Statement by Jim Jatras Director, American Council for Kosovo Washington There may be some in Serbia who are tempted to think Moscow's recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is bad for Serbia, and that maybe Russia might change its position on Kosovo and Metohija.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, this development is very favorable to Serbia for several reasons: 1. Russia will not change its position on KiM. Russia will continue to make points of principle that -- (a) With respect to KiM, Belgrade has always insisted on a negotiated solution and did not resort to violence as Saakashvili did. Instead, it was the Albanians and their supporters who took illegal action, which cannot compromise Serbian sovereignty. By contrast, Saakashvili injured Georgia's claim " and it only a claim (see point (b), below) through his own violent actions. (b) Under the relevant Yugoslav and Soviet laws, KiM has no right to secede from Serbia (or from Yugoslavia before that), but the USSR's autonomous republics (Abkhazia) and oblasts (South Ossetia) had the right to opt out of the Union Republics' secession, in this case, the Georgian SSR, under the 1990 law on secession from the USSR <http://www.pridnestrovie.net/ussr_law.html> . Hence, Abkhazia and South Ossetia clearly were part of the GeSSR but never part of independent Georgia. By contrast, KiM unquestionably has been part of Serbia since before Yugoslavia was created. President Medvedev, Minister Lavrov, and Ambassador Churkin have been quite clear on these points. They have correctly insisted that these "frozen" areas of the former USSR are far more deserving of independence than KiM is. 2. The Russian action shows that there is no objective value to Washington's recognition of Kosovo, only a subjective standard. Ask the question: does Russia's recognition settle the question of Abkhazia's and South Ossetia's global status? Of course not. As Washington has done with Kosovo, Moscow will now try to get other countries on board. Suppose they get 20, or 10, or 5. And Kosovo has 46? And Western Sahara has perhaps 47? The bottom line is that each claim of independence can be answered with "Well, that's your opinion. You say it is, and I say it's not." Washington has replaced international standards with the law of the jungle and has no right to complain about what other powers do. Independence stays in the eye of the beholder. What we have in effect are several regions in frozen conflict with no clear answer to what they are. But it's pretty clear none of them will get into the UN. 3. Given the growing sense of the instability the KiM problem now has caused, even fewer countries will want to get involved. This means a further discouragement to recognition of KiM. It also makes it more likely the UN General Assembly will vote to refer KiM (and maybe the other areas) to the ICJ, to avoid having to take a position themselves. 4. Perhaps most importantly, this exposes the degree to which Moscow (Serbia's supporter on KiM) is strong and Washington (Serbias enemy on KiM) is weak. In the Georgian crisis US officials condemn violation of Georgia's "sovereignty and territorial integrity" evidently unaware of their hypocrisy. They demand that Russia "must do this" and Russia "must do that" when it is obvious to everyone they cannot make Russia do anything. They seem not to appreciate how ridiculous they appear. But the rest of the world sees and takes note. James George Jatras, Esq. Principal Squire Sanders Public Advocacy, LLC Office: +1.202.626.6248 Serbian News Network - SNN [email protected] http://www.antic.org/
