Kosovo 1998-2008: Human Rights from War to Independence

Serbs and Albanians have inhabited Kosovo for centuries. For Serbs, Kosovo is the core of the medieval Serbian kingdom. For Albanians, Kosovo is the cradle of their struggle for independence. With both parties feeling entitled to the territory of the province, the threat of conflict was never far away. At several points, human rights abuses were perpetrated by one group on the other. Deeper ethnic antagonisms led to the outbreak of conflict in Kosovo in 1998, culminating in January 1999. Having already dealt with conflicts in Croatia and Bosnia, the international community claimed to be well-prepared to approach the Kosovo issue and stop the atrocities. While bearing in mind the past and the present, this paper addresses the failures of both the international community and the local parties in regard to human rights protection.

"Europe 1989-2009: Rethinking the Break-up of Yugoslavia"

The collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has encouraged proliferation of academic literature. This paper examines Western scholarship and, while broadly dividing factors that contributed to the state disintegration into two main categories (internal and external), questions what is yet to be analyzed in order to get a clearer picture about the Yugoslav drama. In this respect, the paper perceives non-state actors as important players capable of influencing decision-making processes. Thus, deeper understanding of activism perpetrated by diaspora groups, media and churches would be a valuable contribution to the existing scholarship

Kosovo 1998-2008: Human Rights from War to Independence

Serbs and Albanians have inhabited Kosovo for centuries. For Serbs, Kosovo is the core of the medieval Serbian kingdom. For Albanians, Kosovo is the cradle of their struggle for independence. With both parties feeling entitled to the territory of the province, the threat of conflict was never far away. At several points, human rights abuses were perpetrated by one group on the other. Deeper ethnic antagonisms led to the outbreak of conflict in Kosovo in 1998, culminating in January 1999. Having already dealt with conflicts in Croatia and Bosnia, the international community claimed to be well-prepared to approach the Kosovo issue and stop the atrocities. While bearing in mind the past and the present, this paper addresses the failures of both the international community and the local parties in regard to human rights protection

Kosovo 1998-2008: Human Rights from War to Independence

Serbs and Albanians have inhabited Kosovo for centuries. For Serbs, Kosovo is the core of the medieval Serbian kingdom. For Albanians, Kosovo is the cradle of their struggle for independence. With both parties feeling entitled to the territory of the province, the threat of conflict was never far away. At several points, human rights abuses were perpetrated by one group on the other. Deeper ethnic antagonisms led to the outbreak of conflict in Kosovo in 1998, culminating in January 1999. Having already dealt with conflicts in Croatia and Bosnia, the international community claimed to be well-prepared to approach the Kosovo issue and stop the atrocities. While bearing in mind the past and the present, this paper addresses the failures of both the international community and the local parties in regard to human rights protection

Independent Kosovo: A Threat for the Balkan Region?

Both political and security future of the Balkans highly depend on the conditions in a newly created state of Kosovo. Bearing in mind the ethnic Albanian leadership declared unilateral independence in February 2008 and without providing the Serbian minority with durable solution, this paper aims at exploring three possible scenarios following the Kosovo independence. It combines both sides' positions offering wider understanding why each of them feels entitled to the Kosovo's territory and what are the risks if that territory remains only in one side's hands. The three puzzling questions presented in this paper, supported by the concepts from different thinkers (Cox, Buzan, Wæver) are arguably among the least discussed ones in contemporary discourse about Kosovo's future

The regional implications of Kosovo’s policy of independence

No abstract available

Independent Kosovo: A Threat for the Balkan Region?

Both political and security future of the Balkans highly depend on the conditions in a newly created state of Kosovo. Bearing in mind the ethnic Albanian leadership declared unilateral independence in February 2008 and without providing the Serbian minority with durable solution, this paper aims at exploring three possible scenarios following the Kosovo independence. It combines both sides' positions offering wider understanding why each of them feels entitled to the Kosovo's territory and what are the risks if that territory remains only in one side's hands. The three puzzling questions presented in this paper, supported by the concepts from different thinkers (Cox, Buzan, Wæver) are arguably among the least discussed ones in contemporary discourse about Kosovo's future

University autonomy under democratic backsliding: a case study of a plagiarism investigation against Serbian Minister of Finance (2014–2019)

Scholars have documented a tendency of (semi-)authoritarian regimes to undermine university autonomy, mainly through organizational (de jure) changes. This paper presents a case study of a publicly triggered plagiarism investigation by the University of Belgrade into the doctoral thesis of the Serbian Minister of Finance, one of the key members of the increasingly authoritarian regime. The analysis finds a proceduralized and delayed response of the university’s leadership, which indicates lowered de facto autonomy from politics, despite the university’s continually high de jure autonomy. The investigation was closed only after a mobilization within the academic community which resulted in a university’s blockade that forced its leadership to retract the contentious thesis. The case study shows that, in contexts of democratic backsliding, political capture can extend farther than usually thought, impacting even the implementation of internal university standards. On the other hand, the analysis also shows that political capture is not necessarily irreversible and that academic community can mobilize to ‘undo’ it. This reinforces the notion of academic communities as value-driven groups capable of exerting peer pressure to override even authoritarian pressures. In order to understand the dynamic of the plagiarism inquiry in its entirety, we apply insights from theory of power to complement and overcome the limitations of the conventional theoretical frameworks on democratic backsliding and academic autonomy. autonomy

La OTAN en la Posguerra Fría: Ucrania y los límites de la hipertrofia

The Russian military action in Ukraine in February 2022 has served as a catalyst of a long-standing trend in NATO: that of justifying its existence in its geographical expansion both in organic terms, through the incorporation of new states into its structure, and in operational terms, through the execution of so-called out-of-area operations. This dynamic, which has been firmly established since the mid-1990s, has been overridden by the growing contradictions between the interests of its members, the successive changes in US administrations and the transformation of the international system, characterised by an inexora- ble trend towards multipolarity. Starting with the implications of the war in Ukraine for NATO, this article provides a historical analysis of this phenomenon, noting the vicissitudes of NATO's enlargements and operations over the past thirty years, and how these activities have enabled the alliance to weather the successive internal crises it has faced. Ultimately, the authors argue that the war in Ukraine marks the end of this dynamic, putting NATO in the dilemma of either limiting its operations to the defence of its members (in line with the collective security clause enshrined in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty) or completingpending enlargement processes, thereby endangering international peace and security.La acción militar rusa en Ucrania de febrero de 2022 ha servido como catalizadora de una tendencia de largo recorrido en la OTAN: la de justificar su existencia en su expansión geográfica tanto en términos orgánicos, a través de la incorporación de nuevos Estados a su estructura, como operativos, mediante la ejecución de las denominadas “operaciones fuera de área”. Esa dinámica, firmemente asentada desde mediados de los años noventa, ha pasado por encima de las crecientes contradicciones entre los intere- ses de sus miembros, los sucesivos cambios en las administraciones norteamericanas y la transformación del sistema internacional, caracterizada por una inexorable tendencia hacia la multipolaridad. Partiendo de las implicaciones de la guerra en Ucrania para la OTAN, este artículo realiza un análisis histórico de este fenómeno, señalando las vicisitudes de las ampliaciones y operaciones de esa alianza militar en los últimos treinta años, y cómo estas actividades le han permitido sortear las sucesivas crisis internas a las que se ha ido enfrentando. En último término, los autores sostienen que la guerra en Ucrania supone el final de esa dinámica, lo que pone a la OTAN frente al dilema de limitar sus operaciones a la defensa de sus miembros (en la línea de la cláusula de seguridad colectiva, consagrada en el artículo 5 del Tratado del Atlántico Norte) o culminar los procesos de ampliación pendientes, poniendo así en peligro la paz y la seguridad internacionales

La OTAN en la Posguerra Fría: Ucrania y los límites de la hipertrofia

The Russian military action in Ukraine in February 2022 has served as a catalyst of a long-standing trend in NATO: that of justifying its existence in its geographical expansion both in organic terms, through the incorporation of new states into its structure, and in operational terms, through the execution of so-called out-of-area operations. This dynamic, which has been firmly established since the mid-1990s, has been overridden by the growing contradictions between the interests of its members, the successive changes in US administrations and the transformation of the international system, characterized by an inexorable trend towards multipolarity. Starting with the implications of the war in Ukraine for NATO, this article provides a historical analysis of this phenomenon, noting the vicissitudes of NATO's enlargements and operations over the past thirty years, and how these activities have enabled the alliance to weather the successive internal crises it has faced. Ultimately, the authors argue that the war in Ukraine marks the end of this dynamic, putting NATO in the dilemma of either limiting its operations to the defense of its members (in line with the collective security clause enshrined in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty) or completing pending enlargement processes, thereby endangering international peace and security.La acción militar rusa en Ucrania de febrero de 2022 ha servido como catalizadora de una tendencia de largo recorrido en la OTAN: la de justificar su existencia en su expansión geográfica tanto en termino orgánicos, a través de la incorporación de nuevos Estados a su estructura, como operativos, mediante la ejecución de las denominadas “operaciones fuera de área”. Esa dinámica, firmemente asentada desde mediados de los años noventa, ha pasado por encima de las crecientes contradicciones entre los intereses de sus miembros, los sucesivos cambios en las administraciones norteamericanas y la transformación del sistema internacional, caracterizada por una inexorable tendencia hacia la multipolaridad. Partiendo de las implicaciones de la guerra en Ucrania para la OTAN, este articulo realiza un análisis histórico de este fenómeno, señalando las vicisitudes de las ampliaciones y operaciones de esa alianza militar en los últimos treinta años, y como estas actividades le han permitido sortear las sucesivas crisis internas a las que se ha ido enfrentando. En último término, los autores sostienen que la guerra en Ucrania supone el final de esa dinámica, lo que pone a la OTAN frente al dilema de limitar sus operaciones a la defensa de sus miembros (en la línea de la cláusula de seguridad colectiva, consagrada en el artículo 5 del Tratado del Atlántico Norte) o culminar los procesos de ampliación pendientes, poniendo así en peligro la paz y la seguridad internacionales