Serbian election does not put Kosovo question to rest

Now that the dust has settled from the Serbian elections, let’s step back and take a look at what actually transpired on 11 May.

All eyes of the world were posted on the voting outcomes – because these elections had been called immediately after Kosovo’s independence move. Serbians on both sides of the issue – for and against – rallied for what turned out to be a very tense and emotive electoral campaign, culminating in death threats to leading candidates.

The decision to call snap elections (for a date that was originally scheduled only for local elections) came after a breakdown in the Serbian government, over an inability to decide how to handle relations with the EU.

Low turnout worried many international observers, who believed that only the most ultra-nationalist Serb voters would turn out for the election. The vote would determine, many felt, which direction Serbia would choose – the path of civil nationalism and democratic freedom, or the path of ultra-nationalist policies and jingoistic threats to its new neighbours.

Kosovo was understandably nervous about the outcome. Kosovar Serbs threatened to create their own parliament within the fledgling state, depending on the outcome of the Serbia vote.

After two days of counting, it emerged that the current president, Boris Tadic, the moderate European-leaning candidate, could proclaim a ‘clear victory’ for his party. However, the victory was anything but clear. Though Tadic’s moderate party took 39% of the vote, the largest nationalist party, which rejects Kosovo’s independence, took 29%. A smaller nationalist party, led by the Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, took only 11.3% of the vote.

While most of Europe rejoiced in this ‘outright’ victory, closer observers have noted that this election actually makes Serbia more unstable than it did before the election. Despite the electoral gains of the pro-Europe party and the electoral losses of the pro-nationalist party, the legislature is now deadlocked right down the middle. Relations with the EU are going to be even more tenuous than before.

Video Links:

From Russia Today:

From CTV:

From Al-Jazeera:

Is Nationalism the Cure-all?

I’ve always been a fervent nationalist. It always made the most sense to me, somewhat paradoxically living in the multicultural US and Canada, that the most effective division of society would be on nationalistic grounds. Of course I recognized that there would be problems – looking at some Israelis’ treatment of Ethiopian Jews, or the division in Italy between North Italians and Sicilians, I was aware that the question of nationality and how it would be defined would always be contentious. But overall, I thought it was the simplest means to splitting the world into governable bits.

I no doubt was heavily influenced by my own heritage in this way of thinking. Ethnically Norwegian, I have heard how time and time again the Norwegian nation was first subdued by the Danes, and then, in a sudden transfer of power that involved no Norwegian voices, taken over by the Swedes, who ruled Norway despite a hostile reception for 91 years.

It was due to these nationalist leanings that I applied to work for the Scottish National Party five years ago. Reading about the Scots’ “plight,” I honestly believed that Scotland, its heritage, and its language were on the brink of being lost, and only Scottish independence could adequately prevent this from happening.

Then, I actually went to work for them in Westminster. I was struck by their utter inability to look beyond the moment when independence might actually be granted, to decide how the country would be run. The party drew supporters and potential SNP representatives from all ends of the political spectrum, from left to right, their hatred of England the United Kingdom being the sole unifying point. I saw how empty their policies could be, and I began to seriously question whether nationalism really was a solid starting point for self-governance, as I had once believed, or if it just caused a whole lot of trouble in otherwise stable societies.

And then I moved to Montreal, where I was surrounded, day-in and day-out by sovereigntists and anti-sovereigntists, who could not let the issue of Quebec nationhood be forgotten for even a second. I TA’d a political science course entitled “Nations and States,” and found myself, rather surprisingly, on the other side of the argument, understanding for the first time that Woodrow Wilson’s grand philosophy probably laid the groundwork for the bloodiest conflicts that this century, and the last, have ever seen.

And so I approach the new Kosovar state with much scepticism. While no one could argue that their subjection to Serb rule was justifiable or should be continued, I am not convinced that a nationalist solution was the best solution. I’m sure Serbs in Mitrovica could tell you the same thing. But the verdict’s still out on the viability of this nation as an independent nation-state, so I guess we’ll all just have to wait and see.

Serb President receives death threats over Kosovo break

The President of Serbia, Boris Tedic, has received death threats a week before parliamentary elections are due to be held. The threats are believed to be in response to Kosovo’s declaring independence in February, and the lack of any military action to reclaim lost Serb territory.

The president urged Serbians to remain calm and rational, insisting that there be “no lynching atmosphere in Serbia.”

Serbia’s elections, scheduled for 11 May, were called shortly after Kosovo declared independence. The snap elections are now reflecting the bitter divisiveness halving the country, between those who were prepared to hold onto Kosovo at all costs and embrace Russia, against those who hope to join the European Union even if it means the loss of a critical portion of Serbian territory.

Divisions also exist between the current Prime Minister, Vojislav Kostunica, and the more Western-oriented president. The President had been in full support of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (see Note), and when the Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic signed it without demanding any recognition of Serbia’s claim over Kosovo, a political crisis ensued.

Kostunica, once supported by the West because of his democratic leanings and his defeat of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, has turned increasingly nationalistic, and has remained a staunch opponent of Kosovar independence. It is under his direction that all Serbian ambassadors have been immediately recalled from nations extending diplomatic recognition to the breakaway state.

Note: The Stabilisation and Association Agreement is branch of EU foreign relations which deals specifically with the nations of the Western Balkans, and includes Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia. It is through this channel that EU leaders hope to encourage Balkan states to undergo solid democratisation and institutionalise democratic reforms. It is hoped that this is the first step towards EU accession for many of these states.

Video links:

UN Plans to Stay Longer in Kosovo

There appears to be a change in schedule in Pristina.

The United Nations peacekeeping force, otherwise referred to as the United Nations Mission in Kosovo or UNMIK, was scheduled to depart the newly independent nation on 15 June, when Kosovo’s independence, declared unilaterally in February, will be official.

At that point, the plans were to hand over all peacekeeping operations to the European Union, in the form of their EULEX (European Union Law and Justice Mission) team designed to encourage state-capacity building and democratisation. However, neither organization is forecasting a definitive transition on 15 June, according to BBC News.

While EU missions have already begun to enter the country, the UN is supposedly packing up. But new revelations from the UNMIK head, Joachim Roeker, said that “the mission will continue.”

This causes logistical issues for EULEX, which was due to inherit 400 UNMIK vehicles from the departing mission. It also breeds concern that the dual missions will only duplicate their programs and achieve no real progress.

There is talk of mounting tension between the West and Russia over the incoming EULEX force. The West’s presence in Russia’s “sphere of influence” sits uneasily with Russia, and Putin and Medvedev would much rather retain the UN presence in the region, if a peacekeeping force is necessary. But Western powers are eager to see EULEX assume its role in the Kosovar region.

“We want to see this as a gradual, orderly transition from the UNMIK role to the EU role unfold over the coming weeks,” said a senior State Department (U.S) official.

As the 15 June deadline approaches, concerns are mounting throughout the international community as to how Kosovo’s real break from Serbia will occur. Additional concern is expressed for the visible minority of Kosovar Serbs, who may resort to violence in northern Kosovo, in response to statements from the Serbian government that EULEX occupation is illegal.

Video: