MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) - On April 17, Serbia will file its case with the International Court of Justice in The Hague against Kosovo's right to independence.
Fifteen judges of the most important court in the UN will face a challenging task of determining what Kosovo really is and if it had the right to declare independence. The Court has two years in which to give the answer to the question put by Serbia last year and approved for consideration in the Court by a UN General Assembly session. The verdict is expected to be handed down in 2011.
Although the judges could speed up the process and reach a verdict earlier, they are not motivated to do so. Nor is anybody else. Because, from a global perspective, regardless of whether their decision is in favor of Serbia or against it, it will do nothing to alter Kosovo's new administrative status.
Incidentally, Serbia has already said it will accept any ruling, while Kosovo's Prime Minister Hashim Thaci uttered something like this: "Whatever is decided will be neither here nor there. We are already independent - period."
To begin with, any decision will be a consultative one. Last year, Serbia had to lodge a complaint with the UN General Assembly, rather than the Security Council, for the simple reason that it was not a dispute between member-countries but claims against a self-proclaimed territory. Second, the General Assembly's resolution does not deal with the legitimacy of Kosovo's independence. The Hague has been requested to provide an expert opinion on this question: "Does the unilateral declaration of independence by interim bodies in Kosovo meet the norms of international law?"
There is a big difference between "illegitimate independence" and "independence declared by interim bodies in conformity with international norms of law." Many Serbian legal experts suggested that Belgrade change the wording and request that The Hague answer if it was legitimate for UN member-states to recognize Kosovo's independence in accordance with the norms of international law and UN resolutions. But Belgrade held back, considering that the trial would take too long, because every country would have to be examined for its reasons.
There are 57 such reasons today. That is the number of countries that have recognized Kosovo's independence by April 16, 2009. Interestingly, only 22 out of 27 European Union states have recognized Kosovo so far. Spain, Greece, Romania, Cyprus and Slovakia, occasionally hit by separatist sentiments, are still refusing to recognize Kosovo. Slovakia has acknowledged Kosovo's passports, but offered no state-level recognition. Among other nations, Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Iran do not intend to recognize Kosovo. Countries refusing to recognize Kosovo include the Vatican, Libya, Argentina (it is still hoping to recover the Malvinas (Faulklands) from Britain), Israel, Egypt, Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and South Africa. Altogether, 44 countries are firmly set against Kosovo's independence.
While The Hague is deciding what to do with Kosovo's right to declared independence, the process of recognition will no doubt slow down. The verdict will be of serious symbolical significance, although it is hard to say which way The Hague judges will lean - there are several schools of international law on the norms of recognizing a state's independence, and just as many criteria. And, as often happens in international law, any "outgoing" ruling usually contains such blurred and fanciful wording that it can easily be stretched in different and sometimes opposite directions. The Hague Court need not be expected to produce anything out of the ordinary. Its judges are too sober-minded to issue a hard-nosed verdict and bind international law to a cast-iron precedent.
If the Court rules against Kosovo Albanians, it will incite many separatists. But, with the crisis going full blast, they are incited as it is, and are unlikely to be spurred any further. Most likely, the ruling will be neither in favor of Serbia nor Kosovo. One thing is certain: in any case, it will have no effect on Kosovo's future.
The Hague judges are no surgeons. And hotheads in Serbia or elsewhere should not expect them to reattach the amputated Kosovo back to Serbia. Officially, Kosovo's independence was declared on March 17, 2008, but in fact it existed from the spring of 1999, when NATO began bombing Yugoslavia. This is something no one can ever do. And, getting down to brass tacks, the Serbs (and previously the people of Yugoslavia) should blame their own governments, going back even further than Milosevic. They did little to cement the seams binding Kosovo and Metochia (the official name of the province) with Yugoslavia, and the seams gradually came apart. They were finally severed by NATO bombings.
Kosovo currently shares the status of other semi- or partly-recognized or non-recognized but self-declared states. They include Taiwan, Transdnestr, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Tamil-Eelam, a de facto independent state in the north-east of Sri Lanka. Taiwan is closest to Kosovo in status. It is recognized by 22 countries, the largest among which are Nicaragua, Salvador and Paraguay. In this weight category there is also the Vatican. Taiwan would have long become a regular member of the world community if it were not for China. All those who did not recognize Taiwan have always feared to exasperate the Heavenly Empire. Northern Cyprus has been recognized by only one country (Turkey), and Abkhazia and South Ossetia have been recognized by two countries each - Russia and Nicaragua.
Since international recognition of Taiwan is no longer an issue, the deliberations of The Hague judges will be followed with most interest by the remaining partly- recognized and/or non-proclaimed but separatist-minded territories and peoples. There are more of them than one might think in the world. They exist in Europe (Hungarians in Romania, Basques in Spain, Albanians in Macedonia and Greece, Corsicans in France, "Northeners" in Italy, Catholics in Ulster, etc.), Asia, North and South America, and Africa.
The Court in The Hague has asked all UN countries concerned to present their arguments for or against Kosovo's independence by July 17. It set it as the starting date for serious deliberation. Incidentally, Michael Wood, one of the best-known world experts on international law from Britain, will represent the Kosovo side. He advised the UN Security Council, took part in drafting the UN Law of the Sea Conventions and prepared legal grounds for the Dayton Accords on Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since 1995 he has been concentrating on Kosovo.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
