|
Post by radovic on Oct 15, 2007 16:59:03 GMT -5
International community seriously considering new solutions Hong Kong as a model for Kosovo Author: | 21.09.2007 - 10:20
Aware that stances of Belgrade (crucial autonomy) and Pristina (independence) cannot be brought closer, the international diplomats are presently considering new models for settlement of Kosovo issue. As ‘Blic’ learns from a source close to the Contact Group, the option mostly thought about in the international circles is that Kosovo problem is solved as per the Hong Kong model. That model, according to our source, would comprise stances of both sides and abridged the differences between Belgrade and Pristina. Hong Kong, officially a part of China, is completely autonomous and has a status of an administrative region. Five years ago it was formally returned to the Peoples Republic of China after expiration of the British Empire’s authority over it. Hong Kong now has a special autonomous status in the following 50 years, until 2047. The authorities in Kosovo would be independent of Belgrade but the province would not be an independent state. NATO would remain in Kosovo while EU mission would replace the current UN mission. The agreement between Belgrade and Pristina would include additional elements of the protection of Serbs and their cultural heritage. Kosovo borderlines would remain as today and it would remain so until final settlement of the status. Such solution would be time-limited by an agreement signed by Belgrade and Pristina and guaranteed by the international community. After expiration of that period the final status would be defined. ‘Blic’ source claims that this solution is an idea that Serbia authorities are aware of. The source also says that the proposal made by Prime Minister Kostunica’s cabinet was not a Hong Kong model but ‘an offer for signing of an international agreement on the autonomy’ valid for a period of 25 years. According to the international circles, Wolfgang Ischinger the most active member of the mediating Troika, is said to be the one the most engaged in finding of a compromise solution. Samardzic: Serbia for loose integration The crucial autonomy being offered by Serbia to Kosovo understands ‘loose integration’ in the following 10 to 20 years in a frame in which ‘the Serbs and Albanians would lead parallel lives’. Albanians would not participate in Serbian power if they do not want so, Slobodan Samardzic, Minister for KiM said. In his interview with Reuters, Samardzic said that a solution that would turn Kosovo Albanians into ‘loyal citizens of Serbia is not very likely’ and that ‘Belgrade is trying to be as realistic as possible’. ‘Serbia is offering the largest autonomy that does not exist anywhere in Europe and perhaps anywhere in the world. Serbia would need a help from European Union in implementation of the plan over the wide autonomy in Kosovo should Kosovo Albanians accept it and that would be a wise investment’, Samardzic said
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Oct 22, 2007 11:01:11 GMT -5
Here is an economist article supporting the Hong Kong model.
Go slow on Kosovo? Oct 3rd 2007 From the Economist Intelligence Unit ViewsWire
The path to independence looks longer than it did before
Most observers have for some time assumed that Kosovo is moving inexorably and inevitably towards independence. At first, most believed that this would be sanctioned by the UN and that opposition from Russia and others would be overcome. When that proved impossible--as the Economist Intelligence Unit consistently argued it would--the focus shifted to the idea of a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) by Kosovo, followed by recognition outside of the framework of the UN. However, recent developments suggest that even this may not happen soon, as the process of resolving Kosovo's status proves far more complicated than had originally been envisaged.
Matters have moved on apace since the UN special envoy in the Kosovo negotiations, Martti Ahtisaari, presented his proposals on the future status of the UN-administered province to the UN Security Council in March 2007. These proposals recommended that Kosovo be granted "internationally supervised independence", and were backed by the US and leading EU states. However, Russia rejected the plan, and its strong opposition led the Western powers to shelve plans to put the Ahtisaari proposals to the vote at the UN Security Council.
Instead, a new round of talks between the Serbian and Kosovo Albanian sides has been launched under the aegis of the Contact Group, an informal body consisting of the US, the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Russia. The talks began in late September and are scheduled to last until December 10th. It had appeared at first that the aim of the talks was simply to buy time for the international powers to try to find a way out of the current impasse, but international mediators have insisted that the talks be given a chance and are now talking up the chances of a compromise.
After preliminary consultations in Belgrade and Pristina by the Contact Group "troika" of mediators (representing the EU, US and Russia respectively), the two sides engaged in face to face talks on September 28th in New York. Nothing was achieved during the first round of talks except a commitment from both sides to keep talking. The next round of talks is to take place on October 14th in Brussels.
The Hong Kong model The significant new development was Serbia's proposal for a so-called "loose integration model". For the first time, Serbia has given content to its longstanding slogan of "more than autonomy, less than independence". The Serbian proposal is based on the model of Hong Kong and would grant the Kosovo Albanians substantial autonomy only just short of sovereignty.
Hong Kong has formally been part of China for the past 10 years, since it ceased being a British colony, but it has almost complete autonomy. For 50 years, until 2047, the Hong Kong authorities can run their own legal system, economy, currency and police force, while the Chinese government is in charge only of defence and foreign affairs.
The Serbian proposal, presented by Serbia's minister for Kosovo, Slobodan Samardzic, would mean that Serbia's borders would remain intact but Kosovo would have "95% sovereignty" with minimal or no integration into Serbia. Kosovo would be a self-governed territory in both political and economic terms, with the right to make economic agreements and participate in international institutions save for the UN. Kosovo would have all the rights of a sovereign state on its soil, except in the areas of foreign and defence policy. Even in these latter areas, Serbia would probably have little influence given the likelihood of a continued international presence in Kosovo.
This "state within a state" solution would be transitional--lasting for an agreed period of perhaps several decades, after which a final status would be determined. Such a transitional solution would be agreed in a contract signed by Belgrade and Pristina and would be guaranteed by the UN.
The Kosovo Albanian side has thus far insisted that it wants nothing less than full independence. It has said that it is not interested in pursuing Serbia's suggestions on the province's future status, but only in offering proposals for future good neighbourly relations between two sovereign states. However, the question is whether the Kosovo Albanians' insistence on their maximalist aims and rejection of all other alternatives will be sustainable. The two sides are committed to continuing with face to face talks in coming months, and it is possible that the supervised negotiating process may continue beyond the current deadline of December 10th and into 2008.
The Kosovo Albanians insist that they will issue a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) after December 10th. However, whether this will remain a mere gesture to appease the Kosovo Albanian population, or be followed by bilateral recognitions by key states, remains to be seen.
Trial of strength The Kosovo issue has become something of a trial of strength between the US and Russia. The statement by the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, on September 24th, only four days before the start of the new talks, that "There's going to be an independent Kosovo" and that "we're dedicated to that" provoked condemnation from Russia. The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said that Ms Rice's statement suggesting that independence is inevitable whatever the result of the negotiations "simply provokes one of the parties to reject compromise." Russia has not budged from its strong opposition to independence for Kosovo. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, recently stated that it would be highly irresponsible to ignore the principle of territorial integrity in resolving the Kosovo issue.
Ms Rice's comments were the USA's most explicit public statement in support of Kosovo's independence since President George Bush said in Albania in June 2007 that "sooner rather than later, you've got to say enough's enough: Kosovo's independent". The latest statement by Ms Rice was no doubt intended as a rebuff to Russia and was also meant to stiffen the resolve of the EU. However, the statement was short on detail and vague about the circumstances and timing of any independence decision. Furthermore, unlike other US officials, Ms Rice also unambiguously called on the Kosovo Albanians not to take unilateral steps. Ms Rice stated that, "we've told the Kosovars that we don't think a unilateral declaration of independence is a very good idea."
Crux of the matter Recognition of a UDI by Kosovo would be a very big step. It would not only mean bypassing the UN, but would also be in direct violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 from 1999, which preserved formal Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo. Contravening the UN, the guarantor of the rule of international law since its foundation in 1945, may be a step too far even for an increasingly unilateralist US. Ms Rice was careful to say that Kosovo's final status would be determined by the US and the EU working "together on this."
It is by no means certain therefore that even the US would recognise a self-declared independent Kosovo, or at least not for some time. And even if the US were to recognise a UDI, there is unlikely to be unanimity for such a course in the EU, some of whose members oppose independence on principle, and many more and perhaps most of whom would be reluctant to recognise an independent Kosovo if the process did not have the imprimatur of the UN. Serb-dominated northern Kosovo would not recognise independence, leading to a de facto partition and there would be a high risk of an exodus of the remaining Serbs from other areas of Kosovo.
The problems involved in a UDI and in ignoring the UN seem to have caused at least some countries to step back. Thus in recent weeks there has been a different tone to the pronouncements from some international players on Kosovo. In particular, various Western spokesmen no longer insist that the Ahtisaari proposal is the only basis for a settlement. Perhaps the most revealing statement was that by the EU mediator, Wolfgang Ischinger, who said that he would "leave open independence" and preferred to talk about "a strong supervised status" for Kosovo.
Allied to worries about contravening the UN, are fears in Europe about the destabilising impact of recognition on Serbia and the wider western Balkans region. There is also a well-founded fear that independence for Kosovo without the sanction of the UN would set a precedent for some of the 50 or so latent territorial disputes worldwide. Claims that the Kosovo case is sui generis and therefore irrelevant for these disputes are not very convincing.
Germany may be the key The pro-independence wind is no longer blowing so strongly. EU sceptics such as Spain, Slovakia, Romania, Greece, Cyprus and even Hungary, have been speaking out more firmly against an imposed solution, which suggests that weightier powers than they are reconsidering their positions. Even the pro-independence UK government appears ill at ease at the prospect of circumventing the UN. What happens after December 10th may depend on how successful the US is in getting leading EU nations on board to support Kosovo independence--given the apparent US reluctance to act alone.
In the end, it may be Germany that holds the key. Germany faces a dilemma and arguably has the most to lose. It is not difficult to see why the German government is divided on the issue. Germany does not want the EU to be torn apart over Kosovo. Germany is more sensitive than other EU states to Russian concerns and does not want to damage its relationship with Russia. Germany does not want to undermine the UN. It would also like to maintain good relations with the US. Above all, Germany does not want independence for Kosovo to unleash instability in its own backyard.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Oct 22, 2007 11:02:19 GMT -5
This is article I found on Birn website (http://www.birn.eu.com/en/108/15/5350/). Everything they mention is basically in line with Hong Kong model.
Troika Sets out Principles for Kosovo Talks 22 10 2007 Vienna_ The Troika of international mediators on Kosovo’s status presented both parties on Monday with its first set of proposals aimed to "open a path for a solution".
The document was published by several media organizations on Monday. Balkan Insight has also obtained a copy. The full text is below.
Troika Assessment on Negotiations: Principal conclusions
The Troika has reviewed the positions of the two parties. Without prejudice to the positions of both parties on status, the following principles can open a path to a solution:
1. Belgrade and Pristina will focus on developing the special nature of the relations existing between them especially in their historical, economic, cultural and human dimensions. 2. Belgrade and Pristina will solve future problems between them in a peaceful manner and not engage in actions or dispositions that would be regarded as threatening to the other side. 3. Kosovo will be fully integrated into regional structures, particularly those involving economic cooperation. 4. There will be no return to the pre-1999 status. 5. Belgrade will not govern Kosovo. 6. Belgrade will not re-establish a physical presence in Kosovo. 7. Belgrade and Pristina are determined to make progress towards association and eventually membership of the European Union as well as to move progressively towards Euro-Atlantic structures. 8. Pristina will implement broad measures to enhance the welfare of Kosovo-Serbs as well as other non-Albanian communities, particularly through decentralization of local government, constitutional guarantees and protection of cultural and religious heritage. 9. Belgrade and Pristina will cooperate on issues of mutual concern, including a) Fate of missing persons and return of displaced persons b) Protection of minorities c) Protection of cultural heritage d) Their European perspective and regional initiatives e) Economic issues, including fiscal policy and energy, trade and harmonization with EU standards and development of a joint economic growth and development strategy in line with regional economic initiatives. f) Free movement of people, goods, capital and services. g) Banking sector h) Infrastructure, transportation and communications i) Environmental protection j) Public health and social welfare k) Fight against crime, particularly in the areas of terrorism, human-, weapons- and drug-trafficking and organised crime. l) Cooperation between municipalities and the government of one of the two sides. m) Education 10. Belgrade and Pristina will establish common bodies to implement cooperation. 11. Belgrade will not interfere in Pristina`s relationship with IFIs [international financial institutions]. 12. Pristina will have full authority over its finances (taxation, public revenues, etc.) 13. Kosovo`s EU Stabilization and Association Process (Tracking Mechanism) will continue unhindered by Belgrade. 14. The international community will retain civilian and military presences in Kosovo after status is determined.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Nov 6, 2007 14:01:05 GMT -5
Tadic and Kostunica presented solution for Kosovo in Vienna Serbia suggesting the Hong Kong model Author: Željka Jevtiæ, Tanja Trikiæ | 06.11.2007 - 00:13
Serbia Prime Minister and President Vojislav Kostunica and Boris Tadic suggested at yesterday’s round of negotiations over Kosovo in Vienna, the Hong Kong model as a possible solution to Kosovo crisis. In the so far negotiating process this has been the most constructive move by Serbian authorities that may seriously jeopardize until so far certain option of unilateral recognition of Kosovo independence. Namely, the Serbian authorities have suggested a model that was thought about by the international community at some point in the past. The question is, however, if this initiative has been launched too late.
As ‘Blic’ reported in September, the option of Hong Kong model was something that the most important mediator in the Troika, EU representative Wolfgang Ischinger was also very inclined to. A source close to the Contact Group told ‘Blic’ that this solution would abridge the gap between Belgrade and Pristina since the Hong Kong model contains the stances of both sides. At yesterday’s negotiations President Tadic said that the talks should be focused on the basic principle – how to speed up the progress towards Europe, and indicated the Hong Kong model as a possible solution. The Prime Minister Kostunica said that the Serbian team was strongly convinced that ‘there is not a serious reason against comparing of Serbia’s proposal over the crucial autonomy with a solution reached in the analogous case of Hong Kong, in the continuation of negotiations’. The Hong Kong model is not a final Kosovo status but a provisional and time limited solution probably for a period of twenty years, until 2020 as unofficially mentioned. The international financial institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development have all elaborated methodology how to act in such a solution. The provisional Kosovo institutions would be independent in concluding agreements and taking credits. The mediating Troika has no mandate to offer such solutions and the proposals have to come from one of the sides in negotiations. Proposal by Serbia President and Prime Minister for settlement of Kosovo issue as per the Hong Kong model is a surprise for the international diplomacy and the question is how late that proposal has been made. Leader of Kosovo Serbs Oliver Ivanovic is of the opinion that the initiative by Belgrade authorities is good. Dusan Janjic, director of the Forum for inter-ethnic relations thinks, however, that the Hong Kong model is not in line with the reality. ‘This model is actually giving more to the Albanians than Ahtisaari’s proposal is’, Janjic claims.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Nov 6, 2007 14:01:57 GMT -5
The recent status freeze that the U.S. supposedly is not against also is inline with the "Hong Kong" model.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Nov 6, 2007 21:47:33 GMT -5
"NATO would remain in Kosovo"
The west is only concerned about this.
|
|
|
Post by tripwire on Nov 6, 2007 22:33:20 GMT -5
Both models were rejected today. Looks like the 2 German states will be the model for the time being. Two distinct independent/sovereign states, recognizing each other and working towards a better future, with a friendship treaty signed by the two independent nations. Tomorrow the SAA agreement will be signed by Serbia and EU. Looks like Serbia is accepting the inevitable. Good for the Serb leaders.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Nov 7, 2007 12:54:49 GMT -5
Both models were rejected today. Looks like the 2 German states will be the model for the time being. Two distinct independent/sovereign states, recognizing each other and working towards a better future, with a friendship treaty signed by the two independent nations. Tomorrow the SAA agreement will be signed by Serbia and EU. Looks like Serbia is accepting the inevitable. Good for the Serb leaders. That model has already been rejected.
|
|
viktor1
Membrum
DARDANIAN
Posts: 247
|
Post by viktor1 on Nov 7, 2007 13:26:03 GMT -5
NO
Only 100% Independence for KOSOVA!!!
VETEVENDOSJE!!!
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Nov 20, 2007 14:16:11 GMT -5
This proposal is still in line with the Hong Kong Model/
Belgrade's latest Kosovo idea: Aland Islands model 20 November 2007 | 09:31 -> 18:06 | Source: B92, Beta BRUSSELS -- The fifth round of direct Kosovo talks between Belgrade and Priština continued in Brussels today.
Koštunica, Tadiæ, during today's round of Kosovo talks (Beta)
The Serbian state negotiating team suggested that its essential autonomy model be accepted for a period of 20 years.
Belgrade also presented the Contact Group mediating Troika with the case of the Aland Islands, populated by Swedes, but territorially a part of Finland, as an example of successful functioning of essential autonomy in Europe.
"Our side has reiterated the case of the Aland Islands in Finland as an example of a functional autonomy solution," Kosovo Minister Slobodan Samardžiæ told reporters immediately after the meeting with the Troika.
He said that the envoys reacted "with interest and attention."
"The last time it was said that Hong Kong is an Asian case and that it is inhabited by the Chinese. Now, however, they did not make such remarks, because the Aland Islands are within Europe and the European Union and are populated by the Swedes, not the Finns," Samardžiæ explained set out, adding that "a widespread autonomy has been functioning on these islands for more than 80 years."
The talks once again begun with the Troika of Wolfgang Ischinger, Frank Wisner and Aleksandr Botsan-Kharchenko meeting the Belgrade and Priština sides separately.
They met the Kosovo Albanian side first, and then just after midday with their Serbian counterparts.
In the official invitation to the talks, it is stated that the meeting will allow the sides to resume their discussions over the province’s future and that the negotiations will be based on the basic principle of the 14 points, though any new proposals will be welcome.
On this occasion, as before, a new Troika proposal has surfaced in the media prior to the next round of talks – the so-called “neutral status” proposal. As Ischinger explained, the logic behind the idea is to normalize relations between Belgrade and Priština, without mentioning Kosovo’s status. Unlike the 14-point document, both sides have dismissed the proposal.
It is as yet unclear whether the idea made it to the negotiating table today.
Interestingly enough, Belgrade claims that neutral status is just another name for Kosovo independence, while Priština has rejected the proposal precisely for the lack of the word “independence.“
One way this round of talks differs from previous encounters is in the meetings EU High Representative Javier Solana has held with both sides prior to the negotiations. Last night, Solana spoke to President Boris Tadiæ, though the details of their conversation are unknown. B92 understands that Tadiæ will reveal all following the end of today’s Brussels round.
The EU high representative also spoke with the Priština negotiating team, while Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica is due to meet Solana this afternoon, either just before or straight after the end of the direct talks.
|
|
|
Post by radovic on Nov 21, 2007 12:58:12 GMT -5
Details emerge of Belgrade's proposal 21 November 2007 Belgrade has offered Kosovo Albanians essential autonomy termed for 20 years, and a new UN resolution.
Beta news agency quotes government statement which said that the Serbian negotiating team in Brussels Tuesday proposed that the resolution of Kosovo's status, according to which Kosovo would enjoy essential autonomy, be termed for 20 years.
The team presented a comparative analysis of the essential autonomy models of Hong Kong, the Aland Islands and Kosovo as functional solutions in line with the UN Charter, says the government news release.
Those solutions are also in accordance with the fundamental principles of implementing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of internationally recognized states, the government said.
Belgrade proposed that an internationally guaranteed agreement on the status of Kosovo, termed for 20 years, and a new UN Security Council resolution be adopted as part of the solution for Kosovo.
According to the proposal, "Serbia's reserved jurisdiction" would include foreign policy, border control, protection of the Serb religious and cultural heritage, while defense would be "Serbia's reserved authority not implemented in Kosovo."
Monetary and customs policies would be the fields of cooperation, while everything else would be under Kosovo's exclusive jurisdiction - the budget, economic policy, agriculture, media, education, environmental protection, youth, sports, fiscal policy, internal affairs, health care, infrastructure, employment, etc.
Kosovo would also appoint and organize its institutions without any interference on Serbia's part, and would have legislative power in the areas under Kosovo's exclusive jurisdiction, and in other cases determined by the agreement, while Serbia would not be able to change or abolish laws in Kosovo.
The Belgrade team's proposal envisages Serbia as an entity of international law that would formally sign agreements along with Kosovo's signature, and would provide diplomatic and consular protection to all citizens, whereas Kosovo consular offices would be part of Serbia's diplomatic and consular offices.
The status of foreign diplomatic and consular offices in Priština would be pushed up to the general consulate level.
Belgrade also proposed a temporary international military presence and the demilitarization of Kosovo.
Serbia and Kosovo would sign the Stabilization and Association Agreement with the EU as an annex of Serbia's agreement, whereas Kosovo's further EU integrations would be run in coordination with Serbia.
According to reports from Brussels yesterday, the Priština team rejected official Belgrade's latest offer.
|
|