Kosovo, Russia, and China
- 02.18.2008 - 3:49 PMThis morning, France, Germany, Britain, Italy, and 13 other EU members said they will recognize Kosovo’s sovereignty. The territory, under UN administration since 1999, declared independence from Serbia yesterday. The United States was not far behind its European allies. Today, President Bush signaled American acceptance of Kosovo’s statehood in remarks made in Tanzania, and Secretary Rice made it official.
But don’t expect the Spaniards to do so. Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said his government would not accept Kosovo’s “unilateral act,” which “does not respect international law.” Apparently Madrid, which has a separatist problem of its own, did not believe the European Union’s foreign ministers, who labeled yesterday’s succession a one-off event.
Spain should indeed be worried about Kosovo’s example. There were slightly more than fifty nations at the end of the Second World War. Since then, decolonization and separatism have increased the number of states to 193, 194, or 195—depending on who is doing the counting. Today, the process of division continues. Kosovo, for example, is the sixth state to be formed from Yugoslavia. So the Russians are right to be concerned about separatist movements in Chechnya and Dagestan and the Chinese with minorities in Xinjiang, Tibet, and Inner Mongolia.
Whether we like it or not, separatism will not end with Kosovo’s independence. The Russians said they would seek independence for Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia if others recognize Kosovo. And Taiwan, an island that meets all the definitions of a state, will undoubtedly try to use the West’s recognition of Kosovo to its own advantage.
It is stirring when people declare independence, and we need to back their aspirations and the concept of self-determination. There is no advantage to us in attempting to stand in the way of history—or helping Russia and China, both large multicultural empires created by conquest and held together by oppression, in keeping themselves together. Kosovo is no one-off. Nor should it be.
| »Back to Contentions | »Back to Commentary |
February 18th, 2008 at 4:32 PM
The Kosovars should have their right to be independent. And the Serbs who live in Kosovo should have the right to secede from Kosovo and join Serbia. We have seen states split up. Provinces, on the other hand, can’t ever be divided. I don’t know why this should be so.
Bosnia-Herzogovina split off from Yugoslavia. The eastern half is semi-independent, but the world won’t allow it full independence—and the right to unite with Serbia—because provincial boundaries are sacred. Too bad. Serbia would stop fighting the independence of Kosovo if it were allowed to reconnect with the Serbian areas of Kosovo and Bosnia. If only provinces could divide, everone would be happy.
February 18th, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Good point, Gordon, but let’s be consistent here.
If the Kosovar Albanians have the right to break away from Serbia as a step towards linking up with Albania, then the Bosnian and Kosovo Serbs have the same right to leave Bosnia and Kosovo to join Serbia.
February 18th, 2008 at 5:55 PM
So a personified History demands the creation of kleptocratic mini-states?
And Lincoln–he really WAS a tyrant, wasn’t he? Or else he would have let the South go its own way.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:23 PM
George and Colin, further redrawing of borders is fine by me. I don’t think provincial lines should be considered sacred. This may be a complicated and lengthy process, but if it avoids unnecessary conflict, then it would be worhwhile.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Grumpy, the difference between the United States in the 19th century and the Balkans now is slavery. Fighting to get rid of it was justified, don’t you think?
February 18th, 2008 at 7:47 PM
Aren’t you confusing self-determination with separatism? Separatist aspirations might not necessarily reflect democratic or majority impulses.
February 18th, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Gordon -my history has it that slavery was not one of the original motivations for the civil war. . It took a few years into a stalemated war for the union leaders to advance slavedom as a cause.In context of the mass killings /starvation/mass relocations of the natives, being stolen & traded into slavery for one & one’s descendants is not a good look but better than genocide..
February 18th, 2008 at 8:34 PM
Baltimoron, self-determination and separatism go hand-in-hand although they are not exactly the same concept. Together they have, over the last sixty years, resulted in a large increase in the number of nations.
February 18th, 2008 at 8:53 PM
Unamerican, slavery is the one issue on which there could be no lasting compromise in the 1850s. Yes, other causes existed at that time, but the primary cause of the Civil War was slave ownership.
February 18th, 2008 at 9:33 PM
Gordon,
something the Kosovars have had in common with some of the other separatist groups you mentioned is the practice of terrorism. I don’t see them as being any better than the Russians or Chinese. I think they’ll govern just as oppressively and irresponsibly. I think they’ll gobble up a nice chunk of our tax dollars in the form of government aid, too.
Are you sure Kosovo’s sovereignty is a good thing? It seems to me that their aspiration for self determination is based on nothing more than hatred for Serbs.
I don’t think it’s accurate to lump Taiwan or Tibet in with “Chechnyans,” and other muslim terrorists. What a people do with their sovereignty is much more important than simply gaining it. Quite frankly, many countries don’t deserve their sovereignty. Does Kosovo? Do you think it will prove itself worthy? I have strong doubts.