55601. Kosovo in Limbo: State-Building and "Substantial Autonomy"
- Author:
- Simon Chesterman
- Publication Date:
- 08-2001
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- International Peace Institute (IPI)
- Abstract:
- Complex peace operations that involve state-building functions are difficult even when the political outcome is clear, as it is in East Timor. In situations such as Kosovo, where the final status of the territory under administration remains unclear, every aspect of state-building is more politically sensitive and more operationally complex. When this occurs in a highly militarized environment and in an unstable region, any departure from a supposedly “interim” solution becomes more difficult still. The Dayton Accords in Bosnia show the dangers of a difficult peace agreement evolving into a constitutional framework that is both unworkable and impossible to change. The conclusion of hostilities may provide the best incentive for belligerents to compromise, but it may subsequently become impossible to reopen such questions without the threat of renewed violence. Future peace agreements are therefore likely to contain state-building provisions that international institutions will assume the task of overseeing, in some situations without a clear political endpoint and exit strategy. In Kosovo, the elections slated for November 17, 2001, reflect a desire for measurable progress and an indication of when the mission will end. An April 2001 report by the UN Secretary-General on this topic was entitled “No exit without strategy”, warning that the UN has too often withdrawn or dramatically altered a peacekeeping operation, only to see the situation remain unstable or sink into renewed violence. Unfortunately, the attitude of lead actors within the Security Council is too often “no strategy without an exit”. State-building after a war will always take years, perhaps decades, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise to domestic publics. Elections and limited devolution notwithstanding, the international community will remain in Kosovo and Bosnia for the foreseeable future, certainly with a strong military presence and with at least a supervisory civilian authority. This is an undesirable outcome of what NATO styles as humanitarian interventions, but it is better than all the alternatives. The fact that UNMIK will remain in control of Kosovo for the foreseeable future raises the question of how it should govern. Within UNMIK, there is an increasing tension between those who regard respect for human rights and the rule of law as central to the institution-building aspect of UNMIK's mandate, and those who see this as secondary to the over-riding concerns of peace and security.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Human Rights, International Law, International Organization, Migration, and United Nations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Bosnia, and Kosovo