| The Colby Reader |
The causes behind the bloody conflict currently raging over the Yugoslavian province of Kosovo elude many casual Western observers. It is easy to see why. The media cannot easily explain the conflict in black and white terms, as was possible when the issue was stopping the monomaniacal ambitions of a single dictator as in the Persian Gulf, or halting the spread of communism as in Korea and Vietnam. Instead, the roots of the Kosovo problem run deep in the complex history of the Balkan Peninsula. The conflict springs from such disparate elements as an obscure battle in the Middle Ages, years of forced camaraderie among numerous dissimilar groups in Tito’s Yugoslavia resulting in widespread ethnic inequality, and most importantly, an opportunistic politician willing to exploit and manipulate the fears of large groups of people for his own personal gain. In many ways, the war in Kosovo is an example of a traditionally defined ethnic conflict.
In their essay Spreading Fear, David A. Lake and Donald Rothchild lay out a general theory on the roots of ethnic conflict. Lake and Rothchild stress that divergent ethnic groups living in close proximity to one another are not predestined to violent disputes merely by virtue of their dissimilarity. Instead, ethnic conflict arises when one group fears another. These fears are usually caused by competition for resources, which can include property rights, jobs, scholarships, educational admissions, language rights, and government contracts and support. The specific fears on each side take different forms depending on the size and strength of the groups involved. For instance, groups that are in the minority in a region or state can fear being assimilated into the larger group and losing their distinct cultural, political or economic identity, or they may fear that they will face deprivation and severe disadvantage at the hands of the larger group. Majority ethnic groups can fear that their own interests are threatened when a minority group begins to receive what they view as a disproportionate share of the resources in question.
The situation transforms from uneasiness and suspicion to full-blown conflict when one or both groups believe that their access to the above resources is threatened by the other group and that action must be taken to preserve their own position. Whether or not the opposition group poses a realistic threat to the other is inconsequential. All that is important is that the groups believe the threat is real. If the conflict escalates to the point where the groups involved decide that their own access to resources and hence their well-being can only be maintained by breaking away from or killing members of the other group, the conflict can explode in a separatist movement or war.
Even when resources are scarce and competition for them is a matter of survival, ethnic conflicts do not always occur. For instance, when the majority group holds significant advantages in strength, size, power and influence, conflict is unlikely to occur, since the minority group knows that it can be easily defeated. The larger group may choose to attack and subdue the smaller group, but such situations usually only arise when the minority group commits an initial act of aggression. In other cases the larger group is able to get its way simply by virtue of the fact that it holds influence over the smaller group. However, when the groups are fairly evenly matched in size and strength, conflict is likely to occur once the feelings of fear and competition grow intense enough. The most probable setting for conflict in this situation is when the minority group and the majority group fear each other. However, even in such situations, conflict may be averted if the central government of the state the conflicting groups reside in is capable of handling negotiations between the groups.
There are also several external circumstances that can exacerbate an already volatile conflict. For instance, a history of conflict between the groups, while not necessary for a new conflict to occur, can often intensify the passions of the combatants by calling to mind past victories and defeats in the struggle. As was discussed above, a strong central government can mediate a conflict, but a weak or nonexistent government can cause the struggle to amplify unchecked. The most important factor for a rise in ethnic tensions (at least in Kosovo) is the presence of an opportunist politician holding a powerful position in government. Such a politician is capable of aligning one group against another by promoting nationalist sentiments for his own gain. By promoting the interests of one group and subjugating the opposing group, he is able to bring about an appetite for conflict in both sides, often with fatal results. Finally, the reason ethnic conflicts are often so much more intense than other types of conflict is centered on the fact that hostility based on ethnicity requires that each and every person in the area is identified with one side or the other. While conflicts may begin by involving only a small number of combatants, if they explode they can involve every person in a society.
Kosovo and Serbia: A Historical Overview
In the 1300s, the area now known as Kosovo was controlled mainly by Serbs, even though, by most accounts, ethnic Albanians were the first inhabitants of the area. Though the Serbs were nominally in command, they were unable to keep any sort of strong government in place and were fairly unorganized. To the south, the Ottoman Empire was rapidly expanding, invading and overtaking numerous areas close to Kosovo. The Christian Serbs watched as several of their neighbors surrendered to the invading Muslims and were determined not to be the next victims. On June 28, 1389, the Serb forces of Prince Lazar faced the Ottoman army at Kosovo (“the Field of the Blackbirds”). The Battle of Kosovo was a draw, but each side was severely weakened. However, the Serbs had used nearly all of their military forces in the battle, while many other Ottoman forces remained in Turkey, waiting to launch another attack on the Serbs. Soon after, the Serbs in Kosovo fell to the Ottomans and remained under their control for more than 500 years. The Serbs never got over the defeat they saw as halting their bid for independence and the Battle of Kosovo became the focal point of Serb nationalism. It was portrayed as a valiant effort to defend the Serb people from pagan invaders and the date of the battle is often referred to as the birth of the Serb nation.
During the Ottoman rule of Albania, many people converted to Islam to appease their new conquerors and moved into the sparsely populated neighboring area of Kosovo. So began the divisiveness between Serbs and Albanians: not only were Albanians moving into an area that was a very significant part of Serb heritage, they were bringing an alien religion with them. It did not help matters any that the seat of the Christian Serbian Orthodox Church was located near Kosovo.
The Serb-Albanian relationship was never cordial during Ottoman rule, but it did not become violent either. Residents of the area that would become Yugoslavia expelled the Ottomans in 1912, when the entire empire was crumbling. Afterwards, Kosovo changed hands several times. Between 1912 and 1918 it was part of Serbia, Albania, and Austria-Hungary by turns. In 1918, the independent monarchy of Yugoslavia was formed with the intention of uniting all South Slavs (Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, and Montenegrins) in statehood. The monarchy was dictatorial and was overthrown when it agreed to cooperate with the Nazis in the Second World War. Afterwards, the country was unstable and getting so many disparate groups to cooperate proved to be a difficult proposition. A strong leader was needed to maintain the legitimacy of Yugoslavia.
He came in the form of Josip Broz Tito, the communist leader who took command of the nation following WWII. His thirty-five year regime was characterized by his attempt to join all the diverse ethnic groups in the country (including non-Slavs like the Albanians) into a national “brotherhood.” The idea was to teach people to think of themselves as Yugoslavs more than as members of an ethnic group. By virtue of his charisma and powerful influence, he managed to keep conflict at a minimum for many years.
However, Tito realized that if the largest Yugoslav province, Serbia, accumulated too much power, his experiment in brotherhood would fail. He therefore broke up Serbia into several smaller components. In some of these components, Serbs became a disadvantaged minority and Serb resentment for other groups began to grow.
In 1974, amendments to Yugoslavia’s constitution granted autonomy to Kosovo, which at the time was composed of a significant Albanian majority (about 90%) and a small Serbian minority. The poorly educated and underprivileged Albanians, now in control of the local government, used their newly acquired power to give themselves economic advantages over
 |
 |
| Crisis Web Kosovo Coverage | |
| BBC Backround Report on Kosovo |