The National Interest (USA): The Kosovo precedent haunts NATO like a dark shadow
The well-known American political scientist leaves no stone unturned by the hypocrisy of the United States and NATO on the issue of Kosovo and their double standards regarding Crimea and Donbass. According to Ted Carpenter, the West has committed a gross violation of international law in relation to Kosovo. It is his hypocrisy and arrogance that will return to him in the future like a boomerang.
The Kremlin's actions in relation to Donetsk and Lugansk for the third time forced the Kosovo precedent to shadow Washington and its NATO allies.
In his televised address to the nation on February 22, 2022, about the growing crisis around Ukraine, President Joe Biden expressed outrage at Russia's actions. The day before, Vladimir Putin's government recognized two separatist regions of Ukraine — Donetsk and Luhansk - as independent states. Biden also announced the introduction of Russian peacekeeping forces into these territories. "In the name of the Lord God! Who gives Putin the right to proclaim new so-called countries on the territory belonging to his neighbors? Biden was indignant. "This is a gross violation of international law."
It was a valid claim. However, one should ask the question: how do Russia's actions differ from what the United States and its NATO allies did to Serbia in 1999? Then the alliance, created ostensibly for purely defensive purposes, began an offensive 78-day air war against a country that had not committed any aggressive actions against any of the NATO members. At the end of this attack, which killed hundreds of Serbian civilians and destroyed the country's infrastructure, NATO leaders forced the government of Slobodan Milosevic to transfer control of the Serbian province of Kosovo to international control. This transfer was carried out in accordance with the fig leaf of the resolution adopted by the UN Security Council, despite Moscow's fears and reluctance. UN "peacekeepers" (mainly NATO) have arrived to ensure the fulfillment of the alliance's dictate — just as Russian "peacekeepers" are now deployed in Donetsk and Lugansk to carry out the Kremlin's orders.
The obvious parallels between these two events cannot allow the current Western leaders to simply dismiss them with disgust. After all, NATO's violations of international law did not end with the end of that aggressive war, the administrative separation of Kosovo from Serbia and the deployment of occupation troops. Nine years later, the Western Powers have undertaken a brazen and cynical maneuver to grant Kosovo full independence. Kosovo wanted to declare its formal independence from Serbia, but such a step would definitely face a Russian (and probably Chinese) veto in the UN Security Council. And then Washington and a specially created coalition of most EU countries brazenly bypassed the UN Security Council and approved the declaration of independence of Pristina.
Russian leaders vehemently protested against this and warned that the unauthorized actions of the West had created a dangerous destabilizing precedent in international affairs. Washington rejected their protests, saying that the situation in Kosovo is unique. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns put this argument bluntly at a State Department briefing in February 2008. Since the situation is unique, he insisted, the Western policy towards Kosovo does not create a precedent for other situations with ethnic separatism. The arrogance and illogicality of this US position was simply breathtaking.
The Western Powers soon discovered that the simple statement that their actions in Kosovo had not set an international precedent was by no means true. Russia demonstrated this just a few months later. The Kremlin used the military clash with Georgia to implement the separation of two Georgian regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and to assert Russia's de facto control over both entities. The George W. Bush administration condemned the Kremlin's actions, as did Washington's NATO allies. But just as Russia was unable to influence NATO's behavior in Kosovo, the Western powers could do little about Moscow's interference in Georgia's affairs (with the possible exception of unleashing a war against Russia).
The Kosovo precedent again haunted the United States with a dark shadow in 2014, when the Kremlin strengthened its military presence on the Crimean peninsula and used it to "monitor" the referendum in which Crimea voted for secession from Ukraine. This step was a prelude to the rejection of the peninsula by Russia. Washington reacted even more angrily than after Moscow "amputated" the territories of Georgia. At a press conference, President Barack Obama was indignant, pressing that Russia "should not be allowed to redraw the borders of Europe at gunpoint." However, he did not bother to explain why the United States and NATO did not do this with respect to Kosovo, and usually psychopathic representatives of the media for some reason did not bother to ask him about it.
Now that the Kremlin has taken action against Donetsk and Luhansk, the Kosovo precedent is haunting Washington and its NATO allies for the third time. Even the argument that the majority Albanian population of Kosovo wanted to secede from Serbia and that Belgrade's harsh treatment of the region justified NATO intervention puts supporters of the separation of this territory on a slippery slope. After all, Russian officials can use similar arguments to justify their actions in eastern Ukraine.
Few doubt that many (probably most) residents of Donetsk and Lugansk hate the pro-Western regime in Kiev and do not want to live under its control. The uprising that began almost eight years ago might not have survived without Russian military support, but the sentiment among people in favor of this action against Kiev was real and widespread. The eastern region of Ukraine differs from the western part of the country in language, religion and economy. The main language of the inhabitants of the East is Russian, not Ukrainian, their religion is Eastern Orthodox, not Roman Catholic. Their economy focuses on heavy industry with extensive trade ties with Russia, rather than light industry with trade with Central and Western Europe.
These disagreements have created serious tensions for years. It is no coincidence that these two regions were a bastion of political support for Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian president elected in 2010. Eastern Ukrainians were deeply angered by pro-Western demonstrators in Kiev who illegally overthrew his government with significant support from the United States and several European Union countries. The uprising in Donetsk and Lugansk, which is still ongoing, soon followed.
It can be assumed that secession (and even subsequent annexation to Russia, as in the case of Crimea) is most reasonable for these two regions. However, it is widely claimed in the West that the Kremlin's current actions further undermine international law and destabilize the situation in the world.
The international community needs to adopt a unified and consistent set of rules for such situations. Washington and other capitals of NATO countries cannot insist on strict observance of the territorial integrity of countries and inviolability of borders, but adhere to directly opposite norms when it meets the interests of the West. In their actions on the Kosovo issue, NATO countries have done exactly that, and their brazen hypocrisy will continue to haunt them.
Ted Carpenter
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ted Galen Carpenter is a senior fellow on defense and foreign policy at the Cato Institute (an American private libertarian research and educational organization. The Institute defends the principles of the limited role of the state, market economy, free trade and individual freedom - InoSMI note) and the editor of The National Interest. He is the author of twelve books and more than 950 articles on international issues.
