Unrest has unfortunately been a prevalent ideal in the territory of Kosovo for over a decade. Currently, the world is split between support for the recognized state of Kosovo, notably backed by Albania, and the Serbians claim to the right of Kosovo. Tensions have been quite uneven over the past years between both negative and neutral states. Caught in this inferno, several thousand NATO officers and soldiers have been residing in Kosovo, tirelessly trying to create peace within the former Yugoslav states. However, as an old and frankly unhopeful project, NATO’s involvement in Kosovo has been overshadowed by more urgent issues such as conflict in Afghanistan, and Russia’s annexation of Ukraine. Nevertheless, one of the more pressing components of this fracas is the release of NATO’s representatives from this burden that has plaguing international relations for years.
Over the next few days, NATO will be having multiple strategy sessions and debates to see how to proceed with their operations in Kosovo as to remove their officers from the region while leaving a peaceful and calm sense of life behind. As only a limited amount of time has so far been allocated to discuss possible solutions to the Kosovo crisis, only a summation can be articulated at this moment.
So far however, a heated debate has been underway for many hours in which no apparent agreement to “mend relationships” (Delegation of the United States) is seen in the near future. Certain nations have much more determined perspectives on Kosovo’s independence as opposed to others. The delegations of Spain is extremely anti-separatist due to its own problems with Catalonia’s want for a referendum for independence. Greece’s representation has similar feelings efficiently showcasing its perspective with the support of Spain. On the other-hand, benefits of the addition of Kosovo as a fully-recognized state have been understood by major powers such as America, Canada, Britain, and France, and thus, Serbia’s battle against Kosovan independence is heavily guarded.
Neutrality has also played a role in the so far stalemate within NATO’s debate on the predicament in Kosovo. Currently, the odd contender of the delegation of Croatia which has mutual relations with Albania, Serbia, and Kosovo, has an odd sense of neutrality towards this situation. As Croatia was a former Yugoslav state, it is beneficial to keep strong ties with its neighbours to help its economy and foreign relationships in the name of brotherhood. However, the delegation must be prudent as even though the stance it has currently chosen is relatively strong and stable, the slightest bias can topple its foundation and political connections to former Yugoslavia and its respective allies. Other delegations that has values of neutrality include Denmark and Bulgaria. By “not looking at who is the obstacle” (Delegation of Denmark) but rather for an efficient solution, it appears that these delegations will be the forefront of mediation and resolution for the committee of NATO.
Overall, “dialogues [are] starting to happen” such that an agreement on the situation in Kosovo should recently be resolved. With this being said, progress is still slow, and it is NATO’s full hope to retreat its soldiers from the area within this year.
Over the next few days, NATO will be having multiple strategy sessions and debates to see how to proceed with their operations in Kosovo as to remove their officers from the region while leaving a peaceful and calm sense of life behind. As only a limited amount of time has so far been allocated to discuss possible solutions to the Kosovo crisis, only a summation can be articulated at this moment.
So far however, a heated debate has been underway for many hours in which no apparent agreement to “mend relationships” (Delegation of the United States) is seen in the near future. Certain nations have much more determined perspectives on Kosovo’s independence as opposed to others. The delegations of Spain is extremely anti-separatist due to its own problems with Catalonia’s want for a referendum for independence. Greece’s representation has similar feelings efficiently showcasing its perspective with the support of Spain. On the other-hand, benefits of the addition of Kosovo as a fully-recognized state have been understood by major powers such as America, Canada, Britain, and France, and thus, Serbia’s battle against Kosovan independence is heavily guarded.
Neutrality has also played a role in the so far stalemate within NATO’s debate on the predicament in Kosovo. Currently, the odd contender of the delegation of Croatia which has mutual relations with Albania, Serbia, and Kosovo, has an odd sense of neutrality towards this situation. As Croatia was a former Yugoslav state, it is beneficial to keep strong ties with its neighbours to help its economy and foreign relationships in the name of brotherhood. However, the delegation must be prudent as even though the stance it has currently chosen is relatively strong and stable, the slightest bias can topple its foundation and political connections to former Yugoslavia and its respective allies. Other delegations that has values of neutrality include Denmark and Bulgaria. By “not looking at who is the obstacle” (Delegation of Denmark) but rather for an efficient solution, it appears that these delegations will be the forefront of mediation and resolution for the committee of NATO.
Overall, “dialogues [are] starting to happen” such that an agreement on the situation in Kosovo should recently be resolved. With this being said, progress is still slow, and it is NATO’s full hope to retreat its soldiers from the area within this year.