The State On Lease

While the debate on the status of Kosovo and its future legal and political territorial position has recently been reduced to two dominant options--Kosovo as an independent and sovereign state (as urged by ethnic Albanians), and Kosovo as the inseparable part of Serbia (the stand held by Serbs and Serbian authorities), some foreign scientific research circles, as well as certain geopolitical and analytical centers in some countries have in recent years come up with compromises and original options.

If we disregard what has already been offered and rejected by both sides, such as the proposals made at the London conference on maximal autonomy, we will give some of the options on the future status of Kosovo, in circulation right now. One of these projects was drawn up in late 1992, and is the work of the Stockholm-based "Transnational Foundation for Peace and the Research of the Future."

This project starts with two main assumptions: If Serbia wants Serbs to go on living in Kosovo, and if it wishes to continue being present in the region, then it will have to conduct a policy acceptable to Kosovo Albanians. On the other hand, if ethnic Albanians insist on an independent state, this state will have to be based on principles acceptable to Serbia. Therefore, starting from the assumption that, as is set down in this study, "both sides cannot realize 100% of that which they wish, they must become aware that each must cede something.'' Paragraph VI of the Swedish project proposes the "creation of a new type of state in Europe.'' Swedish experts propose the setting up of an "international trusteeship'' as the main prerequisite condition for this state of Kosovo. Under this proposal, Kosovo would be proclaimed a protectorate which would be administered by Serbia as the mandator, and supervised by the United Nations. This would ensure the independence of this new type of a state, while the OUN General Assembly and its Trusteeship Council would oversee the process until self-administration was achieved. Serbia would not have sole responsibility in the matter. This means that both sides, the Serbs and ethnic Albanians would have the right to complain, i.e., to send petitions to the UN, and demand that UN fact-finding teams visit the region from time to time in order to resolve problems. No state would be allowed to annex Kosovo. This would create a feeling of security among Kosovo Serbs, and they would not become a marginal issue. During this period, Kosovo would slowly be attaining independence, it would be demilitarized and finally declared neutral. The authors of the project have envisioned Kosovo as a "new type of European state,'' one which would play the role of a link between Serbia and Albania, a state with open borders, one which would not require visas and passports, and which would not have an army, but a police force. In short, a state based on the principle of "quid pro quo.'' Over the next twenty years Serbia would guarantee to set up Kosovo's autonomous status, and it would be irretrievable. Ethnic Albanians, on the other hand, would give guarantees that they were abandoning the idea of secession.

The "Minnesota Plan'' is similar to the Swedish one. It is a project drawn up by the Lawyers' Organization of Minnesota (USA), aimed at finding a solution to the problem of Kosovo's status. It too, takes as its point of departure an OUN protectorate. According to this plan, it would be necessary to first ensure some prerequisite conditions such as a peaceful solution for Kosovo and the scheduling of an international conference on Kosovo. The implementation of "sanctions'' is also envisioned. The plan proposes that the UN Security Council and the OUN return Kosovo's autonomous status, and if the Serbs object, then the UN Security Council would demand that Kosovo be placed under international protectorship, and that Serbia and Montenegro would not be recognized automatically as the inheritors of the former Yugoslavia. Article three of the "Minnesota Plan'' is worked out in detail and demands that the Serbian Government comply with the following demands: to stop the violation of the ethnic Albanians' human rights, to withdraw the Serbian army and paramilitary units from Kosovo, and to enable the return of ethnic Albanians to political, public and professional functions, to open the possibility for the education of ethnic Albanians, and to stop the settlement of Kosovo with Serbs from other parts of the country. The Government of the "Province of Kosovo,'' as is set down in this plan, would also be required to respect international norms on the rights of minorities (including the Serb population) and to schedule elections. If Serbia did not meet with the UN Security Council's demands, then the "Security Council would, under (Articles 7591) of the OUN Charter, set up an International Protectorate over Kosovo. The territory of Kosovo would be administered by the OUN with the help of the Trusteeship Council).''

One of the correctives for any status solution of Kosovo, would be the formulation that "any recognition of Kosovo, whether it be an Autonomous Province, or an independent status, must be made conditional to guarantees that the right of minorities will be observed (those of non-Albanians), according to OUN, CSCE and European Council standards.''

Another interesting project was drafted by the "Federation of Scientists of the United States of America'' (FAS) in May 1993. This project proposes four options for the peaceful resolving of the problem of Kosovo and its legal-territorial status. The first FAS option calls for the division of Kosovo whereby a certain percentage of Kosovo's territory would be apportioned to each side. Care would be taken that the territories with monasteries and battlefields of historical importance for the Serbs be allotted to the Serbs. The second option is the so-called CONDOMINIUM, or lease which ethnic Albanians would pay to Serbs, which on the one hand would confirm Serbia's ownership of Kosovo, and on the other hand, create conditions, that ethnic Albanians through maximal autonomy, in time, might take over the self-administration of Kosovo. The third FAS option proposes an OUN protectorate over Kosovo, and as an initial solution the "defence of the minimal interests of both sides, until a final solution for Kosovo'' is reached. The fourth option foresees the "altering of the new Yugoslav borders,'' or as is explained in the text, "the borders of Kosovo could be resolved within the context of border changes in Bosnia or Croatia.''

In the end it must be underlined that the three main conclusions reached at the international symposium on options concerning solutions to the problem of Kosovo, and held in December 1993 in New York, under the auspices of the State Department's Foreign Relations Committee, was attended by over 50 prominent scientists, diplomats and mediators in the resolving of the Yugoslav crisis. The summary of all these discussions was that the USA viewed the problem of Kosovo from three angles. Some believe that the "USA is not interested in what is happening in Kosovo''; others are of the opinion that as far as the USA is concerned, "Kosovo is a very important problem, and that something must be done about it,'' because, as is set down in conclusion, "if the world intervenes militarily, Kosovo could become another Bosnia.'' There were views that the resolving of the problem of Kosovo is "closely linked to the resolving of the problem of Macedonia.'' On the basis of the three US stands on the problem of Kosovo, three options have crystallized: first, that the USA must work on setting up Kosovo's "quasi-independence'' (as in Kurdistan), secondly, that the USA is not prepared to undertake a military intervention, unless the situation deteriorates like it did in Bosnia, and thirdly, that "preventive steps must be undertaken in Kosovo, such as will prevent a possible conflict.''