The imminent declaration of a sovereign state in the Serbian province of Kosovo signals the possible return of conflict to the Balkans. Many international actors, most notably the Russian Federation, are firmly against an independent Kosovo. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Larov warned yesterday at a press conference in Cyprus that the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo and recognition of such independence “will not remain without consequences. . . . It will create a chain reaction throughout the Balkans and other areas of the world.”
Russia’s denial of Kosovo’s nationhood is rooted in two strategies of her foreign policy. First, if it were to acknowledge the sovereignty of small secessionist ethnic groups, such as in Kosovo, the Russian Federation would open itself up to more internal divisions. Already beset by conflict in breakaway regions such as Chechnya and Dagestan, Russia can ill afford the dissolution of the state in the same manner that befell the Soviet Union in 1991. By rejecting Kosovo’s independence, Moscow is sending a clear message to the international community that Russia will not stand for the continued fragmentation of the nation-state structure.
Secondly, Russia seeks to deny Kosovo’s independence in order to gain a renewed sense of power on the international stage. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the former empire’s standing has been severely reduced economically, militarily, and diplomatically. Controlling a vast empire and sphere of influence during the Cold War, the USSR’s Russian successor state has been riddled with internal conflict and violence. By making a strong stance against Kosovo’s secession from Serbia, Russia is continuing its defiance of the interests and policies of the West. Along with Putin’s strengthening of the decrepit Russian military and an economic upswing due to the sale of Russia’s vast energy resources, the Russian Federation is once again beginning to manifest itself as a world power.
With a consensus unable to be reached by the United Nations on the Kosovo question, tensions continue to rise. Kosovo’s President Fatmir Sejdiu has already stated that the province will declare its independence from Serbia soon. This declaration will be made regardless if it is unilateral in nature. So from a foreign policy perspective, what can Russia do to influence the outcome of the Kosovo crisis?
The simple answer: not much. Russia no longer has the strategic means to deploy forces to assist the Serbian government in their attempts to snuff out an independent Kosovo. Along with the stationing of 16,000 NATO troops in Kosovo, additional forces from the U.S. and France are arriving to deter against any possible violence. These two facts clearly rule out any type of military intervention by the Russian Federation. Diplomatically, Russia really has only two choices: to increase its support for the Serbian state, and to veto any resolution supporting Kosovo’s independence that comes through the UN. Aside from these options, policymakers in the Kremlin can only sit and wait for Kosovo’s fate. This is a sad reality for Moscow considering the Federation’s unity, on a large part, relies on the outcome in Kosovo.
4 Comments
I disagree that Russia has no diplomatic options. If the world accepts self-determination as grounds for breaking up a sovereign state against the will of that sovereign state (the core of the Kosovar case) then the Russians can quite legitimately claim a precedent for an independent and internationally-recognized Abkhazia carved out of Georgia, Transdniestria carved out of Moldova, and further cases to named at a later date. The potential for mischief opened up by Kosovar independence is enormous. Kosovo is the perfect example of an international problem best kicked on down the road a few years.
I would add a third element to the two mentioned above, and that is the blood tie that exists between the Russ’ and the Serbs.
The cultural comparison the Serbs are fond of mentioning to Americans is that the loss of Kosovo is similar to Texas being broken away from the US and returned to Mexican rule.
I hate to admit I never thought about it before, but now that you mention it, it might likely be very good for the USA to give texas back to mexico. Likely good for mexico too. Maybe even good for texans.
An independent texas would probably be good for the USA, provided they didn’t get nukes. I don’t want to think about texas with nukes.
Don’t be so quick to write off Russia’s military. They’ve modernized a great deal since Putin took office. And unlike the US, they are not overextended with commitments elsewhere.