The Wall Street Journal-20080212-Is Independence the Best Course for Kosovo-

Return to: The_Wall_Street_Journal-20080212

Is Independence the Best Course for Kosovo?

Full Text (530  words)

Ruth Wedgwood ("Let's Avoid Another Kosovo Crisis," op-ed, Feb. 9) advocates autonomy as an alternative to Kosovo's desire for independence. Autonomy has worked well for minorities in other parts of Europe, such as the Catalans in Spain or the German-speaking Tyroleans in Italy. The 1.5 million Hungarians in Transylvania or the 10% of Slovakia's population who wish to retain their Hungarian heritage would certainly welcome such a solution to their aspirations. Autonomy represents a step toward Wilsonian principles of self- determination and the U.S. should support it.

Csaba K. Zoltani

Lutherville, Md.

---

Prof. Wedgwood presented opposition to pending independence for Kosovo as good U.S. policy. I object on the basis of both international law and good public policy. The U.N. already recognizes Kosovo's sovereignty in principle. The principle happens to be that of "equal rights and self-determination of peoples," which was added to the U.N. Charter in 1945, and reinforced when the U.S. ratified the U.N. Civil and Political Rights Covenant in 1992.

The same legal argument now applies to completing the process of dismembering the former Yugoslavia, and now "Serbia," which includes the distinct people of Kosovo. Kosovo's population of two million is both over 90% ethnic Albanian in culture and Sunni Muslim in religion in contrast to Serbia's Orthodox Christianity.

Kosovo's equal right to self-determination needs to be enforced as a basic principle of international law and as an obligation of the U.S. -- often avoided since we supported the breakup of the Soviet Union. In another respect this is comparable to the breakup of the former Malay States into an independent Singapore and independent Malaysia. Both got rich and prosperous and democratic, one primarily Muslim and one primarily Buddhist.

Walt Landry

Arlington, Va.

---

Serbian nationalism is not a small event, rather it is a mindset that has barely changed in 100 years.

It was Serbian nationalism which precipitated World War I. The unresolved differences of World War I led to World War II. It was Serbian nationalism which in the 1980s and '90s led to the fragmentation of Yugoslavia. One can see this nationalism with ultra- nationalist Tomislav Nikolic almost being elected. One can reasonably argue that little has changed.

Serbia claims that Kosovo is an integral part of its territory. So what? Serbia fought wars with Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia to keep them as a part of Yugoslavia. It lost them all. Macedonia and Montenegro were able to go more peacefully. With Kosovo it didn't need to fight a war. Serbia was so much more heavily armed than the Kosovars that it could with impunity kill tens of thousands and attempted to drive hundreds of thousands out. The world was outraged and NATO stepped in to prevent the worst ethnic-cleansing in Europe since the 1940s.

Whatever claim Serbia might have had on Kosovo and the Kosovars ended with the brutal attempt at that cleansing.

In terms of timing: It's been nine years since the U.N. began the administration of Kosovo. Let's do what needs to be done and move on. A free and independent Kosovo will be in the best interests of the Kosovars, the Serbians and the free world.

Brahim Zabeli

Shorewood, Minn.