14:0

The Security Council voted on Tuesday evening (March 31) on the resolution of implementing an embargo on arms import into FR Yugoslavia.  The resolution could be withdrawn when the UN Secretary General, Kofi Anan, concludes that Yugoslavia has begun a real dialogue with Kosovo’s Albanians, that special police units have been withdrawn from Kosovo, and that humanitarian organizations have been allowed access to the conflict area.

Even though representatives of Russia and China stated that unrest in Kosovo will not be treated as a threat to international security, the result was 14:0 — Russia voted for the resolution, while China, which could have voted against, did not vote.  Admittedly, the Chinese diplomat, Shen Guofeng, stated that intervention in the Kosovo crisis “can represent a bad precedent with negative implications.”

Voting was preceded by phone consultations, which is reminiscent of the reaching of resolutions during the disintegration of SFRY,  After that, at Russia’s request, the statement was withdrawn in which the conflict in Kosovo was designated as a “threat to international peace and stability”, and which gives the Security Council a basis for intervention in the domestic affairs of a sovereign country.  Russian Ambassador, Yuri Fedetov announced that Moscow “believes that events in Kosovo do not represent a threat to peace, despite the fact that the situation in Kosovo influences negatively the situation in the region.”

In his interview for the BBC, the Yugoslav Ambassador of FRY in the UN, Vladislav Jovanovic, expressed regret that the Security Council yielded to pressures of certain countries, and that it did not take note of promising signals from Belgrade (he probably referred to the beginning of the realization of the Agreement on Education and, on March 31, the return of the Institute for Albanian Studies to its previous residents).  The resolution was strongly supported by the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Portugal and Sweden.  Judging by what our government was told in recent weeks, Yugoslav authorities sent positive signals too late, and they once again underestimated the extent of US determination, and overestimated differences between westerners, just as they again overestimated the desire of Russia to go up against America for Serbia.
In its first Security Council news, CNN emphasized that the USA and Russia remained “together”.  The American Ambassador to the UN, Bill Richardson, stated that the resolution sends a clear signal to the Yugoslav Government that the world will not tolerate violence and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans.  David Richmond, Diplomatic Representative of Great Britain, which according to the European Community understanding suggested the resolution, stated that this is a clear message to Belgrade, but also a clear signal to Kosovo’s Albanians that terrorism in any form and with whatever objective will not be tolerated.  It is not possible to foresee from the resolution or from other statements in what way this non-tolerance will find concrete expression.

With the resolution, the Security Council is moving for a substantially greater degree of autonomy and for more significant self-rule in Kosovo, but it is not specified what this could mean, nor in what areas Kosovo’s autonomy ought to be increased, nor in relation to the present situation (suspended autonomous status designated by the Constitution of Serbia), in relation to the 1974 Constitution developed in SFRY (state within a state), or in relation to existing autonomies in Europe, of which the greatest is in South Tirol (Alto Aldige) in Italy and the autonomy of Aland Islands (Ahvenanmaa) in Finland.

The cited autonomies are otherwise the result of international understandings.  South Tirol, an Italian region where 60 percent of the population speaks German, received autonomy through an agreement between Italy and Austria which guarantees the use of the German language and the right to equal access to education and public administration.

The Finnish Aland Islands, with a Swedish minority, were under Russian rule, and then it was given to Finland by the Community of Nations, with the obligation that it guarantee certain rights such as the official use of the Swedish language, and international demilitarization was guaranteed along with the bringing of laws independently of Finland, except in foreign affairs.

On the basis of certain previous discussions, and on the basis of statements made by certain diplomats, it is possible to conclude that FR Yugoslavia ultimately wishes to make a new precedent with the status of Kosovo.  In the context of discussions of various solutions for Kosovo, for instance in last year’s discussion in Vienna (November 1, 1997) within the European Action Council for Peace in the Balkans and the Public International Law & Policy Group of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the solutions in Tirol and Aland are mentioned, but are dismissed with a very negative comment toward FR Yugoslavia that those are solutions adopted in countries with developed democratic institutions and that they cannot be directly adopted in Kosovo.

On the evening of the Security Council vote, Yugoslav, Serb, and Montenegrin politicians (Milosevic and Lilic only slightly more than Djukanovic) issued mutually identical statements — they repeated that Kosovo, at the price of sanctions, must remain a domestic question for Serbia, and claimed that they will not consider any proposals which lead to the creation of a Kosovo Republic, which they assess as a step toward secession and war, as Kosovo’s Albanians had publicly declared themselves in favor of an independent Kosovo.

The newest Security Council sanctions are accompanied by the repeated EU threat that they will institute new, more difficult sanctions.  For now, Montenegro has not been excluded (the prohibition against arms import applies equally to it), but there is mention of possible American aid to Montenegro in the context of the outer wall of old sanctions against FRY — sending of experts for privatization and for the development of money markets, support for development of energy resources and the private sector, as well as support for private investment.  This would come with initial verification in practice of all the programs and significant changes which were announced during Djukanovic’s pre-election campaign.  Something from that package must appear as the wrath of God to the Serbian transitional, economic-political elite — there is mention of sending experts for fiscal and tax policy...