Role of NATO in the Conflict Resolution Process (Bosnia, Kosovo)
Mari Khotivrishvili
Researcher
Contents
Introduction to Conflict and Resolution Process
Methods of Conflict Settlement
The Role and Objectives of NATO in Conflict Resolution
Situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Introduction to
Conflict and Resolution Process
While discussing
the conflict and its resolution process, the first step is to understand and
consider that conflict in a sense is a complex concept and is connected to
various processes. Conflicts have always played a significant role in human
life and mostly in the field of politics and international relations. Therefore
it is important to resolute the conflict and implements a useful tool to
stabilize and solve it.
Normally, there
are several mediating actors in conflicts. They can be state or non-state
actors such as international organizations, individuals, or other parties.
Accordingly, we should bring the significance of international organizations and
most importantly – The North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO.
Before discussing
the role of NATO in the conflict resolution processes, it is noteworthy to
remember four main tools which are used as methods of resolution.
Methods of Conflict Settlement
As discussed above,
NATO and other international or regional organizations or mediators implement
several strategies and methods to resolve the dispute. The first method can be
applied as preventive diplomacy.
Generally, preventive diplomacy aims to prevent the conflict from escalating
and tries to bring it to a minimum level. It usually begins with soft, diplomatic
measures and is pointed at restoration and trust. Trust is a crucial factor
because it usually happens to be one of the most important issues in the
dispute that need to be addressed. Preventive diplomacy in practice includes
observance of civilians, humanitarian assistance, and early deployment of missions;
also, a lot of attention is paid to information because the lack of facts and
statistics and especially the spread of false information can simply lead to
escalation of the conflict.
The second tool is called Peacekeeping. It is the method that may include the usage of a ceasefire if it is necessary at a particular time or in a given situation.
It may adequately involve peacekeeping forces and in some cases even the usage
of military operations and observing military, or creation of special locations
or territories which will serve as buffer zones. Peacekeeping forces can be established
and implemented depending on the conflict itself. It can be ad-hoc, temporary, or emergency. That is why it is crucial to understand the character and the
phase of development of the conflict.
The third method is Peacemaking which has also played nevertheless
important role in the conflict resolution process. Peacemaking takes place when the
third party is involved and all actors or parties – conflicting ones and the
third party as well – are aimed at finding the resolution. Still, the issue and
process of Peacemaking itself are difficult because parties generally never
agree to a common goal that can be mutually beneficial for everyone. So here
diplomacy and deep knowledge of the roots of conflict and its development,
facts, and details are always necessary. It mostly happens when the disputes
arise because of ethnic, religious, or national cleavages, and therefore it
becomes much more complex to handle the process and keep the Peacemaking phase
in a normal and peaceful manner.
The fourth method is Peace-building. Peace-building can be viewed as
the last, ending point of the conflict resolution process. It can involve such
processes as restoration of infrastructure, assistance in democracy promotion, and building of institutions which are necessary for future development. The peace-building process is also targeting restoring the relations between the
conflicting parties. It is concentrated on finding a mutual language and common
background for the peaceful existence of both groups and considering their
interests and goals.
As it becomes vivid, the conflict resolution process is a complex
phenomenon that needs careful observation, experience, and useful tools and
methods to bring positive effects and fruits. Therefore, all four methods -
Preventive diplomacy, Peacekeeping, Peacemaking, and Peace-building - are
playing a significant role in the settlement of the conflict and preventing its deterioration
and far escalation.
The Role and Objectives of NATO in Conflict Resolution
Since its birth in
1949, NATO has been performing in full to fulfill its mission, provide peace and
resolve conflicts. To remember, the aim of its foundation was to counter the
danger and possible threat that could come from the Soviet Union which would be
directed against the United States and its allies. It was back in the first
days of the Cold War. However, after the USSR was dissolved and the political
environment of the world was changed, NATO had to change and update and upgrade
its role and mission. After becoming victorious from the Cold War, the U.S. and
NATO respectively took a mission to provide peace where conflict could arise. It
took the responsibilities of a cooperative-security organization that, with
the help of its military resources and arsenal, was able to secure conflicting
areas (Matei, 2003).
As already discussed,
third actors and mediators play a significant role in the conflict resolution process
and therefore, international organizations such as NATO were brought as an
example of a mediator. Accordingly, two disputes – the wars in Bosnia and
Kosovo – will be given as two cases where NATO was involved and its role
impacted the course and results of both conflicts.
The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Generally, the Bosnian War is classified as an ethnic conflict, but before analyzing the involvement of NATO and the consequences of the confrontation, the historical
background has to be brought as well.
Former
Yugoslavia consisted of six states, namely: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia,
Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, and Montenegro. These territories comprised
Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Albanians, and other ethnicities. Bosnia-Herzegovina
was one of the member states of Yugoslavia, with its capital and the largest
city Sarajevo. It is bordered by Serbia from the east, Croatia to the north,
south, and west, and Montenegro to its southeast.
It
is also important to underline the historical path of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The country was first inhabited by the people of Slavic nation from the sixth
to ninth century B.C. From the middle ages, from the fifteenth century to the nineteenth century it was under the control of the Ottoman Empire which ruled
and spread control over the Balkan Peninsula. Accordingly, Islam was spread and
big portions of the population were Muslim.
Bosnia
was annexed by the Austro-Hungarian Empire until the First World War. Up until
the Second World War Bosnia-Herzegovina was integrated with the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in the interwar period and lastly, after the Second World War, it
became the republic already inside the Yugoslav Federation.
After
the Second World War, Bosnia and Herzegovina became one part of the Federal
People’s Republic of Yugoslavia which brought new political order, different
social and economic tools for managing life in the region. According to Lampe
(2021), influenced by historical and religious experience, Muslims made the
biggest part of the population up to the 1970s. 1980s economic stagnation was mixed
with nationalist feelings. Multiparty elections and seats for new-emerged
ethnic politicians brought a new wave for self-proclaimed independent states.
Croatia and Slovenia proclaimed independence in 1991 which was also recognized
by the European Community respectively.
After
the problem with Croatia and Slovenia was more or less solved, now new issues
emerged in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Important is to consider the ethnic
complexity of the state. Much portions of the population – 44% remained Muslim,
there were Orthodox Serbs who comprised nearly 33% of the population as well as
Catholic Croats who were the smallest in number and made 17% of the whole
population (Britannica, 2021).
Serbs
proved to stay loyal to the government of Milosevic and resisted the striving
for independence. Even before the conflict would break off, Serbs would
threaten both Croats and Bosnians about future escalation if these two declared independence. Still, Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independence on the 3rd
of March in 1992. Consequently, it received international recognition in April
of the same year. Bosnia and Herzegovina became the UN member in May.
Even
before the official proclamation, after Croatian and Slovenian independence in
1991, Bosnia and Herzegovina passed a referendum for independence in a year in
February of 1992. It was fiercely rejected and condemned by the nationalist Serbs
who went against the Bosnian strive for independence.
Already
after the declaration of independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, nationalist Serbs
got support from the government of Milosevic and the Yugoslav People’s Army and
culminated their forces and powers against Bosnians who were forced outside
state borders. War broke out, ethnic cleansing occurred and by April Serbs had
occupied all territories of Bosnia.
It
is noteworthy to understand the action and reaction of other ethnicities, their
leaders, and their response from international communities as well. Specifically,
Croats and their leader Mate Boban took the side of Serbs and declared that Croats
would side with Serbs and not Bosnians. Both Croats and Bosnians were deported
or expelled from their country with over a hundred thousand people dead by
1995. However, things got the worst in 1995 in Srebrenica where genocide
occurred and eight thousand men were slaughtered (Lampe, 2021).
European
Union proved useless during the conflict. They had neither the political will nor any
practical tool or method to engage and solve it. UN peacekeepers could not hold
or control the situation when the case was brought down to ethnic cleansing. Consequently,
another actor that had to take the position and role was NATO.
First
negotiations about conflict resolution and NATO involvement started already in
1992 at the Oslo meeting in June. With the first peacekeeping operation – Operation
Maritime Monitor – NATO entered the conflict.
Matei
(2003) suggests that it is important to understand the aim and target of NATO’s
involvement and particularly its first mission in Bosnia. The very first aim
was to control if the situation was relevant to UN sanctions against Bosnia. The
first operation Maritime Monitor ended in November which, according to the level
and proceeding of the conflict was replaced by a more aggressive Operation
Maritime Guard.
Additionally,
the second mission was formed by the NAC. The target of the second operation Maritime
Guard was to control all ships in rivers and seas and implement economic
sanctions and arms embargo. By UN resolution 781 it was prohibited to violate Bosnia’s
airspace and the country was locked for other military airplanes to cross its
airspace. NATO supported the resolution and in October new mission - Operation
Sky Monitor – was launched. It concentrated on controlling and monitoring airspace
and ended in 1993.
In
the same year, a new operation - Operation Deny Flight was announced again in
1993 and continued until 1995. According to it, it became easier for NATO to
control airspace. Similar air controlling mission - Operation Deliberate Force
was launched in 1995 in August and ended in September. It fully neutralized
Serbian National Army and its military resources.
According
to Matei (2003), NATO’s role was established at the Oslo NATO Foreign Ministers
meeting in June 1992. Its function was to support peacekeeping under Conference
on Security and Cooperation in Europe and the UN. In 1995, on 14th December,
Dayton Peace Accord was signed which in other words is the General Framework
Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to the Agreement, IFOR
or the Implementation Force was established and 60 000 troops were sent to
oversee the fulfillment and execution of the agreement. All NATO and non-NATO forces
were brought under IFOR command after 4 days.
A two-year consolidation plan was created in November-December of 1996 under the
Peace Implementation Council in which ad hoc groups of states and international
organizations would participate. The military was eventually reduced and 32 000 troops
under the SFOR mission, or Stabilization Force, were sent in December of 1996,
20. By 2002 troops were reduced to 19 000 from 17 NATO and 15 non-NATO members
including states such as Ukraine, Morocco, Bulgaria, Egypt, and Jordan. Already
by 2004 number of military comprised 7000 troops. Finally, operation SFOR was
concluded by 2004.
It
is noteworthy to mention that the new term – military strategic concept – was formed
at the Brussels Summit in 1994. This concept comprised the idea that combined
military forces would struggle against the “new threat” even in non-NATO
states.
Bosnian
Conflict was an uneasy task and undoubtedly one of the bloodiest conflicts of modern times. Still, after a big number of casualties, deaths, and damage, NATO
was able and effective enough to take the role and put an end to the conflict
with its fast reaction and resolution skills and prevented it from further
escalation.
Crisis in Kosovo
The case of Kosovo is a notable topic
to discuss, as it gives food for thought for currently conflicting regions in
the world and is still one of the most debated issues in the international arena. Generally,
Kosovo is a small state in the Balkan region which is mostly populated by
ethnic Albanians who are Muslim. Albanians make the 90% of Kosovo’s whole
population. It is important to mention the ideological meaning and significance
of Kosovo for Serbians in order to fully grasp and understand the nature of the
Kosovo Conflict.
Historically,
Lampe (2021) suggests and Matei (2003) also argues that Serbians have always
approached Kosovo as the territory where the Serbian Orthodox Church and religion
as well as the nation of Serbia itself was established and flourished. This
ideological understanding is crucially important in order to understand the
sentiments of the sides of the conflict.
Nevertheless
important is the role of the leader. Slobodan Milosevic was a nationalist
President of Serbia, who lit the fire of all Serbian nationalists and motivated
the Balkan crisis to happen. Encouraged
by the government, leadership, and profitable political environment, Albanians
who were the majority in Kosovo, were pushed under suppression by ethnic Serbians
who, even though we're a small minority, took all political power, government
elite and in the early 1990s started to close down Albanian schools, prohibited
usage of their language and expression of their religion.
The first point of
Ethnic conflict was expressed in discrimination and the already vivid influence of
Serbia over Kosovo in political and social life. Increasing Albanian
nationalism led to tensions between ethnic Serbs and Albanians. On 2 July of
1990, 114 ethnic Albanian delegates of the 180 member Kosovo assembly declared
Kosovo as an independent republic within Yugoslavia; soon after, on 5th July
Serbians took decisive measures. Serbian assembly dissolved the Kosovo Assembly
and provincial executive Council and assumed direct control over Kosovo; In
September 1991 Kosovo Albanians held the unofficial referendum on independence
(Britannica, 2021).
In the first
phase, non-violent resistance was used by Kosovo Albanians. They elected their
own leaders, refused to cooperate with Serb authorities, and created their institutions
that would counter the Serbian ones. They also elected their president -
Ibrahim Rugova in an unofficial way in May of 1992.
However, non-violent
resistance seemed to be ineffective because it did not bring much recognition
nor it bring any fruits for Kosovo to be seen as an independent entity. After
the Bosnian crisis ended and the U.S. held talks in Dayton, Rugova was excluded
from the discussion which was an important factor and it played a significant
role at that time. It meant that the “President” of Kosovo was not recognized
and neither was Kosovo. Soon, in 1996 the KLA – Kosovo Liberation Army – was
created which started already violent actions against Serbian police and even
civilians. After the response from the Serbian side which was exercised by killing
Albanian people in villages, the KLA started guerrilla warfare against
Serbians.
Consequently, when
the crisis between the Kosovo Liberation Army and Serbians became too
concerning and thousands of people had to leave their homes and flee because of
attacks, NATO took measures.
On 28th May in
1998 NAC met at the Foreign Ministerial Level where two basic targets and
objectives were put out: the first was to achieve a peaceful resolution to the
situation in Kosovo and the second was to promote stability and security not
only in the state but in neighboring states as well. Similarly, by August,
NATO was fully prepared and ready to implement its measures if the crisis did
not cease down. By September, air bombing was declared if the situation would
need it. By the UN Security Council Resolution 1203 non-NATO members
participating in the Partnership for Peace program agreed to contribute in
the mission. Finally, in March of 1999, a 78-day air campaign was launched by
NATO. On June of 10 in 1999 suspension of operation was declared and a military-technical agreement would have to be implemented between NATO and
the Yugoslavian Federation.
As a result, NATO
withdrew its troops after the mission was finally completed and the United
Nations gave a mandate for international security observance for the prevention of
future conflict (Matei, 2003). Kosovo Force or the KFOR was established on 11
June of 1999 by NATO after the UN SC Resolution 1244. It is currently still
deployed on the Balkan territories and its mission is Peacekeeping. The mission
of KFOR was to observe further development of the situation, promote democracy,
peace, and security.
Finally, Kosovo
gained independence on 17 February of 2008. However, its independence is not
recognized by all states such as Serbia, Russia, China, Spain, and Romania. Even
though the majority of the international community recognizes the independence of
Kosovo but the resistance from important political players still poses a
disputed role on the country’s authority.
Analysis and Summary
As it has been
seen, the conflict resolution process has never been an easy task or process. It is
a complex issue that needs careful examination and adequate steps must be
taken in order to bring positive fruits in the end. International actors and
organizations have always played a prominent role in these processes and NATO is
not excluded.
NATO has been
playing undoubtedly a significant role in the conflict resolution processes and
the cases of Bosnian and Kosovo conflicts have been brought as clear examples.
With enough skills, experience, and tools, NATO effectively put an end to
both conflicts and prevented the spread of the crisis to the Balkan region
respectively. With the help of NATO peace was restored in both conflict areas
and their current political developments are the consequences of the actions
taken in past.
In the end, the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization has been a prominent actor in international
disputes and its political measures and steps have been accumulated into
important political developments in the modern-day as well.
Literature Review
Editors of North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, NATO’s role in Kosovo, November 2020, retrieved in April 2021,
available at: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_48818.htm;
Editors of North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, NATO Organization, updated in August 2020, retrieved in April
2021, online available at: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/organisation.htm;
Ivo H.
Daalder, Decision to Intervene: How the War in Bosnia Ended, December 1998,
Brookings Institute, retrieved in May 2021, article available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/decision-to-intervene-how-the-war-in-bosnia-ended/;
Lampe John R., Bosnian War, updated in 2021, Encyclopaedia
Britannica, retrieved in April 2021, article available at: https://www.britannica.com/event/Bosnian-War;
Lampe John R., Conflict in Kosovo, updated in 2021, Encyclopaedia
Britannica, retrieved in April 2021, article available at:
https://www.britannica.com/place/Serbia/Conflict-in-Kosovo;
Matei Floriana Cristiana, 2001,
NATO and Conflict Resolution, Naval Postgraduate School, Dudley Knox Library,
retrieved in May 2021, pdf available at: https://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/44506/01Mar_Matei.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y;
Stone Julius, International Conflict Resolution, Online
Encyclopaedia, last updated in 2021, retrieved in May 2021, article available
at: https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/international-conflict-resolution.
Comments
Post a Comment