Tuesday
Feb262008
Ambassador Wisner and Dimitri Simes discuss "Kosovo: What Next?" at the USIP
Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 12:07PM
At the discussion “Kosovo: What Next?” held at the United States Institute of Peace, Ambassador Frank G. Wisner, Special Representative of the Secretary of State to the Kosovo Status talks, said that it is an “unusual declaration” for Kosovo to declare independence, because their independence will be supervised. It was clear to anyone, he said, that Kosovo had a few bridges that would need to be built across the divide toward independence. Serbia finds itself on a real threshold of history, and he said the opinion today is that Serbia is looking backwards with humiliation and cannot move forward if it continues to carry the “albatross of Kosovo” with it.
Wisner said that he did not think the outcome could have been different. The offer put on the table was limited autonomy, but the deeply held views by Serbia would prevent autonomy from being a solution. First and foremost, he said, if peace is to be maintained, the United States and the Europeans must be heavily involved in the detailed protection of the minorities in order to produce success.
The United States, he said, needs to reestablish ties with Belgrade because Serbia is a major factor in the Balkans. Why Russian chose to “draw a line’ over Kosovo is a question, he said, and Russia’s decision has produced a deep alienation between Moscow, many European capitals, and the United States. Russia’s blocking of the declaration is making them alienated, but he said he does not think that Russia’s opposition will continue much longer.
Dimitri K. Simes, President of The Nixon Center, said he thinks it is a tragedy to what extent informed people in the United States do not know “the other narrative,” which, he said, is very important. Russia is not going to use military force or establish bases in the Balkans. Russia will not cooperate, he said, because Moscow does not want Kosovo’s independence.
The problem, Simes said, is that if we are prepared to “swallow it,” he does not know why we are not prepared to make a deal with Russia. There are serious implications he said, and as a result of the United States violating the UN resolutions, Russia will most likely approach the Kosovo issue “selectively” just like the United States does. According to Simes, Moscow says that if the UN security resolutions can be ignored, Russia should be entitled to be selective when it is in Russia’s interests.
Ambassador Wisner said that his conclusion after listening to Simes was that Russia thinks it’s the most important element in the Kosovo issue, but that he disagrees. He said the United States interests were broader than that. He said he believes that Russia, like the United States, has interests that can be accommodated but that he does not believe that the cost of denying a solution to a problem that was “crying out” was wrong. His question to the audience was, ‘do we want to destroy the UN, are we going to leave the UN and revert Kosovo to autonomy?’ He declared that Russia’s view that autonomy was offered is disillusioned. UNSC Resolution 1244 makes it clear, he said, that there can be independence and that violation of national law has not occurred.
Wisner said that he did not think the outcome could have been different. The offer put on the table was limited autonomy, but the deeply held views by Serbia would prevent autonomy from being a solution. First and foremost, he said, if peace is to be maintained, the United States and the Europeans must be heavily involved in the detailed protection of the minorities in order to produce success.
The United States, he said, needs to reestablish ties with Belgrade because Serbia is a major factor in the Balkans. Why Russian chose to “draw a line’ over Kosovo is a question, he said, and Russia’s decision has produced a deep alienation between Moscow, many European capitals, and the United States. Russia’s blocking of the declaration is making them alienated, but he said he does not think that Russia’s opposition will continue much longer.
Dimitri K. Simes, President of The Nixon Center, said he thinks it is a tragedy to what extent informed people in the United States do not know “the other narrative,” which, he said, is very important. Russia is not going to use military force or establish bases in the Balkans. Russia will not cooperate, he said, because Moscow does not want Kosovo’s independence.
The problem, Simes said, is that if we are prepared to “swallow it,” he does not know why we are not prepared to make a deal with Russia. There are serious implications he said, and as a result of the United States violating the UN resolutions, Russia will most likely approach the Kosovo issue “selectively” just like the United States does. According to Simes, Moscow says that if the UN security resolutions can be ignored, Russia should be entitled to be selective when it is in Russia’s interests.
Ambassador Wisner said that his conclusion after listening to Simes was that Russia thinks it’s the most important element in the Kosovo issue, but that he disagrees. He said the United States interests were broader than that. He said he believes that Russia, like the United States, has interests that can be accommodated but that he does not believe that the cost of denying a solution to a problem that was “crying out” was wrong. His question to the audience was, ‘do we want to destroy the UN, are we going to leave the UN and revert Kosovo to autonomy?’ He declared that Russia’s view that autonomy was offered is disillusioned. UNSC Resolution 1244 makes it clear, he said, that there can be independence and that violation of national law has not occurred.
How does the U.S. approach Iran?
"If the United States is able to set a new tone in context with the
relationship in Afghanistan and elsewhere I think in of that
itself will change the nuclear calculations of Iran's leadership."
said Karim Sadjadpour, an associate at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
In a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing titled "Iranian
Political and Nuclear Realities and U.S. Policy Options" witnesses
gave their recommendations on how the U.S. should approach Iran
concerning nuclear production. The hearing comes after a report
released by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stating that
Natanz, an Iranian nuclear plant, has gained enough reactor-grade
uranium to allow Iran to create an atomic bomb.
Sadjapour focused on three key options that he thinks the U.S. should
follow. The first being to commence the dialogue with Iran by aiming
to build confidence on areas of common interest such as Afghanistan
and Iraq rather than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the nuclear
issue. "Focus on Supreme leader in Iran, Khamenei not the President,
Ahmadinejad. If I had to describe him (Ahmadinejad) in one word, is
mistrustful...He believes that if you compromise you project
weakness." he said. Sadjapour also stated that it is imperative that
the U.S. maintain an airtight international approach saying that each
country should approach Iran with the same talking points.
Former U.S. Ambassador to Zambia and Egypt, Frank Wisner, said that Iran
is important, Iran is dangerous and Iran is urgent. "I do not believe
in the military option...there is no room for a military
response...the issues of national survival that are first and foremost
on Iran's mind gives me some hope that we can get traction if we chose
to engage and engage fully but I won't pretend for a moment that
dealing with Iranians will not be extremely tough. There will be many
setbacks and many deceptions...I personally welcome as I'm certain all
of us do, an appointment of a new special representative to take a
hard look at Iran and our foreign policies." he concluded.