Kosovo
Expected Council Action
The Security Council will review the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), the standards-implementation process and the ongoing decreases in the size of the mission. The Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Søren Jessen-Petersen, is likely to be present to brief the Council on the latest report from the Secretary-General. (This meeting was delayed so that it could follow on from a Contact Group meeting in London on 31 January.) The Council will probably receive an analysis of the impact of the recent death of Kosovo President, Ibrahim Rugova, on the situation as well.
Any discussion of the political status negotiations is likely to be very low key. The Special Envoy appointed in November, former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari, has only recently commenced Kosovo’s future political status negotiations. It remains to be seen whether aspects of the international community’s role during the negotiating process will come up in Council discussions. It is unlikely that the Council will take any significant decisions.
Key Facts
Following NATO’s intervention in Kosovo, which began in March 1999 and culminated with the capitulation of then-Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic in June, Kosovo became a UN protectorate with the passage of resolution 1244 on 10 June 1999. Resolution 1244 established UNMIK and tasked it with re-establishing and running a complete transitional civil administration, developing provisional democratic self-governing institutions, and in its final phase, overseeing the transfer of authority from Kosovo’s provisional institutions to those established as a result of an eventual political settlement.
The mandate for UNMIK was for an initial period of 12 months, but was to continue thereafter unless the Security Council decided otherwise. The initial policy focus was for UNMIK to focus on governance issues-“standards before status.”
The UNMIK mission, unusual for its scope and complexity, was initially of significant size. However, the gradual shift of UNMIK’s role from an administrative function to an advisory one is now well-advanced. This has been accompanied by gradual downsizing, primarily by attrition but also through the measured elimination of posts since 2003, from a peak of approximately 5,600 in 2002 to some 3,800 today (including international staff and UNMIK police officers, but excluding OSCE, EU or NATO staff). In 2005 UNMIK transferred the majority of the remaining responsibilities that do not impinge on sovereignty to the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government.
Since November 2003, UNMIK has focused primarily on helping local authorities in meeting standards of governance and human rights in eight areas: functioning democratic institutions, the rule of law, freedom of movement, returns and reintegration of refugees, the economy, property rights, dialogue with Belgrade and the Kosovo Protection Corps.
In May 2004, the Secretary-General appointed Kai Eide as his Special Envoy to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the situation in Kosovo. Eide’s first report in August 2004 questioned the conditionality of the standards before status policy. The report also highlighted the necessary restructuring of UNMIK in the future, including downsizing. Following Eide’s second report in 2005, attention has focused on the future status of the province.
Since his appointment as Special Envoy in November 2005, Ahtisaari has initiated meetings with leaders throughout the region while taking the lead in the status talks. Most recently, on 16 January, Ahtisaari met in Vienna with Jessen-Petersen and with the Contact Group (states closely involved in the Kosovo peace process: France, Germany, Italy, Russia, the UK and the US).
Key Issues
The future of UNMIK, and when to begin taking decisions on this, remains an issue for the Council. Because its mandate does not have expiry provisions, UNMIK has not been subject to the regular review points common to most operations. Given the size and the complexity of UNMIK, member states would normally expect that the Council would devote considerable thought to the future of this operation and its role during the transition. The political sensitivities (concern about a possible Russian veto) that gave rise to this unusual situation have diminished, but there is still an issue about how and whether to engage the Council-as opposed to the Secretary-General-in decisions about UNMIK.
Another key issue is the ongoing process towards achieving standards on governance and human rights. The periodic report by the Secretary-General on UNMIK at the end of 2005 was postponed due to the publication of the Eide report on status, and the next report on UNMIK is now expected by 31 January. It is expected that the report will indicate that progress on these standards remains suboptimal.
The death of Rugova, who has provided a pro-democracy and politically moderate voice in Kosovo politics since 1999, is likely to have a negative impact on both status and standards processes.
Lurking beneath the surface, yet another issue is the role of the wider international community, represented by the Security Council as such, rather than the Contact Group, in meaningful oversight of the status negotiations.
Council Dynamics
The history of the establishment of UNMIK continues to play an important role in Council dynamics vis-à-vis Kosovo. The UN operation in Kosovo came in the wake of a NATO-led intervention that began without Council authorisation due to the threat of a Russian veto. Following the intervention there was consensus about the need to establish an international presence that in effect would run the whole territory. Thus, UNMIK, the most comprehensive UN operation to date, was authorised in June 1999. To secure consensus between members of the Council, resolution 1244, which was drafted in broad terms, adopted an unusual formula. Rather than having the mandate renewed, and possibly modified, periodically as it is the case with virtually all other UN operations, UNMIK will continue unless the Council decides otherwise.
The current main fault lines within the Council relate to the nature of the future status of Kosovo: whether Kosovo will remain part of Serbia and Montenegro, become independent or have a status that will fall somewhere in between. Russia, siding with Serbia and Montenegro, is likely to insist that Kosovo remain part of that state. The European Union and the US have made statements indicating their preference for independence, although there appear to be differences of opinion among EU countries themselves.
Options
The Council may continue to do what it has done with respect to most periodic reports on UNMIK, i.e. limit itself to a discussion without issuing any kind of a formal pronouncement.
Depending on the developments on the ground, as well as the dynamic of the status negotiations following the death of Kosovo’s President Rugova, the Council may feel the need to issue a statement building confidence in the continuation of the Kosovo democratisation and status processes.
Underlying Problems
Progress on certain governance and human rights standards remains elusive, particularly with regards to minorities. Without further achievement on these standards, the transition away from UNMIK’s control of certain areas of governance will be complicated and perhaps perilous for future stability. Despite their differences on Kosovo’s future status, Council members share the desire for a stable Kosovo to prevent trafficking, organised crime and regional terrorist or insurgent networks.
| Security Council Resolutions |
|
| Selected Presidential Statements |
|
| Selected Secretary-General’s Reports / Letters |
|
| 21 January 2006 |
Kosovo President Rugova died. |
| 16 January 2006 |
Ahtisaari met in Vienna with the Contact Group and the Secretary-General’s Special Representative Jessen-Petersen. |
| December 2005 |
Ahtisaari toured the region’s capital cities for meetings. |
| 14 November 2005 |
Deputy Speaker of the Russian Duma, Sergei Baburin, announced that “Moscow will never recognise the independence and occupation of Kosovo and Metohija.” |
| 1 November 2005 |
The Secretary-General appointed Ahtisaari as his Special Envoy for Status Talks. |
| June 2005 |
The Secretary-General appointed Eide as his Special Envoy to carry out a comprehensive review of Kosovo. |
| March 2005 |
The prime minister of Kosovo, Ramush Haradinaj, was indicted by the ICTY. He resigned and voluntarily surrendered to the tribunal. The Kosovo Assembly elected a new government, headed by Bajram Kosumi. |
| November 2004 |
General elections installed a new government led by Haradinaj. |
| 6 August 2004 |
Eide’s report questioned the wisdom of the “standards before status” policy and suggested that a priority-based standards policy, aimed at facilitating orderly future-status discussions, should replace it. Eide recommended the downsizing of UNMIK. |
| 17-20 March 2004 |
Rioting led by Kosovo Albanian militants against minority communities broke out. |
| 12 December 2003 |
The Council endorsed “Standards for Kosovo.” |
| 10 June 1999 |
The Council passed resolution 1244 establishing UNMIK. |
| Early 1999 |
Yugoslav Armed Forces campaigned against ethnic Albanians, which was followed by NATO intervention. |
| Special Representative of the Secretary-General |
| Søren Jessen-Petersen (Denmark) |
| Size and Composition of Missions |
|
| Cost |
|
As of April 2005: $2.215 billion (not including OSCE, EU and NATO expenditures) |
| KFOR (NATO FORCE) |
| Lieutenant General Giuseppe Valotto (Italy) |
| Size and Composition of Mission |
|
| UNMIK Civilian Police |
|
