Kian Williams

In 1888, Otto von Bismarck quipped “One day the great European War will come out of some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.” As we now know, he would be correct. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by Serbian nationalists was just the first of many ethnic and political tensions, wars, and genocides over the last century-and-a-half in the region. Even in the modern day, ethnic tensions have caused sporadic violence leading to the deaths of many Balkan citizens.

In the early 1990’s Kosovar Albanians formed a rebel group known as the Kosovo Liberation Army. This rebel group sought to fight the Serbian persecution of Kosovar Albanians and eventually unite Kosovo into a Greater Albania. Over the next several years, the Serb government began targeting and jailing ethnic Albanians in government positions and removing Albanians from public schools[1]. Mass protests by both parties’ supporters injured hundreds and killed dozens of people over the years as tensions increased. As tensions skyrocketed, Serbia attempted to weaken Kosovo by forcefully resettling tens of thousands of its own citizens into Kosovo territory. The Committee for Human Rights and Freedoms in Kosovo released a statement in September 1995 warning of a large-scale conflict if Serbia continued resettling ethnic Serbs into Kosovo to change the ethnic makeup of the region[2].

War between the regions slowly broke out in 1998 as Serb forces began clearing the border of KLA fighters and making small incursions into Kosovar-claimed territory. Fearing a large-scale war and worsened atrocities, NATO began mock-bombing raids in the Balkans in June in an attempt to scare the Serbs into a ceasefire[3]. This was initially successful as, in mid-October, NATO proposed a ceasefire that was accepted by the two regions, and the Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM) was established to oversee the withdrawal of troops[4]. This ceasefire would barely hold by the New Year, and reports of the killing of 45 Kosovar Albanians in the Račak Massacre would severely flare tensions. NATO then led one last attempt to broker peace in the region at Rambouillet, presenting a plan that included Kosovo political autonomy (but not recognition). This was flatly rejected by Serbia but eventually agreed to by the KLA. With Serbia’s refusal to support peace in the region, NATO had a pretext for its infamous bombing campaign.

NATO would proceed to drop thousands of bombs on strategic targets including Serbian infrastructure and forces based on the pretext of Serbian aggression and ethnic cleansing of the Kosovar Albanians. Some international organizations protested this intervention as a violation of human rights and illegal under UN rules of engagement which led to the failure of the intervention to secure long-term peace in the region. Yugoslavia signed NATO’s Military Technical Agreement which created a ceasefire ending NATO’s bombing campaign, and the Kosovo War as a whole[5]. The United Nations Security Council would adopt Resolution 1244 which authorized an international civil and military presence in Yugoslavia and de-facto recognized the political autonomy of Kosovo[6].

The history of the Kosovo conflict is one full of tragedy, ethnic discrimination, and murder on both sides. While the UN and NATO attempted to resolve these tensions, conflicts persisted to the modern day. Even after Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence in 2008, acts of political violence were few and far in between, but that would change in 2022. Kosovo had been issuing its own license plates for many years, but only recently did it attempt to force Serb-majority municipalities to switch its license plates over to Kosovar ones. This led to tens of thousands of Serbs in Kosovo to protest by barricading roads and firing shots at Kosovar police[7]. The European Union brokered short-term peace by getting Kosovo to agree to not fine Serb drivers without Kosovar plates in exchange for Serbia not issuing plates for Kosovar towns[8]. While this may seem trivial, it goes to show that tensions are nearing a breaking point where political violence will once again become the norm in the Balkans, all because of ethnic tensions which worry world leaders of another genocide.

Identifying non-starters and potential compromises can ease the process of making agreements. Beginning with Serbia, the most obvious non-starter for Serbia is the recognition of Kosovo as a sovereign state. Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic announced that he does “not want and cannot discuss… Kosovo’s UN membership[9].” This, however, comes after Serbia signaled they would enter into EU-led negotiations for normalized relations. Even though President Vucic indicated a willingness to negotiate, Serbian citizens themselves strongly disagree. Mere hours after announcing a breakthrough in negotiations, thousands of Serb ultranationalists took to the streets, some even calling for Vucic’s resignation[10]. Not only does Vucic have his own policies to push for, but a growing faction of his party is quickly growing weary of their leader. Serbia is also heavily concerned with the well-being of ethnic Serbs currently living in Kosovo territory. The northern territory of Kosovo is heavily populated by ethnic Serbs, and guaranteeing protections for them is essential. Serbia has for many years expressed support for a “Community of Serb Municipalities” (CSM) that would grant some extra autonomy to Serb-dominated regions of Kosovo.

As for Kosovo, the government primarily seeks membership in international organizations. As barely one hundred UN nations recognize Kosovo, their path to UN and EU membership is extremely difficult. Without Russian and Chinese support (or at the very least apathy) Kosovo will never reach UN member status and cannot reap any benefits from international cooperation. It is also worth noting that Kosovo is over 90% ethnically Albanian, and a very large majority of Kosovans (and Albanians) would like to see a unification of all Albanian peoples[11]. While the immediate focus might be admittance to international organizations, recognition from Serbia could very well just be the first step to a “Greater Albania” in the Balkans, which challenges Serbia’s already weak regional hegemony.

After decades of tensions and micro-conflicts, some solutions have been proposed to break the impasse in the Balkans. In 2013, the First Agreement of Principles Governing the Normalization of Relations called for establishing a CSM in Kosovo. The semi-autonomy granted to the Serb communities would theoretically reduce tensions by guaranteeing some amount of protection and safety to the Serbs but creates an awkward power-sharing agreement where Serbia de facto recognizes the authority and sovereignty of Kosovo, and Kosovo agrees to give up control of its territory to its “sworn enemy”. Therefore, a partition could be proposed as a compromise where Serbia willingly gives up and recognizes Kosovo but retains sovereign control over Serb-majority areas. While a fair compromise at face value, it meets various criticisms upon deeper analysis. Historical examples of dividing territory (such as the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent) have been fraught with challenges and lasting political violence. While the Balkan partition would be far more thought out and avoid major ethnic issues as it actively takes them into account, not all Serbs live in Serb-majority communities. Some ethnic Albanians also live in these communities. Attempting to divide on ethnic grounds could trigger further violence as these “left behind” communities attempt to reunite with their home nation[12]. Partitioning also ignores the economic context of the land being traded and violence is likely necessary in order for one nation to maintain or seize control of resource-rich areas.

The largest and potentially most successful proposal came recently from a collaborating French-German government and would evolve into an EU-proposed peace plan. Originally consisting of nine articles (now eleven), the plan lays out a process for peace in the Balkans. Major components include Serbia’s de facto recognition of Kosovo as a sovereign state, freedom for Kosovo to seek membership to international organizations, protections for Serbian Christians within Kosovo, potential financial/economic support for Serbia, and the exchanging of Permanent Missions between the nations. While the independence of Kosovo is usually a non-starter for President Vucic, protections for Serbs in Kosovo could be enough to win his support. If tensions continue and violence escalates, more harm could come to his people and his administration. The additional economic support could help rebuild a largely stagnant Serbian economy and help integrate Serbia into the European market. Serbia has long sought entrance into the European Union and this plan from the EU seems to signal the independence of Kosovo being the last wall between Serbia and membership. This plan also encourages the creation and protection of the CSM that would inherently create a largely decentralized state. Evidence of the CSM succeeding can be found elsewhere in the Balkans. Bosnia-Herzegovina is largely comprised of ethnic Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs. Each group enjoys constitutional protections such as the right to veto legislation deemed destructive to their interests[13]. These groups were used to years of bloodshed, but now live in relative peace and harmony under a singular banner. Bosnia-Herzegovina also serves as a model for a united Kosovo since it is composed of two entities, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the Republika Srpska. The decentralized government structure has prevented violence that has risen to the same level as the Bosnian Wars in the mid-1990s. Lastly, if Serbia fears the rise of a “Greater Albania”, recognizing Kosovo’s independence and granting it rights to the international community is the proper strategy to prevent a regional hegemonic challenge.

A potential addition to the peace plan is the transfer of control over the Kosovo force from NATO to the UN. First, an international force is recommended to ensure the peace plan is being followed through. Seeing the turbulent history of the region, it is also necessary to ensure there are no human rights violations through ethnic cleansing and forced resettlements. Using an existing force avoids many political roadblocks to creating a new joint force. Further, transferring the authority from NATO to the UN shifts the power balance (albeit slightly) in favor of Serbia. The EU plan largely favors Kosovo and doesn’t provide many concessions to Serbia. By transferring the force to the UN, Serbia’s allies in Russia and China would get some control over the force to ensure fair use of its power.

Otto von Bismarck’s famous quip over the Balkans may have come true. That quote is over 135 years old and yet it may still be true today. Tensions in the Balkans may have subsided since the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, but they still cause thousands of deaths today and create proxy power struggles between the world’s great powers. The Western World has an opportunity to promote peace in the region by implementing the EU’s plan to recognize Kosovo, support Serbia economically, and normalize the relationship between the nations.