Day: March 18, 2024
C+ is not a good grade
C+ is what I would give as a grade for implementation of the year-old “Agreement on the path to normalisation between Kosovo and Serbia.” Koha asked for an interview on this subject but then did not call at the appointed time. So I wrote this piece instead. It’s a B or B+ for Pristina and a C for Belgrade.
Let’s break it down article by article:
Good neighborly relations:
Certainly not in general, but there has been some limited progress on mutual recognition of their respective documents and national symbols, including passports, diplomas, license plates, and customs stamps. Pristina was never the problem. Belgrade has moved on this. B or B+ I guess.
Respect for the UN Charter:
Serbia fails (that’s an F) miserably on respect for “the sovereign equality of all States, respect for their independence, autonomy and territorial integrity.” Kosovo gets a B+, marked down due to continued shortcomings in protection of human rights and non-discrimination. Things are improving in those departments, but problems remain.
Peaceful settlement of disputes:
Serbia fails (F) on settlement of disputes exclusively by peaceful means and refraining from the threat or use of force. Belgrade sponsored the September 24 attempted uprising intended to create a pretext for the use of force, which it threatened by mobilizing its forces on Kosovo’s borders. Belgrade had also already kidnapped two Kosovo police from Kosovo territory and organized a mob that attacked NATO-led peacekeepers. Kosovo has no real option for use of force, but nevertheless gets an A for the police handling of the September 24 incident.
International representation:
Serbia (D) continues to oppose Kosovo’s membership in international organizations. Kosovo (A) has not to my knowledge objected to Serbia’s membership in them.
EU path:
Serbia (D) is no longer in transition to democracy and does not align with EU foreign policy, especially but not only on Ukraine and Russia. Kosovo (B+) is moving in the right direction on democracy and does respect EU foreign policy.
Dialogue process:
Neither Belgrade nor Pristina is much engaged, the former because it objects to the basic premises and the latter because it has gotten little benefit. C+ for both.
Treatment of the Serbian community in Kosovo:
Kosovo has conceded little on “self-management” but is resolving one important issue concerning Serbian Orthodox Church property at Decan/i. Pristina has muddied the waters on financial support from Belgrade by insisting on use of the euro but there is really no bar to direct communication for the Serbian community with the Kosovo government. B for Pristina, but no better than a C+ for Belgrade, which insists on violating Kosovo law in transferring finances opaquely and in dinars.
EU and others’ support package:
I really don’t know. Has it been created? Is anything happening on this front?
Joint Committee on implementation:
Is this just the Dialogue writ small, or has such a thing been created?
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A new book is a joy. Hackers are not.
Some of you will have noticed my hiatus in posting lately. It has two imminent causes. I’ve been proofing my new book. And Gmail has blocked my account, due to hacking efforts Google attributes to a foreign government. Regular readers will know the likely culprits. I hardly need mention my other (welcome) obligations. I am reading three doctoral dissertations, I recently trained some Syrians in consensus-building, and I appear almost daily on Al Jazeera Arabic or Al Hurra.
The new book is entitled Strengthening International Regimes: the Case of Radiation Protection. I submitted the manuscript December 31. Palgrave MacMillan will publish it in April. That is very fast for an academic book. I am grateful to everyone involved: the German owner Springer, the British imprint, the New York-based editor, and the copy editing and production crew, which I think works in India. Globalization is not defunct yet.
I regret the $120 price. I don’t expect you to buy it. But please do ask your local or university library to get it.
It took a lifetime
The book is the product of most of my lifetime. I initially wrote about the history of radiation protection for my Princeton doctoral dissertation with Tom Kuhn. That was in the 1970s, but my dissertation only got to 1934. The international regime that protects all of us from ionizing radiation was then still a pre-teen.
I’ve now completed the history more or less to the present, in good time for the 100th anniversary of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 2028. What was once an exercise in history of science is now also an exercise in the creation and dissemination of normative regimes. I am fortunate that my own career followed the same trajectory. It gave me tools with which to trace a fascinating history across two disciplines. That is a rare treat.
The crux of the matter
The keystone of the regime for radiation protection is an epistemic community of global experts. They used specialized knowledge to protect both the enterprises using radiation as well as human health and the environment. They have been remarkably successful. The entire world respects the norms they set, even though they lack legal authority. That lack of legal authority has made the norms more resilient, not less.
Their success can teach us something about what makes a regime strong. I argue in the book that the lessons learned may be applicable to other technologies and knowledge-rich subjects that entail both risks and benefits. Balancing them cooperatively rather than in an adversarial process has distinct advantages. The lessons learned may have applications to less knowledge-rich enterprises as well. I explore the possibilities beyond ionizing radiation in the final chapter.
More anon
I’ll have more to say about the book in coming months and will hope to meet some of you in public discussions of mine and related work. If you have suggestions of institutions that might be interested in hosting a discussion, please let me know. I am already trying to arrange something at SAIS and some of the other international affairs institutions with which I am affiliated.
In the meanwhile, I will welcome thoughts on how to liberate my Gmail from the block Google has imposed on it. You can reach me, until the hackers get to it, at dserwer1@jh.edu My Googlevoice number 202 681 7021 is also blocked. Those of you who have it should please use my other number.
RSS - Posts
