Controversy Over Abkhazian and South Ossetian Independence - Kosovo As A Precedent

Kosovo As A Precedent

Further information: International reaction to the 2008 declaration of independence by Kosovo

The Assembly of the Serbian Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, under administration of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo since 1999, unilaterally declared independence as the Republic of Kosovo on 17 February 2008. The Republic of Kosovo was instantly recognised by the United States and the EU-3 and now has been recognised by 101 internationally recognised sovereign states.

In an emergency session of the UN Security Council Serbian President Boris Tadić asked the Council, "Are we all aware of the precedent that is being set and are we aware of the catastrophic consequences that it may lead to?" The Permanent Representatives of the United States, United Kingdom and France presented their opinion that the Kosovo case is sui generis in nature and could not be perceived as a precedent.

The setting of a precedent was mentioned by many countries, such as Argentina, China, Cuba, Greece and Spain. India stated that Kosovo "can set a very dangerous precedent for similar cases around the world." The then Russian President Vladimir Putin described the recognition by Western powers of Kosovo independence as "terrible precedent, which will de facto blow apart the whole system of international relations, developed not over decades, but over centuries." He then went on to say, "hey have not thought through the results of what they are doing. At the end of the day it is a two-ended stick and the second end will come back and hit them in the face."

Some analysts at the time called ignoring Russian objections and the move by the United States and the EU-3 a mistake, with Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute stating that their view of Kosovo being sui generis and setting no precedent as "extraordinarily naïve". It was also suggested that Russia could use the case of Kosovo as pretext for recognising Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the future. Other analysts, including the Heritage Foundation, offer that Kosovo is no precedent due to its administration by the United Nations as a protectorate for seven years and was blocked from being admitted to the United Nations due to Russia and China being able to use their veto in the United Nations Security Council.

In hearings before the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs, California Republican Congressman and member of the Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight, Dana Rohrabacher, said there is an "obvious analogy between Kosovo and what's going on in Georgia" and continued to say "Now the only difference is of course, we're Americans and they're Russians. And the people trying to breakaway there were pro-Russian." This echoes sentiments he expressed in 2007, when he stated the United States "reflexively take the anti-Russia position" due to that "the majority of US foreign policy establishment formed in the Soviet era, when they dealt with developing a strategy to surround, weaken, and humiliate Russia."

In July 2008, in a speech to Russian ambassadors on Russian foreign policy, Dmitry Medvedev opined that "for the European Union, Kosovo is almost what Iraq has proved to be for the United States" and that they acted unilaterally in pursuit of their own self-interests and undermined international law in the process.

In October 2009, Dmitry Medvedev said that parallels between Kosovo and South Ossetia are "inappropriate" and that "We are categorically against drawing parallels between the Balkan events and the events in the Caucasus. As concerns South Ossetia – it’s our unambiguous, absolutely clear position – it about repelling direct military aggression. And what was done by Russia after that, was done in full accordance with the UN Charter." and that Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence and the events that followed "have confirmed the inadequacy of attempts to adjust the solution of complex international problems to considerations of notorious political expediency. We consider it unacceptable to do what was done in the Kosovo precedent – to use the lack of progress at negotiations as the reason for unilateral actions, including recognition of new international legal entities.".