KOSOVO: DPKO BRIEFING ON IMPLEMENTATION OF UNSCR

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000330

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/29/2017
TAGS: PGOV PREL UNSC UNMIK YI
SUBJECT: KOSOVO: DPKO BRIEFING ON IMPLEMENTATION OF UNSCR
1244


Classified By: Charge d'Affaires Alejandro Wolff, Reasons 1.4
(b) and (d).


1. (C) Summary. In a briefing to the Security Council on the
eve of its trip to Kosovo, U/SYG Guehenno delivered a
briefing on implementation of UN Security Council Resolution
(UNSCR) 1244. Guehenno cited progress across the board and
stated that by any objective evaluation Kosovo was now a much
better place than it had been in 1999. Russia's Ambassador
Churkin responded with a strong prepared rebuttal. Churkin's
comments revealed again how Russia intends to argue that
Kosovo is not ready for independence and why the UN's mandate
should continue. End summary.

Guehenno: Kosovo Status Needed For Continued Progress
-------------- --------------

2. (SBU) In Security Council consultations on April 24, the
eve of a Security Council trip to Kosovo, U/SYG Guehenno read
a briefing note (faxed to Department) on implementation of UN
Security Council Resolution 1244. Guehenno focused on
paragraph 11 of UNSCR 1244. He said UNMIK's initial goal had
been to provide humanitarian relief to refugees. UNMIK had
then succeeded in creating basic administrative structures,
including a judicial system, police force and a network of
administration. Guehenno said that an accountable and
largely responsible system of public administration had also
been successfully created. Four elections have been held
since 1999 and all had been determined to be free and fair.
Kosovo's provisional institutions were well in place, but had
been boycotted by Serbs who did not fully trust them, said
Guehenno. Participation by Serbs was also discouraged by
Belgrade and that had complicated UNSCR 1244's
implementation. The security situation in Kosovo had greatly
improved since 1999, with the murder rate having dropped
dramatically. Guehenno said some economic progress had been
made but certainty on status and its prospects for
integration into European institutions would help promote
further improvements. He stated that the situation for
minorities had improved since 1999 and overall was
satisfactory but was not fully normalized, especially in
urban centers. Guehenno said be suggesting that we were "now
in the next to last phase envisioned in paragraph 11 of
1244." He said that progress in Kosovo under UNMIK had by
any objective standard been considerable and that Kosovo was
a vastly different place than in June of 1999. Guehenno
warned, however, that clarity of status was needed to prevent
unraveling and sustaining and consolidating progress would
require timely completion of the status process.

Russia's Churkin: Strong Rebuttal From Moscow
--------------

3. (C) Reading (in Russian) from a prepared statement,
Russia's Permrep Churkin began by thanking Guehenno but said
he had not agreed with "his bravado tone at the end."
Without saying Russia opposes independence, the main Russian
themes were that Kosovo was not at the point where we should
consider that an option. According to Churkin, key
provisions of 1244 remained unimplemented in Kosovo and
Kosovars needed to do much more to fulfill their obligations
under 1244 related to safety and security for the Serb
minority. Churkin alleged, inter alia, that demilitarization
had not been carried out and "weapons caches were
everywhere", borders weren't properly controlled, the rights
of non-Albanians were not protected, returns had actually
slowed down in recent years, and living conditions in
enclaves were poor. Furthermore, he averred that the
Provisional Institutions of Self Government (PISG) could not
be allowed to decide the future of Kosovo. Making a point on
the importance of returns, Churkin stated that "being of a
Slavic background" himself, he understood how important it is
to be able to live in one's homeland. Churkin added that he
did not see why clarity of status had to mean independence.

Other National Comments
--------------

4. (SBU) Ambassador Wolff strongly refuted Churkin's points
and countered specifically that a good part of the blame for
the plight of the Kosovo Serb community and the low number of
returnees lies with Belgrade and the Kosovar Serbs
themselves, who boycott the very institutions designed to
help them. South African Ambassador Kumalo argued that it
seemed UNMIK was supposed to have accomplished more than it
did and asserted that Guehuenno had said Ahtisaari held two
negotiations of the sides but there had only been one.
Kumalo asked rhetorically whether there were any guarantee
that freedom of movement and returns would improve after
status. Later, Kumalo spoke again and said the argument that
Kosovo needed independence to pave the way for investment did


not hold water and UNMIK's goal had not been to pave the way
"for Coca Cola to come," he asserted. France and the UK both
spoke and said UNMIK had succeeded greatly but more could not
be done without clarity of status.

Comment
--------------

5. (C) Comment: On a more abstract level, Russia's arguments,
as made by Churkin, centered around the assertion that Kosovo
will not be successful if given independence, and might even
become a serious danger in Europe. Churkin's prepared
comments were riddled with allusions to Kosovar violence,
criminal activity, and even more ominous suggestions. It
will be important for UNMIK and the Kosovars to show that the
1244 process has run its course with good success, even if
there are areas where more progress would have been
desirable. Guehenno did not handle the question session as
well as could have been hoped for, dropping a number of
opportunities to say clearly that further progress is
dependent on status clarity, not on an extended UNMIK
presence. UNMIK will need to be clear on this in the future.
WOLFF