< < <
Date > > >
|
< < <
Thread > > >
US/UK - Russia Confrontation in Kosovo
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 20:21:32 -0400 (EDT)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Although this Stratfor analysis refers primarily to immediate June
11 issues about the occupation of Kosovo, it also reveals much more
deepgoing East-West and West-West fault lines in the G-8 agreement,
Security Council resolution, and conflicts of interest about the NATO
role in the Balkans [which were also evoked in the part 3 of the June 2
AGF article on Political Praxis to Dismember NATO]
Unresolved Issues Erupt in First KFOR Crisis
1537 GMT, 990611
The issue left unresolved by both the G-8 and the UN
– the exact makeup, deployment, and
command structure of the peacekeeping forces in
Kosovo – has now erupted in the first crisis
for KFOR. As U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe
Talbott departed deadlocked
negotiations on the issue in Moscow, Russia was
already presenting NATO with a fait
accompli. 500 Russian paratroopers were reportedly
redeployed from SFOR duties in
Bosnia to positions along Kosovo’s border with the
rest of Serbia where, according to
Russian military officials, they would remain until
NATO and Russia reach an agreement.
Upon receiving news of this, Talbott’s aircraft
reportedly turned around mid-flight and
returned to Moscow.
Russia’s top military negotiator on Kosovo, General
Leonid Ivashov, has made Russia’s
position crystal clear. "We are not going to beg the
United States to give us a specific sector,
said Ivashov. "If we do not reach an agreement, we
will work out with Yugoslavia the sector
we will control."
The G-8 agreement, and the UN Security Council
resolution it fostered, included key
compromises by NATO. The peacekeeping force in
Kosovo, while it would be armed and
retain NATO at its core, would include non-NATO
nations, operate under Security Council
mandate, and have a unified command. As NATO refused
to relinquish the leadership role
and Russia held firm both that it would have troops
in Kosovo and those troops would not fall
under NATO command, the G-8 agreement for a time
looked dead. Yugoslavia was not
going to accept unmitigated NATO domination of
Kosovo. In an emergency session of the
G-8, NATO made sufficient assurances that the issue
could be resolved to convince
Yugoslavia and Russia to accept the G-8 plan, the
military-technical accord, and the Security
Council resolution. Point 7 of the UN Resolution
"Authorizes Member States and relevant
international organizations to establish the
international security presence in Kosovo." It does
not mention NATO leadership – it charges NATO and
others to reach an agreement. In fact,
U.S. President Bill Clinton explicitly acknowledged
that Russian troops in Kosovo would not
fall under NATO command, but would be expected to
coordinate at an acceptable level with
NATO.
Apparently, once the deals were signed, NATO felt it
could once again dictate terms on
Kosovo – this time to Russia. Russia is not amused.
This is the second time NATO has
attempted to override the spirit and letter of the
peace accords, and once again it is attempting
to marginalize the Russian Federation. Russia has
two options to bring this to a head. The first
it is apparently underway – presenting NATO with a
fait accompli in northern Kosovo. The
second would be for Russia to take the issue to the
UN Security Council, charging NATO
with being incapable of forging an agreement on an
international security presence and
demanding that the task be handed to a neutral
party.
Both dramatically escalate the confrontation between
NATO and Russia – or more precisely
between the U.S. and UK and Russia. NATO’s European
members, Germany in particular,
are not going to allow Washington and London to
foment confrontation and conflict in
Euro-Russian relations over the command structure of
KFOR. Russia will get its sector, and
either NATO will accept a neutral UN commander or
the UN Resolution will be reinterpreted
or revised to account for the Russian zone.
Washington and London have again gotten
greedy, and are again going to be slapped back.
< < <
Date > > >
|
< < <
Thread > > >
|
Home