NATO CASE STUDY: KOSOVO success

2008 headline after Kosovo declared independence:

SOME KEY MOMENTS

THE BUILD-UP TO CONFLICT

1987: future Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic rallies Kosovo Serbs, a key step in his rise to power in Yuglosalvia; as President he stripped Kosovo of its regional autonomy under the constitution

1990: before Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia declared independence in 1991 it was Albanian Kosovo leaders who were the 1st to declare independence from Yugoslavia. 100,000 ethnic Albanian workers were worked, leading to a general strike. Conflict brewed as a new president (Rugova) was elected for the self-proclaimed republic

1995: The KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) publicly announce their formation, growing out of earlier independence groups. They reacted against the perceived weakness of President Rugova and the absence of any concessions in the 1995 Dayton Accords; they declare their aim to militarily resist Serbian rule in 1997.

ARMED CONFLICT BEGINS: SWIFT, DECISIVE NATO AIRSTRIKES - BUT CIVILIAN AREAS BOMBED

1998, March: Serbia launches a military crackdown on Kosovo rebels, leading to 1000s of ethnic Albanians being forced out of their homes by militias and the Serbian army (still officially the Yugoslav army). Around 2,000 Kosovan civilians + KLA combatants killed.

1998, September: Nato gives President Milosevic an ultimatum: cease the attacks or face retribution

1999, March: a year after the armed conflict began, Nato launches 78 days of airstrikes against Belgrade, terming this a "humanitarian war". 1000s of ethnic Albanian refugees tell horror stories of suffering at the hands of Serb forces/militias.

1999, June: 'President Milosevic agrees to withdraw troops from Kosovo. UN sets up a Kosovo Peace Implementation Force (Kfor) and Nato forces arrive in the province. The KLA agrees to disarm. Serb civilians flee revenge attacks.' (BBC)

The war ended with the Kumanovo Treaty, with Yugoslav and Serb forces agreeing to withdraw from Kosovo to make way for an international presence

After the war, a list was compiled which documented that over 13,500 people were killed or went missing during the two year conflict. The Yugoslav and Serb forces caused the displacement of between 1.2 million to 1.45 million Kosovo Albanians

The NATO bombing campaign has remained controversial. It did not gain the approval of the UN Security Council and it caused at least 488 Yugoslav civilian deaths, including substantial numbers of Kosovar refugees. (Wiki)

NATO description of KFOR

 

A VERY UNEASY PEACE - WITH FRESH OUTBREAKS OF VIOLENCE. UN FORCES

2004 March - Nineteen people are killed in the worst clashes between Serbs and ethnic Albanians since 1999. The violence started in the divided town of Mitrovica.

2004 October - President Rugova's pro-independence Democratic League tops poll in general election, winning 47 seats in 120-seat parliament. Poll is boycotted by Serbs.

2004 December - Parliament re-elects President Rugova and elects former rebel commander Ramush Haradinaj as prime minister. Mr Haradinaj's party had entered into a coalition with the president's Democratic League.

2005 March - Mr Haradinaj indicted to face UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague, resigns as prime minister. [BBC]

INDEPENDENCE DECLARED; CONFLICT OVER RECOGNITION, BUT MUTUAL ASPIRATION TO JOIN EU. EU TAKES OVER UN ROLE
 

2008 Following Vienna 2006, the 1st direct talks since 1999, Kosovo declares independence - swiftly recognised by the US and UN but not Russia or Serbia. I experienced not so long after being turned away at the Serb border for having a Kosovo stamp in my passport! BBC:

2008 June - A new constitution transfers power to majority ethnic Albanian government after nine years of UN rule. Kosovo Serbs set up their own rival assembly in Mitrovica.

2008 December - European Union mission (Eulex) takes over police, justice and customs services from the UN. Serbia accepts the EU mission.

2009 January - New multi-ethnic Kosovo Security Force launched under Nato supervision, replacing a unit dominated by veterans of independence campaign against Serbia.

2012 September - The group of 23 EU countries, the US and Turkey overseeing Kosovo since 2008 end its supervisory role over the government, although Nato-led peacekeepers and EU rule-of-law monitors remain.

2013 April - Kosovo and Serbia reach a landmark agreement on normalising relations that grants a high degree of autonomy to Serb-majority areas in northern, while both sides agree not to block each other's efforts to seek EU membership.

2018 Talks over landswap with Serbia - initially supported by EU, but they reverse once the US makes its opposition clear. This remains a live possibility today, with splits in Nato over whether this is a good idea. Kosovo remains unstable with Kosovo Serbs, similarly to Bosnian Serbs, largely refusing to recognise or engage with the federal government.

2019, 2020 First the PM, then the President, resign over war crimes prosecutions.  

STARTER ARTICLES

BBC timeline (+ alternate version)

BBC (video): the war that won't end

BBC Newsbeat: NATO explained in pictures 

Wiki

BalkanInsight: 78 days of terror

NATO's own guide

IrishTimes: example of sceptical Western media from 1999

Britannica: encyclopedia entry

Euronews: Serbia/Kosovo relations explained

Looooong read: Was NATO’s decision to militarily intervene in the Kosovo War a ‘last resort’?

VIDEOS

This is a pretty good amateur video explaining the context of the breakup of Yugoslavia and outbreak of multiple wars, though the sound quality isn't great (4:58, 2015).

You can find lots of useful vids; not a bad idea when revising to try a video you haven't watched before.

A simple YouTube search (you can also try looking for BBC or C4 News features)

Most of these sources will mainly uncritically follow the line that the NATO action was legitimate and proportionate, and for exam purposes this is a case study of NATO success. There is a critique though, that NATO targeted civilian infrastructure as well as military, bombing a modern European capital city. This short Spanish video (subtitled) quotes a Serbian media worker beside a headstone commemorating his fellow workers killed by a NATO bomb hitting a media centre.

There are some unlikely features out there too - like ex-soldier now terrible solo singer James "You're Beautiful" Blunt returning to see Kosovo. There are alternate news sources like this Turkish one too, plus longer docs like this 30min one from 1999.

THE ECONOMIST: HOW DID KOSOVO BECOME A COUNTRY? 7:52 (2018)

The final point in this vid is interesting: both Serbia and Kosovo aspire to EU membership; impossible if continued hostility from Serbia continues - so could this bring about a more settled peace? The video highlights that many Kosovans (just as in Bosnia) simply reject the Kosovo identity, perceiving themselves still as simply Serbian.

NATO: HOW KFOR DEVELOPED (REFLECTS ON 20 YEARS, ESPECIALLY POST-WAR REBUILDING ROLE) 9:27 (2019)

Obviously not an objective source! Useful detail nonetheless.

BBC: KOSOVO WAR, THE CONFLICT THAT WON'T GO AWAY 5:31 (2019)

As noted in the Economist video above, this conflict may have moved past direct military confrontation, but tension and conflict over borders and national identity remains very strong - as seen in some flashpoint sporting events.

You can get a sense of how the Western media portrayed the conflict with this 1999 appeal for the UK public to donate aid to Kosovo, fronted by a BBC journalist.

BBC: GROWING UP IN KOSOVO I'VE NEVER MET A SERBIAN 8:19 (2019)

We've discussed the sectarian schooling in Northern Ireland, and the 'peace walls' that continue to divide many communities decades after the ceasefires and GFA. This video explores the reality of a sharply ethnically divided European state, whose very existence is still contested by Serbia, Russia and more.

COULD THE SERBIA/KOSOVO BORDERS CHANGE AGAIN (PEACEFULLY)? LAND-SWAP DISCUSSIONS 1:30, BBC 2018

The EU initially signalled they were in favour of this, but changed tack after the US expressed opposition. No dialogue in this video, just titles. 

...

NATO CASE STUDY: AFGHANISTAN failure

STARTER LINKS:

NATO's guide

Wiki

History.com

BBC explainer: costs of the war

BBC Afghanistan archive

Guardian Afghanistan archive

A long read: Belfer

...

US DRONE STRIKE THAT KILLED 7 CHILDREN WON’T BE PUNISHED (Guardian)

'No US troops or officials will face disciplinary action for a drone strike in Kabul in August that killed 10 Afghan civilians, including seven children, the Pentagon said’

How US bombings, killings radicalised many Afghans (Guardian)

'“The insurgency was not inevitable. There was a good chance for peace in 2001. Everyone, including the Taliban accepted they had been defeated. But the US and their Afghan allies persecuted and marginalised those who’d lost the war, not just Taliban but tribal and factional rivals of those who had seized power,” said Kate Clark, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.'


Afghanistan papers reveal US public were misled about unwinnable war (Guardian Dec 2019)

Interviews with key insiders reveal damning verdict on conflict that cost 2,300 US lives

Snippet:

Hundreds of confidential interviews with key figures involved in prosecuting the 18-year US war in Afghanistan have revealed that the US public has been consistently misled about an unwinnable conflict.

Transcripts of the interviews, published by the Washington Post after a three-year legal battle, were collected for a Lessons Learned project by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (Sigar), a federal agency whose main task is eliminating corruption and inefficiency in the US war effort.

The 2,000 pages of documents reveal the bleak and unvarnished views of many insiders in a war that has cost $1tn (£760bn) and killed more than 2,300 US servicemen and women, with more than 20,000 injured. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have died in the conflict.

...

BBC April 2021:

The Taliban believe victory is theirs. Sitting over a cup of green tea, Haji Hekmat proclaims, "we have won the war and America has lost". The decision by US President Joe Biden to delay the withdrawal of remaining US forces to September, meaning they will remain in the country past the 1 May deadline agreed last year, has sparked a sharp reaction from the Taliban's political leadership. Nonetheless, momentum seems to be with the militants. 

For the past year, there has been an apparent contradiction in the Taliban's "jihad". They stopped attacks on international forces following the signing of an agreement with the US, but continued to fight with the Afghan government. Haji Hekmat, though, insists there is no contradiction. "We want an Islamic government ruled by the Sharia. We will continue our jihad until they accept our demands."

On whether or not the Taliban would be willing to share power with other Afghan political factions, Haji Hekmat defers to the group's political leadership in Qatar. "Whatever they decide we will accept," he repeatedly says.

The Taliban don't see themselves as a mere rebel group, but as a government-in-waiting. They refer to themselves as the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan," the name they used when in power from 1996 until being overthrown in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

Now, they have a sophisticated "shadow" structure, with officials in charge of overseeing everyday services in the areas they control.

Airpower, particularly that provided by the Americans, has been crucial over the years in holding back the Taliban's advance. The US already drastically cut back its military operations after signing an agreement with the Taliban last year, and many fear that following their withdrawal the Taliban will be placed to launch a military takeover of the country.

Haji Hekmat derides the Afghan government, or "Kabul administration" as the Taliban refer to it, as corrupt and un-Islamic. It's hard to see how men like him will reconcile with others in the country, unless it's on their own terms.

"This is jihad," he says, "it is worship. We don't do it for power but for Allah and His law. To bring Sharia to this country. Whoever stands against us we will fight against them."

UK troops to begin 'drawdown' in Afghanistan (BBC April 2021)
Selected quotes:

The UK is to "drawdown" the number of troops in Afghanistan from next month, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has said.

Confirming the planned departure of forces, Mr Wallace also warned any attacks on existing troops would be "met with a forceful response".

The UK military has been in Afghanistan since 2001, with more than 450 British troops dying during the conflict with the Taliban and fighters from al-Qaeda.

The US has said it will withdraw all forces by 11 September.

And Nato confirmed allies would begin withdrawing troops from 1 May.

The last UK combat troops left in 2014, but about 750 remain as part of the Nato mission to train Afghan forces.

US President Joe Biden has announced that American troops will leave Afghanistan by 11 September, saying it was "time to end America's longest war".

That would coincide with the 20th anniversary of the terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the US in 2001.

Mr Biden said while the US "will not stay involved in Afghanistan militarily", its "diplomatic and humanitarian work" would continue.

Our defence correspondent Jonathan Beale says the UK, like most Nato allies, relies on the US's infrastructure, logistics and support in Afghanistan.

The US has some 2,500 troops in the country as part of a 9,600-strong Nato mission.

At the height of the war, Nato had more than 130,000 troops from 50 nations in Afghanistan. The UK had 9,500 personnel and 137 bases in Helmand province alone.

The speaker of the Afghan parliament, Mir Rahman Rahmani, has warned the withdrawal of foreign forces in the current circumstances will lead to civil war.

In February 2020, the US and the Taliban agreed a deal that would see the US and Nato allies withdraw all troops within 14 months if the Taliban upheld its promises, including not allowing al-Qaeda or other militants to operate in areas it controlled and proceeding with national peace talks.

Although the group stopped attacks on international forces as part of the agreement, it has continued to fight the Afghan government.

Last month, the Taliban threatened to resume hostilities against foreign troops still in the country on 1 May.

MORE BBC LINKS:

• US troops to leave Afghanistan by 11 September
• Timeline: UK troops in Afghanistan
• Afghans face pivotal moment as US 'closes the book'

• The Afghan war: The short and long story
• Who are the Taliban?

UN CASE STUDY: BOSNIA failure

tbc

SEE ALSO: post on BANNING BOSNIA GENOCIDE DENIAL

Dec 2020

Bosnian/Croat split blocked Mostar election for 12 years until a case went to European Court of Human Rights for denying the right to vote. The EU, US and UK ambassadors subsequently brokered a deal for elections held this week. Guardian.

Like the GFA, the Daytona Agreement fudged some conflict points.

Concerns over new conflict potential, Guardian. Nov 2021 update: threat of war recedes as Bosnian Serbs withdraw threat to create their own army - but still intend to have a separate tax and legal system, which basically means seceding from Bosnia Herzegovina:

'[High Representative, 'international community envoy'] Schmidt’s position is under diplomatic pressure. Moscow opposed his appointment and does not recognise his authority. Russia and China both insisted that every mention of the high representative was stripped from a recent UN security council resolution on Bosnia. [Bosnian Serb premier] Dodik has refused to meet him, questioning his legitimacy.'

The story continues... 'In an interview with the Guardian, Milorad Dodik, the Serb member of the tripartite leadership of Bosnia-Herzegovina, said he would not be deterred by the outcry from London, Washington, Berlin and Brussels.' He's signalled he expects Russia and China (who both blocked any mention of the High Representative from a recent UN report) to make up any finance lost from Western sanctions. Dodik is the Serb part of the 3-member Bosnian leadership:

'Dodik has been widely condemned in recent weeks over his stated intention to withdraw the Serbian part of Bosnia-Herzegovina from state-level institutions, such as the tax administration, judiciary, intelligence agency and even the national army, in order to create a Serb force.

The proposal has been described in a report to the UN as tantamount to “secession”, and a dangerous risk to the 1995 Dayton peace accord, which ended the civil war that cost about 100,000 lives after the breakup of Yugoslavia.

That peace deal established a state, Bosnia-Herzegovina, made up of two entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, consisting predominantly of Bosniak Muslims and Croats, and the Serbian Republika Srpska. Bosnia’s three-member presidency is held by representatives of those three main ethnic groups.

Under the so-called Bonn powers of 1997, substantial powers of law-making were also granted to the office of the high representative (OHR) in charge of implementing the deal. Those powers were used extensively by the former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown, during his time as high representative, to centralise the administration of the country.

Most recently, Valentin Inzko, who left the post this summer, used the office to outlaw the denial of genocide, in response to attempts by some people to play down the scope of the 1995 Srebrenica massacre. This led Dodik in July to pull Republika Srpska representatives out of central institutions, and in October to propose taking back powers and transferring land owned by the central state.'

Dodik paints both the High Representative and the 3 judges appointed by the EU court of human rights as undemocratic and outside interference, and refuses to accept that the Serbs committed genocide in Sbrenica, and:

'Since 2017 Dodik has been banned from travelling to the US, or accessing to assets under its jurisdiction, after he defied Bosnia’s constitutional court by staging a referendum on celebrating Republika Srpska Day, marking the date in 1992 when Bosnian Serbs declared their own state in Bosnia.'

He says he still wants EU membership but that everyone knows enlargement is basically off the table, with France/Holland repeatedly blocking Bosnia's application to join Croatia inside the EU (he's almost certainly correct in that, which boosts his willingness to turn to Russia/China for backing)

CAMPAIGNING - Inactivism. Painting climate campaigners as elitist

See Guardian.

Bite sized Brexit

I'll gather some of our lesson materials here in time

US ended trade war with EU...but kept high tariffs on steel and more for the UK! "UK steel makers 'left behind' as US ends trade war - BBC News" https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59113868