Your Questions: Ask CBC

Kosovo's population is more than 90% albanian.

Do you think an independant Kosovo would join Albania eventually?

Can you put these events in the historical perspective of the Greater Albania?

Don Murray: I think the chances of Kosovo joining Albania in the foreseeable future are remote, indeed very remote, for three reasons.

First, Kosovo’s independence is still hotly contested, not least by Serbia and Russia, but also by several countries in the European Union. It would be a monumental, and monumentally controversial, step to try to push a contested independence further into a dubious union.

Second and linked to the first, Kosovo is, to all intents and purposes, a client state or a protectorate of the European Union, depending on its money to survive. That money would dry up with a push for union with Albania.

Third, Albania itself is a candidate for membership in NATO. The alliance, like the EU, would be uninterested, to put it mildly, in welcoming a unified state which included a part whose independence has angered Russia.

As for Greater Albania, this is a concept held by some. It has never, in the modern world, been a reality. The insurrection of 1911 which was destined to free Albania of Ottoman rule also led to the creation of the Balkan League. All the League’s members, except Bulgaria, possessed territories with important Albanian populations and none were interested in ceding them.

After World War I Yugoslavia was formed, with Albanian populations in three republics — Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia. Under the extreme communist regime of Enver Hoxha in Albania after World War II there was no talk of Greater Albania. With the end of communism and the breakup of Yugoslavia, the main power broker in the region is now the EU which, as I said above, shows no interest in further border changes.

How far will Russia go to make life difficult for Kosovo?

Don Murray: Not far or rather not much farther than it has already gone. Russia will continue to block any attempt to have the UN recognize Kosovo. It will continue to back Serbia as it protests what it sees as an illegal unilateral declaration of independence.

But Russia has almost no economic contact with Kosovo and therefore no economic leverage. A couple of analysts I talked to think that Russia will, as one put it, “pocket this as a diplomatic card to be used later.” In other words, Russia’s public anger will act as a brake on Western powers if and when Russia wishes to take controversial action either in a place like Chechnya or against neighbours like Georgia and Ukraine.

In Georgia, in particular, President Putin has already raised the possibility of ‘encouraging’ unilateral independence declarations in ‘breakaway’ republics like Abkhazia where Russia has troops still stationed. That is an unsubtle reminder that the Western powers have opened a Pandora’s box by recognizing Kosovo.

Who stands to lose the most by Kosovo's independence?

Don Murray: In the short term, Serbia probably. Its angry reaction and the riot which torched the American embassy in Belgrade will only serve to isolate it further. Much of the country and half the political elite would like to have much closer ties with the European Union but its stance puts it on a direct collision course, once again, with the EU.

Serbia is already at odds with the EU because of its refusal to hand over Ratko Mladic to the International Tribunal in The Hague. He’s wanted for war crimes as the military commander of the Bosnian Serbs in the war in the 1990s.

I just wanted to get Mr. Murray's take on the possible reasons behind the U.S. recognition of Kosovo's independence.

Don Murray: I’m not sure but I suspect it’s the American desire to cut the Gordian knot. The Yugoslav crisis has been dragging on in one form or another for almost 20 years. Throughout the various wars and standoffs the American view has been that the Europeans have been weak and vacillating, preferring ‘wait and see’ to direct action.

It was the Americans who led the push for the NATO bombing of Bosnia in 1995, it was the Americans who led the NATO bombing of Serbia and Kosovo in 1999. In both cases there was strong European resistance.

Since the NATO occupation of Kosovo in 1999, the stated goals of nation-building and ethnic reconciliation preached by the Europeans have been largely empty words. As a country that came into being through a unilateral declaration of independence the Americans were always more favorable than the Europeans to that course. They thought they could jostle the Serbs into accepting some negotiated form of independence. They couldn’t. So they looked at the facts on the ground and decided there was no point in waiting any longer.

And an independent Kosovo might allow NATO to reduce its troop levels there (almost 17,000) in the coming years, thus freeing up more European troops for other tasks (in Afghanistan, for example).

If Kosovo is recognized,does it not set a precidence for other countries or nations wanting to be declared also?[Spain and Canada come to mind.]

If others decide to follow Kosovo's example,how will international law apply as to who can/can not be a country?Why/why not?

Don Murray: That’s precisely why countries like Spain, Romania and Cyprus refused to go along with the European Union plan to recognize Kosovo. All have minority populations who might see this as a handy precedent. Canada has kept very quiet, you may have noticed.

As for international law, even the European states which recognized Kosovo also recognize that a unilateral declaration of independence doesn’t accord with the terms of resolution 1244 which governs the UN presence there. Infact it explictly recognizes the sovereignty of Serbia (under the name of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) over Kosovo. This is the relevant clause: “Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”

On the other hand, the first Chapter of the UN charter explicitly mentions the right of self-determination of peoples.

The short answer is that unilateral declarations of independence stand or fall on who recognizes them. The white Rhodesians rolled out theirs in 1965 and failed. They were isolated and sanctioned and the blacks fought a guerrilla war and received international support. The outcome in Kosovo will, it seems, be quite different.

Outside of Serbia and Russia, I've found the strongest arguments against the existence of an independent Kosovo are spoken by none other than Canada's own retired Major-General Lewis Mackenzie. Being that he was actually commanding our troops during the Yugoslavian civil wars, I find him to be more of an expert on this topic than most. Being interviewed on CBC News he went into detail about the past atrocities the present leaders of Kosovo had perpetrated against Serbs within Kosovo, and well before then stretching back to Croatia’s war. Not to say the Serbs are not guilty of any war crimes (they are) but my questions are; a) if there is even the slightest chance that these allegations are true, should not Kosovo’s leaders be on trial for war crimes charges in The Hague? And, B) if found guilty, should this alone not null and void Kosovo’s claim of independence?

Don Murray: The answer to a) is that at least one Kosovo leader has been indicted for war crimes. Ramush Haradinaj was the sitting prime minister at the time. He had just been elected and agreed to surrender voluntarily and go to The Hague. He was charged with crimes in Western Kosovo where he was a KLA commander. His trial is still pending. Three other members of the KLA were also tried for torture of prisoners. One was convicted and two acquitted.

The answer to b) is surely ‘no.’ The whole concept behind war crimes is that individuals and not nations are responsible for these acts. To nullify a claim of independence on the basis of alleged crimes of some individuals would be to turn that concept on its head.

Do you expect war?

If so, who do you think will be involved in the fighting and how do you think the region will be drawn up afterwards?

Don Murray: I don’t expect war. This is a region exhausted by wars and conflict. There is very little stomach for more fighting. As well, there are almost 17,000 NATO troops on the ground in Kosovo precisely to prevent further fighting.

I think the map you see now, with an independent Kosovo, is the map you will still see in five years time. The only possible major change might be if the Bosnian Serbs continue to agitate for their autonomy or independence using the Kosovo declaration as a precedent. But I doubt the Europeans would let the Bosnian Serbs get away with it.