Pieter Feith: Kosovo Six Months After Independence
S
ince Kosovo’s declaration of independence on February 17, 2008, diplomats and analysts have struggled to make sense of the political process that has unfolded since the atrocities and invasion of 1999. The future is no less clear. What are the best next steps for Kosovo’s citizens? What repercussions will Western recognition of Kosovo’s independence have on the international order? With formal recognition limited more or less to the European Union, the United States, and their close allies, and with Russia citing Kosovo as precedent justifying its militarism surrounding Georgia, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia, the politics of Kosovo’s independence remain hotly contested and cause for continued international dispute.
But, argued Pieter Feith, E.U. Special Representative in Kosovo, “There was no other choice.” Speaking on September 22 at The Fletcher School as a part of the Charles Frances Adams Lecture series, Feith articulated his view that independence was a “dramatic leap forward” for Kosovo marked by a sui generis character. “It is a case in its own right, with no alternative to independence,” he emphasized during the course of his presentation to a group of students, faculty, and guests, delivered in light of a same-day presentation of the Dr. Jean Mayer Global Citizenship Award to the Honorable Martti Ahtisaari at Tufts University.
Feith himself is hardly a novice to global conflicts and the tense politics they provoke. He recalled how as a graduate student at The Fletcher School (MALD 1970), the Vietnam War sparked controversy in Fletcher’s community, noting parallels to today. His studies at Fletcher, however, were deeply influential to his professional development. Post graduation, he spent nearly two decades in the Netherlands Diplomatic corps, serving in a variety of capacities before moving over to NATO. In this distinguished career, he learned “there are no one size fits all solutions in international crisis management.” He contrasted Kosovo with Aceh’s peace process—where he worked with Ahtisaari under different circumstances—as a case in point.
As for Kosovo’s near future, Feith sees a few key challenges facing the Government of Kosovo and its international partners, mostly relating to the north where Kosovo’s Serbs have been without effective rule of law for almost six months now. EULEX, a joint-E.U.-U.S. initiative he directs, is now seeking to assist law enforcement, the judiciary, prosecutors, and others. Kosovo’s new constitution, drafted with the consultation of The Fletcher School’s Professor Louis Aucoin, provides a solid legal basis for such work, but in practice much remains to be done to strengthen implementation. Similarly, although the constitution is progressive for human rights and protection of minorities, Feith believes there is a need for more effective outreach by the Government in this regard. Decentralization and security sector reform are critical endeavors as well. Finally, a currently pending judgment by the International Court of Justice will also influence the psychology underlying these policies and reforms.
In the long run, however, Kosovo sees the possibility of E.U. membership dangling in the future. This potential accession is Feith’s most powerful source of leverage. Similarly, the prosperity and good governance implied by an E.U. future is surely Kosovo’s most powerful hope.
Kirby Reiling MALD ‘09