Dear Hashim,
The Kosovo parliament yesterday elected Hashim Thaci President, to be inaugurated in April. Here is what I have to say to him today:
Congratulations! You have been privileged to lead the government for six years, including at independence, you have served more than a year as foreign minister, and now you will be chief of state. Not bad for a guy still under 50.
As you know all too well, such jobs come with responsibilities. They are like owning a boat: the first day and the last are the best.
For the next five years you face enormous challenges. The first is to heal the rift that your election has created in Kosovo’s polity. You won only on the third ballot and without opposition support. Parts of the opposition preferred to take to the streets and even to violence in an effort to derail, or at least diminish, your election.
I’ve got no sympathy whatsoever for the violence, which besmirches Kosovo more than you. That I am afraid is the purpose: the leadership of the violent protests opposes Kosovo statehood and wants instead to exercise the right of self-determination in order to join Albania, something that the Kosovo constitution prohibits. This is no less a threat to the state that you will represent than are the efforts by Belgrade to gain effective control over the Serb population of Kosovo. Both are anti-constitutional forces that will require a great deal of your attention and all the wisdom you can muster.
One of your greatest challenges will be to enlarge the sphere of moderate politics and transform these fringes of the Kosovo political space into something more like loyal oppositions. That will be enormously difficult, as the fringes despise each other even if they share a disdain for Kosovo’s statehood. Every move you make to be proper, fair and respectful to Serbs will find opposition among some Albanians. Any move you make to accommodate your Albanian critics will generate criticism in Belgrade. Your constitutional court’s wise guidance on implementation of the Association of Serb Municipalities should help on that especially contentious issue.
Even if it does, you will still face implacable opposition from part of your Albanian opposition, which not only loathes you personally but is also committed to ending the Belgrade/Pristina dialogue precisely because it helps to consolidate Kosovo as an independent and sovereign state. The best antidote will be the Kosovo state’s success in meeting the expectations of its people, many of whom are disappointed in the fruits of independence. There is far too much unemployment and underemployment, especially among young people.
I’d be the first to admit that the European economic recession is a primary factor in limiting Kosovo’s ability to provide jobs and prosperity to its own people. There is not a lot the Kosovo state can do to respond to that exogenous factor, especially since you wisely use the euro as your currency and therefore are unable to devalue. Nor is the president in charge of economic policy.
You can however do something about other factors that are shaping the public’s mood. Kosovo’s economic growth has in fact been relatively robust compared to Europe and the rest of the Balkans. Your citizens aren’t giving much credit for that because the benefits seem unfairly distributed. We have that problem in the United States too. In Kosovo, people believe nepotism, corruption and organized crime are the reasons. As president, you will need to set an example, as your predecessor has done, and insist on a level of probity, transparency and accountability that has too often been lacking, including in governments you have led.
The still pending European investigation of crimes committed against Serbs, Albanians and others after the Kosovo war will pose a particular problem for you. I imagine Brussels and Washington will continue to press for creation of a special court to try the accused. Because of the Marty report, which implied much but proved little, it is widely believed you may be among them. You will have to decide whether to use your new position to push ahead or to impede creation of the special court. You will also have to decide how to react if the Europeans bring an indictment against you personally.
Pristina’s relationship with Belgrade continues to fall short of what I would like to see. I believe it is important to convince Belgrade to recognize Kosovo’s sovereignty and territorial integrity sooner rather than later, if only by allowing Kosovo to become a member of the United Nations. This is not a big leap from the April 2013 political agreement that you negotiated, but it will require the same savvy diplomacy you employed as well as a lot of international community support, including from some of the European countries that don’t yet recognize Kosovo. International support will depend in large part on whether you are successful in convincing people that Kosovo is cleaning up its act, enforcing the rule of law and treating all its citizens equally.
Hashim: though strong politically within the governing coalition and your own political party, you are still a divisive figure domestically and an ambiguous one internationally. Your presidency will be an opportunity to overcome both defects. I know that won’t be easy. But I also know that you have demonstrated talents, ingenuity and determination that have served your country well in the past, both in war and peace. I wish you success in meeting the challenges ahead!
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The cessation of hostilities that won’t
I’m getting press queries about the cessation of hostilities in Syria, which goes into effect a midnight Damascus time tonight. Here are some of them, along with answers:
- What chance does this ceasefire have of working?
Little. Without any neutral monitors or agreement on what cannot be targeted, parties on both sides will accuse the other of violating without any possibility of determining who is right. In any event, the Russians have published a map indicating very small areas covered by the cessation of hostilities:
2. Won’t the excluded groups, Islamic State and al-Nusra, simply keep on fighting?
Yes. ISIS at least is largely separate from the moderate opposition, so it can be targeted in principle without necessarily hitting others. Al Nusra is embedded in opposition controlled territory, so targeting it will hit moderate opposition as well.
3. Do you think the cessation of hostilities will simply allow Syrian regime/Russians to cement their gains?
It will help them consolidate their gains, yes. Cement would be going too far, however. They are gaining territory where housing, infrastructure and commercial property has suffered enormous damage. Moscow is repeating what it did to Grozny in Chechnya. But neither the regime nor the Russians has the resources to followup with reconstruction. Nor do I think they can restore Assad’s authority over much of the population.
4. Has John Kerry really been forced into an impossible position because of the Russian intervention?
Yes, but the impossible position is determined also by President Obama’s unwillingness to intervene on the side of the opposition or provide them with the means they require to defend themselves from the Russians, Syrian government forces, Iranians, and Iraqi militias arrayed against them.
5. There’s talk the US may attempt to partition off part of Syria – is that realistic?
It might one day have been possible to create a safe area/no fly zone controlled by the opposition. But it is much harder today with Russian planes operating over much of Syria. Some opposition-controlled territories are likely to survive, but they will be few and far between.
6. Why not just divide Syria? Isn’t that what is happening anyway?
Formal, juridical partition of Syria is simply a bad idea. It would open the question of other borders in the region and beyond, putting at risk our Turkish ally as well as the unity of Iraq. Washington will not want to create a precedent that would help the Russians justify what they did in Crimea or what they are trying to do in eastern Ukraine, never mind South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. The Americans have a big stake in maintaining the notion that national borders should not be changed by military action.
That said, Syria is likely to end up a far more decentralized country than once it was. That is not necessarily a bad thing and might allow for different parts of the country to be governed more to the liking of their inhabitants.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
No one gets dragged into NATO
Vladimir Filipović of Belgrade daily Blic asked me some questions about the US bombing in Libya that killed, among others, two Serbs. I asnwered:
1. Do you think that this incident will affect Serbia’s relations with NATO and US, and that maybe Russia will try to use this situation to get closer to Serbia at that expense?
DPS: First let me say how regrettable the death of the Serbian diplomats is. There is no excuse for their abduction and imprisonment. Their deaths in an American raid against their captors was clearly unintended.
Russia will use any incident it can to denounce NATO and the US, as Moscow seeks to block NATO expansion in the Balkans. You can tell how sincere the Russians are by watching how many civilians they are killing in Syria, despite their continuing denials.
2. Do you think that something would be different if the US knew that there are two Serbian hostages in Sabratha, in that specific terrorist object? That the attack maybe would be postponed or differently conducted?
DPS: My understanding of American policy is that Washington seeks to avoid civilian deaths. I certainly hope that the attack would have been postponed or conducted differently had Washington known of the presence of the Serbs, or any other prisoners. But on that subject you really need to talk with an official spokesperson.
Vladimir wasn’t satisfied, so he asked me to expand and I replied again:
3. If you could expand your yesterday’s statement about Russia trying to use the incident in Libya to get closer to Serbia at the expense of NATO and USA.
DPS: What’s to add? It is clear that Moscow is desperate to keep Serbia out of NATO and will use any incident to accomplish its objective.
No one gets dragged into NATO. They come because they believe it will make their country more secure. With Russia increasingly aggressive in Europe and the Middle East, it is not hard to imagine ways in which NATO membership will make a country more secure. The only humiliation comes from toeing the Russian line rather than helping to shape the NATO line.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Moscow’s steps toward strategic defeat
It would be hard to do better on Syria this morning than listening to this NPR report on Aleppo:
But remember: every tactical Russian gain today is a step towards strategic defeat tomorrow. The winners, however, are increasingly likely to be extremists, not moderates.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
A cessation of hostilities unlikely to last
It took a week or two, but the US and Russia have finally come up with a joint statement whose Annex specifies the terms for the cessation of hostilities in Syria.
Basically it says to the government and opposition fighters (other than those belonging to the Islamic State, Jabhat al Nusra and other terrorist groups) that they need to accept the terms by noon Thursday or risk attack from midnight Friday onwards. The terms include a commitment to participate in the UN-facilitated political process convened under Security Council resolution 2254, to cease attacks, to allow humanitarian access, to refrain from acquiring territory and to proportionate use of force in response to violations.
The US and Russia are to delineate territories the adherents control and provide the capacity to prevent attacks against those who adhere to the agreement, including a working group and communications facilities to investigate noncompliance. No neutral observers are to be deployed. The UN’s special envoy (Stefano De Mistura) is to provide the secretariat for the effort.
The Syrian regime responded quickly. It announced parliamentary elections for April 13, in an obvious effort to short-circuit the UN political process and present the international community with a fait accompli in the form of yet another fraudulent election outcome. No serious opposition will be prepared to participate in an election occurring that quickly under the disastrous conditions existing in Syria today.
I imagine many of the opposition fighting forces will accept the cessation of hostilities. They are on the ropes after weeks of ferocious and indiscriminate Russian bombing. The civilians in areas they control are desperate. The Americans will do their best to twist arms and deliver their friends, including by threatening to cut off support.
The Russians swear up and down they will do everything necessary to deliver the Syrian government. That is hard to believe after their mendacious behavior of the last few months, when they used the cover of international negotiations to mount their offensive. More likely, the Russians as well as the Iranians will use any lull in the fighting to reinforce the Syrian army, Hizbollah and Shia militia fighters from Iraq for the resumption of the war.
Unless someone comes up with a way of getting Bashar al Assad to commit to give up power on a date certain, I expect any cessation of hostilities to be a hiatus, possibly a very short one, not the beginning of a serious political process. Assad’s calling of elections is a clear signal of his disdain for the Geneva 1, Vienna 2 and other internationally negotiated agreements intended to end the war with a political transition.
The Russians aren’t going to force him out after doubling down on their bet last fall and winning back strategically important territory from the opposition. From Moscow’s perspective, this cessation of hostilities is an opportunity for its allies on the ground to consolidate control and get ready for the next round.
There is no indication that Washington is prepared to do likewise for the opposition, who not only lost important territory to the Russian-backed offensive but also find themselves without the anti-aircraft and other weapons they require if they are to perform any better next time around.
Russia is winning a war in Syria the United States refuses to fight, or let others fight. But in doing so, Moscow has alienated most of the Syrian population and guaranteed it will lose the peace.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Russia loses
I spoke this morning at a session on the Middle East of the SAIS conference on Russian Foreign Policy: New Spheres of Influence? Here are my speaking notes.
1. As a conflict management person, I look to distinguish between stated positions and underlying interests. That distinction is fundamental to understanding and resolving conflict.
2. Russia’s stated position on Syria, if you listened to NPR this morning, is clear: Moscow says it is not wedded to Bashar al Assad and is fighting terrorism in Syria.
3. While I am ready to be convinced that Moscow was at one time not wedded to Bashar al Assad, it is hard to argue that since September, when Putin doubled down on Russia’s support for him by initiating its air campaign.
4. Russia’s underlying interests are discernible from what it is doing, not what it is saying: Russia’s main bombing targets are Bashar al Assad’s strongest opponents, which include relative moderates as well as extremists. It is doing little to attack the Islamic State.
5. A well-informed Russian told me in December that the targets are in fact selected mainly by the Syrian army, so the targeting is not a surprise.
6. It is now hard to picture any successor to Assad, except a member of his family or inner circle, who would be as friendly to Russia’s interests in Syria as Assad.
7. Rather than gaining a sphere of influence in Syria, Moscow has lost any hope preserving its influence there in the longer run.
8. A transition to a democratically elected leadership, as foreseen in both the Geneva 1 and Vienna 2 statements, will likely end Moscow’s port access and other privileges in Syria, or raise significantly the price Russia pays for them.
9. It is foolish of the Americans to convince themselves that Russia in the current situation, which is militarily advantageous to Assad, will sign on seriously to any plan that ends the Assad regime.
10. In the meanwhile, Russia is causing massive destruction in Syria
11. Moscow’s strategy is essentially a Chechnya strategy—destroy and conquer—without the possibility of post-war reconstruction under a hand-picked autocrat that has worked reasonably well in Grozny.
12. While the US has contributed upwards of $4 billion to international relief efforts distributed both regime-controlled, and when possible, opposition-controlled areas, Russia has done virtually nothing to feed, shelter or care for upwards of 4 million refugees and 7 million displaced people.
13. Those who know the relief business know how useless the recent airdrops of food are.
14. So long as the Assad regime stays in power, I see no way the United States or even the Europeans would pay for reconstruction, the price tag for which is in the hundreds of billions.
15. Syria may become for a while a Russian satellite, but the longer-term future is one in which Russia loses influence not only in Syria but throughout the Sunni world.
16. What can Washington do to hasten that day?
17. The most immediate priority is to save the relatively moderate opposition in northern Syria from obliteration.
18. John Kerry is trying to do that by negotiating a cessation of hostilities.
19. I admire the determination, but he is unlikely to succeed without a clearer American commitment to protecting a specific area in northern Syria from Russian, Iranian and Syrian attacks.
20. That would require a military commitment that President Obama, fearful of the slippery slope, is unwilling to make in a country where he perceives no vital American national security interest.
21. Bottom line: the horror is likely to continue, with the very real possibility that the winners will be extremists and the losers will be Russians.
22. It will be up to a future American president to determine how Washington feels about that.
RSS - Posts
