itself is complicated. The Serbs have a historical connection to Kosovo, even at an emotional level.* However, few Serbs live there or have lived there in recent (even pre-1990) times.

In Yugoslavia, Kosovo had autonomy, but no the the statehood that the others had. It didn't become part of "Serbia proper" (under Yugoslavia) until the 1990s.


* Imagine Volgograd (then Stalingrad) as a location that is important to Russia, as a turning point in WWII and a place of great slaughter sacrifice. Imagine its settled by Corkonians and after a while, they declare independence. the Russians would be upset.

CCCP

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

In my limited knowledge of former Eastern block countries, the Russian community left behind in places like the Ukraine and Estonia want to be part of a Russian federation (or part of Russia itself). Will what's acceptable for Kosovars suddenly lead to eastern Ukraine (the most Russified part?) declaring themselves independent? How does it play out in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Alot of speculation there.

The most "Russified" Part of Ukraine is Crimea, with over 90% Russian. The Russian Naval fleet is stabled there and Crimea is already an autonomous republic . It is a very stable and safe region of Ukraine with only the Tartar minority causing trouble in politics. The crime rate there is much much lower then here for example, many of them grew up in the USSR and there is a great sense of conformity.

Although many people there believe Crimea is and should be Russian country, they are non militant about it. International Law means little in Ukraine and Russia, they are a law onto themselves.

Russians and Ukrainians are very close as peoples but Ukraine needs Russia for fuel, Russia however needs Ukraine for steel, and as a military gateway to the black sea and therefor the Mediterranean .. Ukraine has been making moves to go into closer ties with the EU.
Ethnic Russians are so intermingled with Ethnic Ukrainians there is no real division in culture, religion or ethics. Russians are not persecuted in Ukraine and vice versa. There are some extreme party's and organizations but generally they want Ukraine to move further away from Russia rather then towards it, such as the ultra-nationalists in the west of Ukraine.

Russian Government and Ukrainian Government are in the same gang, and the normal people are too concerned with the day to day struggle of life in a poor economy to want to shake things up . Above all Ukrainian Russians value stability financially and socially, they are family oriented people who can already move freely between Russia and Ukraine , freely speak Russian (most people speak Russian in Ukraine) and have no reason to want to rise up and fight to become part of Russia again, really life is too hard for people there, only the wealthy make noise and try to exploit these issues, for personal and political gain, the normal man or woman just struggles with the day to day.

Most Ethnic Russians in Ukraine have mixed Ukrainian/Russian ancestry, they are very much the same peoples, and the Tartars (Muslims) are too small a minority to cause serious revolution.

Dandelion6

Victor wrote: »

few Serbs live there or have lived there in recent (even pre-1990) times.

I think you have to be careful about words like "few" - certainly Serbs have been very much in the minority for the past hundred years but we're still talking numbers in the (low) six figures. Bear in mind Kosovo's population is only around 2 million. There is also a sizable chunk of north central Kosovo in which Serbs are by far the majority, as well as the southern mountain enclave of Štrpce.

In Yugoslavia, Kosovo had autonomy, but no the the statehood that the others had. It didn't become part of "Serbia proper" (under Yugoslavia) until the 1990s.

Its precise constitutional status under Yugoslavia was as an autonomous province of the Republic of Serbia.