Međunarodno prisustvo na Kosovu i Metohiji 1999-2009

Lađevac, Ivona and Đurđević-Lukić, Svetlana and Jović-Lazić, Ana (2010) Međunarodno prisustvo na Kosovu i Metohiji 1999-2009. Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu, Beograd. ISBN 978-86-7067-130-0

Text Medjunarodno prisustvo na Kosovu i Metohiji....pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (1MB)

Abstract

The tenth anniversary of the United Nation Security Council Resolution 1244, which was adopted in June 1999, has motivated the authors to analyze the development of the international administration over Kosovo and Metohija in the last decade. The territory of the province has been a magnet not only for the United Nations, NATO and the European Union, but also for numerous other international organizations, agencies, governmental and non-governmental actors, with various levels of capacity, legitimacy and expertise. All of them have had different mandates, agendas and priorities, which have caused versatile, even opposing approaches on the ground. The plurality of international actors, hereby termed “the international presence”, and the plurality of areas of engagement (covering all aspects of everyday life), makes any assessment incomprehensive. However, the authors have selected the areas which are important for influencing future developments and significant from the citizens’ human security point of view. These areas are as follows: human rights, judiciary, illegal arms possession, formation of security forces, protection of cultural heritage, as well as the role of international police and the European Union. The authors offer an overview of development in these selected areas, present the effects of various approaches on the ground in different situations and phases, and the end result as of June 2009. The research is based on legal documents, decisions of multilateral institutions, academic studies, experts’ recommendations, press releases and media items available in English and Serbian, as well as a limited number of interviews. In terms of human rights protection, the assessment of compliance between norms and practice is given according to the numerous reports and other documents published by the leading human rights organizations, both governmental and nongovernmental (Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, United Nations, Council of Europe, and OSCE). The common conclusion that can be drawn is that the situation in Kosovo is below the standards recognized by international law. The right to life is still jeopardized, as well as the right to free movement, the right to work or the right to security. It is particularly discouraging that most of the cases of violation of human rights have remained unresolved and perpetuators, even those whose identity is known, have escaped justice. The justice system in Kosovo has remained far from impartiality and non-discrimination. Additionally, many human rights organizations have criticized the work of judges and prosecutors accusing them of being ineffective. There is a great number of unsolved cases dealing with war crimes, various criminal acts, missing persons, etc. There is a lack of cooperation between the police and justice as well as persistent insecurity, both of which influence potential witnesses to remain silent. The tasks in the area of security, public order and peace and protection of human rights and freedoms were assigned to the international (UNMIK) police. Considering the complexity of the entire situation, UNMIK police have made considerable efforts to fight various forms of crime. In most cases, UNMIK police have given their best to ensure the safety of all who live in Kosovo and Metohija. However, they have often been unable to protect human rights and freedoms and in particular, to create the basic conditions for the safe return of the Serbs and other non- Albanians in the province. According to the Resolution 1244, the international presence in Kosovo was obliged to disarm KLA, but it was not done in the systematic manner by KFOR – disarmament was left to individual KLA commanders. UNMIK introduced the regulation related to illegal gun ownership only in 2001 and even after that strict gun control was not enforced. The UNDP attempt with “Weapons for Development” approach – voluntary disarmament in exchange for a developmental incentive for local community – failed. After the self-proclaimed independency, Kosovo Small Arms Light Weapons Strategy was passed. However, massive stocks of illegal weapons are still present there and they foster security dilemmas within local communities. Protection Corps (KPC). Officially, it was a civilian emergency structure, but for Kosovo Albanians it was the nucleus of a future Kosovo army. Former KLA and KPC involvements in criminal behaviour were treated as isolated incidents. After the events in March 2004, securityrelated issues were framed within the context of a lack of local democratic control and accountability over the security sector. Kosovo Internal Security Sector Review and Ahtisaari Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement laid foundations for numerous changes, which have been put in place as of self-proclaimed independency and they are the following: the Ministry for Kosovo Security Forces, the Forces itself, and Kosovo Security Council. In spite of the adopted international rules and standards in the area of cultural heritage protection, the international forces in Kosovo insufficiently committed themselves to protection and preservation of the Serb cultural heritage. Only after the violence in Kosovo escalated in March 2004, the issue has gained greater importance in the activities of the international community. The European Unions’ ever largest crisis management operation - “EULEX KOSOVO” tends to be a step further in the affirmation of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Its mission was agreed within the EU before the self-proclaimed independency. Hence, EULEX is officially status-neutral. However, there is a substantial discrepancy between the declarative neutrality and the real state of affairs in the field. The United Nations has substantial experience in post-conflict situations and it has developed norms and standards in the areas ranging from disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants to human rights and protection of cultural heritage. However, when it comes to the international presence in Kosovo and Metohija, its implementation has been selective. The interpretation of Resolution 1244 was inconsistent, even treated as not legally binding. As Kosovo Albanians were seen as the only victims of the previous regime, the dominant approach taken by a vast majority of international actors has been experimental state-building.

Actions (login required)

View Item