Kosovo Independence
On Sunday, Kosovo declared its independence and was recognized by some countries such as the United States and the majority of EU countries, while not recognized by others such as Russia. Canada has yet to take a firm position, which is one I support. I am not totally opposed to recognizing Kosovo independence, but I think a legal opinion and the potential precedent it could set needs to be sought first before taking a stance. I am very concerned that recognizing Kosovo's unilateral succession could have dangerous implications elsewhere. Here in Canada, we have a strong separtist movement, so we have every reason to ensure Quebec could not use this is a precedent for seeking unilateral independence. One of the few EU countries opposing recognition of Kosovo is Spain who has had to contend with Basque separtists for some time, whereas Germany, France, and Italy don't have any such threats. In fact the United Kingdom and Turkey are the only countries so far endorsing Kosovo independence that have active independence movements in their countries (UK - Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland; Turkey - Kurdistan). However, even if we argue that this should only be applied to groups that have faced persecution and repression, I ask why only Kosovo. The Tamils in Sri Lanka, Tibetans in China, Kashmir in India, Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran, Chechens in Russia, Abkhaz and South Ossetia in Georgia, and Republika Srpska in Bosnia-Herzegovina to name a few could all make similiar claims. This is why I think it is important to seek a legal opinion to ensure such move would not strengthen the separtists ability in Quebec to declare independence unilaterally or lead to similar movements globally.
I as a general rule believe unilateral succession should only be recognized if one of the following two conditions are met.
1. The country was illegally invaded and occupied by the country it is seeking independence from (i.e. Palestine)
2. A referendum was held with a clear question and a clear majority in favour of succession (i.e. Montenegro).
3. The country in control of the area voluntarily grants it independence (i.e. India by Britain or through military defeat such as US in 1783).
To date Kosovo meets none of these conditions. Now a referendum probably would pass, but it is still quite reasonable to insist one be held before recognizing it.
Now I realize in the case of the European Union, that their goal is to see Serbia and Kosovo join in the future and in all practical sense, Kosovo would not have any more autonomy as an EU member state than they do now as EU membership does entail surrendering a fair amount of sovereignty (although all EU Countries are still sovereign countries in the sense the EU only has as much power as the consent to give it, but has no automatic right to any power), however it is still at least another ten years before either country will meet the criteria for EU membership. Croatia and Montenegro may join in the near future, but Serbia and Kosovo both still have a long ways to go. And when one considers how weak the economy is in Kosovo and the fact it is predominately Muslim (I don't see this as an issue, but I am well aware many Europeans will), I am not so sure the public is as eager as the bureaucrats in Brussels to see it granted membership, especially considering membership grants them the right to live and work anywhere in the union.
Finally, in the event Kosovo is recognized as an independent country, it is essential that the rights of the Serb minority be fully protected. Just because the Serbs treated the Albanians poorly doesn't give them the right to do the same to the Serbs. In addition, I don't think it is totally unreasonable for the districts in the northeast where Serbs are the majority to rejoin Serbia if they so choose. While Kosovo will be predominately Muslim, the right of the Orthodox Christian minority to practice their religion and as a matter fact all other faiths must be protected as well as the Serbs right to preserve their culture and language needs to be protected.
In summary, I don't dispute that Serbia, treated the Kosovar Albanians horribly and that independence probably was the only solution in the long-run. But even if it is the right solution, the way about going about it is very concerning and needs to be firmly grounded in international law if it is to be supported. There is nothing wrong with Canada refusing to recognize Kosovo as an indepedent country until independence is sought properly.
I as a general rule believe unilateral succession should only be recognized if one of the following two conditions are met.
1. The country was illegally invaded and occupied by the country it is seeking independence from (i.e. Palestine)
2. A referendum was held with a clear question and a clear majority in favour of succession (i.e. Montenegro).
3. The country in control of the area voluntarily grants it independence (i.e. India by Britain or through military defeat such as US in 1783).
To date Kosovo meets none of these conditions. Now a referendum probably would pass, but it is still quite reasonable to insist one be held before recognizing it.
Now I realize in the case of the European Union, that their goal is to see Serbia and Kosovo join in the future and in all practical sense, Kosovo would not have any more autonomy as an EU member state than they do now as EU membership does entail surrendering a fair amount of sovereignty (although all EU Countries are still sovereign countries in the sense the EU only has as much power as the consent to give it, but has no automatic right to any power), however it is still at least another ten years before either country will meet the criteria for EU membership. Croatia and Montenegro may join in the near future, but Serbia and Kosovo both still have a long ways to go. And when one considers how weak the economy is in Kosovo and the fact it is predominately Muslim (I don't see this as an issue, but I am well aware many Europeans will), I am not so sure the public is as eager as the bureaucrats in Brussels to see it granted membership, especially considering membership grants them the right to live and work anywhere in the union.
Finally, in the event Kosovo is recognized as an independent country, it is essential that the rights of the Serb minority be fully protected. Just because the Serbs treated the Albanians poorly doesn't give them the right to do the same to the Serbs. In addition, I don't think it is totally unreasonable for the districts in the northeast where Serbs are the majority to rejoin Serbia if they so choose. While Kosovo will be predominately Muslim, the right of the Orthodox Christian minority to practice their religion and as a matter fact all other faiths must be protected as well as the Serbs right to preserve their culture and language needs to be protected.
In summary, I don't dispute that Serbia, treated the Kosovar Albanians horribly and that independence probably was the only solution in the long-run. But even if it is the right solution, the way about going about it is very concerning and needs to be firmly grounded in international law if it is to be supported. There is nothing wrong with Canada refusing to recognize Kosovo as an indepedent country until independence is sought properly.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 5:47 PM
4 Comments:
In my last blog entry, I took Dion to task for his quick recognition of Kosovo. A reversal to the stance he took in passing the Clarity Act.
He also has a tendency to do these things recently. I don't know why.
It is in that sense a reversal of the Clarity Act, so I would prefer he at least seek a legal opinion on the issue. But he did make a very good point, which is even if most countries recognize Kosovo's independence, it likely won't become a UN member any time soon considering Russia and possibly China would veto its entry meaning unilateral succession of Quebec could have negative consequences elsewhere.
So Kosovo and Quebec becomes a state similar to Rhodesia.
Not a good comparison, I'm afraid.
Mushroom - I think Dion's point was more to discourage those from supporting separtism since many separtists don't seem to really grasp what separating from Canada actually means. In fact many still think they will get federal transfers after separating and be able to remain Canadian citizens. If they separate they will definitely not get anymore transfers, while the citizenship issue is a little more complicated, although whatever is worked out, in a few generations most won't be Canadian citizens if they separate.
Interestingly enough, Chretien today came out and urged caution. In fact I think Chretien was bang on. Even if I didn't always agree with him, he definitely had a good political antennae.
Post a Comment
<< Home