A Study of International Conflict Management with an Integrative Explanatory Model: A Case Study of the Kosovo Conflict

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "A Study of International Conflict Management with an Integrative Explanatory Model: A Case Study of the Kosovo Conflict"

Tiffany Atkins
5 years ago
Views:

Research Aim 2/34 A Study of International Conflict Management with an Integrative Explanatory Model: A Case Study of the Conflict Sasha Zivanovic, PhD Candidate Construction Management and

Nevertheless, the is supporting independence of. 2. This research aims to better explain the mechanisms behind this contradicting situation. 1 Outline of Presentation 3/34 Basic Data 4/34 1.

1 Research Aim 2/34 A Study of International Conflict Management with an Integrative Explanatory Model: A Case Study of the Conflict Sasha Zivanovic, PhD Candidate Construction Management and Infrastructure Systems Laboratory Department of Civil Engineering The University of Tokyo 1. After 8 years of UN administration, the human rights situation in is still catastrophic. Nevertheless, the is supporting independence of. 2. This research aims to better explain the mechanisms behind this contradicting situation. 1 Outline of Presentation 3/34 Basic Data 4/34 1. Background & Objectives 2. Research Methodology 3. Development of Cognitive Conflict Model 4. Development of Integrative Explanatory Model 5. Conclusion & Future Research Area:10,887 km 2 ( 岐阜県 : 10,598 km 2 ) Population:ca. 2 Million Ethnic Composition: > 90% < 10% Serbs Religion:Muslim, Serb. Orthodox GDP per capita:<1000 Euro

Definition of Conflict 5/34 Historical Overview 6/34 Contested Territory between 2 groups: Serbia s Claims: Legal and historical right

(London Treaty) 1974 Made Autonomous Province under Tito 1989 Autonomy revoked by Milosevic 1996- War: Serb forces v. Liberation Army 1999.

6- UNMIK administration 2005- Final status negotiations 2007 Conditional Independence?

200,000+ (and other minorities) have fled and cannot return 2. About 90,000 remaining live in enclaves 3.

2 Definition of Conflict 5/34 Historical Overview 6/34 Contested Territory between 2 groups: Serbia s Claims: Legal and historical right Conflict International Community: Conflict Management Claim: Rights of Majority & right of first possession 1912 Becomes part of Serbia (London Treaty) 1974 Made Autonomous Province under Tito 1989 Autonomy revoked by Milosevic War: Serb forces v. Liberation Army Rambouillet Peace Conference day NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia UNMIK administration Final status negotiations 2007 Conditional Independence? Current Situation 7/34 by Sasha, June 2006 by SPC, March /34 8 years of UNMIK have not brought multiethnic democracy to ,000+ (and other minorities) have fled and cannot return 2. About 90,000 remaining live in enclaves 3. Destruction of 120+ churches & monasteries 4. March 2004: organized riots throughout province, violence against minorities by Sasha, June 2006 Burnt Serb houses by SPC, March 2004 Destroyed churches HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN KOSOVO CATASTROPHIC IDPs live in container Albanian boy in burnt Serb house

3 Research Objectives 9/34 Scope of Research 10/34 1. To re-examine the current representation of the ongoing nation building mission in by the International Community 2. To build an Integrative Explanatory Model in order to uncover the factors which have led to the current unsatisfactory situation under UNMIK Why is have the 200,000+ International been Community expelled? Why supporting can independence not return to (of after 8 ) years of UNMIK? under these conditions? Rambouillet Conference Before UNMIK NATO War Conflict Human Rights United Nations Rambouillet Mission in (UNMIK) NATO Bombing UNMIK Conflict Management Return Final of Status Minorities Negotiations Existing Research 12/34 Existing Research 1. Geopolitical Aspect (Imperialism) Significance of, Interests structures 2. Legal Aspect (International Law) Humanitarian Doctrine v. State Sovereignty 3. Moral Aspect (Just War Theory) NATO Bombing 4. Decision-making Aspect (Analogical Reasoning) Rambouillet Peace Conference 5. UNMIK related research (Identification Theory) Administration process 11

4 Deficiencies in Existing Research 13/34 Argumentation Simplified premises: ( are victims of ethnic cleansing by Milosevic) Biased Moral: deserve independence Criticised by Thomas, 2003; Bardos, Historical facts: Insufficient understanding (e.g. Policies of Tito & in the past) Perceptional factors: Misrepresentation (e.g. Non-cooperation of Serbs under UNMIK) Research Methodology NEED FOR NEW HOLISTIC APPROACH 14 Interpretivist Methodology 15/34 Model Building Process 16/34 Field Study Direct (Face-to-Face) Interview Observation Enhanced Case Study Literature Review Review applicable existing theories and models Secondary source of material Start Theories on CA&R Understanding Literature Review Influence Diagrams Theories on Conflict Database of Conflict Categorization (Qualitative Coding) Coding Analysis and Understanding Resolution Field Study Interviews Yes Satisfied No Reveal Inconsistencies Combine data with applicable theories Create new integrative explanatory model Finish Satisfied Yes Model Building with 1. Cognitive and Formulate Revise 2. Rational ValidateTheories Relationships No (Model) Model Formulate Find or Revise Relationships Applicable (Model) Theories No Satisfied Yes Formulate or Revise Relationships Model (Model) Rel.ships

5 Model Building 18/34 Development of Cognitive Conflict Model Mental Model Approach Creation of Influence Diagram Validation of relationships through Guided interviews 2. Extension of individual [cognitive] models to state/organisational level Applications of Prospect Theory to Political Science (Levy, 2003) The Gains Debate: Framing State Choice (Berejekian, 1997) U.S. Military Base Oil Pipelines from Caspian regions NATO enlargement Past experience with Serbs Media & PR influence Oppression of K- during Milosevic regime Tito s Federalism praised in the Serbia traditional ally of Russia Geostrategical Importance of Balkan Region U.S. wants to get rid of Milosevic Factors related to UNMIK? Wars in Bosnia and Croatia Oppression of K- Serbs during Tito s Yugoslavia not perceived Influence Diagram U.S. favours Albanian UNMIK Perception of Serbs as aggressors, Perception of Moral Right to Self- Determination Geopolitical Factors?? FIELD STUDY Perception of historical events by 19/34 supports Cognitive / Perceptional Factors Field Study Check Influence Model Perform interviews in and Belgrade Divide interviewees into 3 groups: Group 1: People with power e.g. K-Serb & K-Albanian politicians, UN officials Group 2: Intelligentia e.g. scholars, lawyers Group 3: Affected people e.g. IDPs, refugees 20/34

6 Field Study Results 21/34 Cognitive Dissonance Theory 22/34 should be independent UN officials K-Albanian Politicians Strong Opposition from Serbia Correlation of UN and K-Albanian Positions People avoid psychologically uncomfortable dissonance in their knowledge/behaviour 4 ways to reduce Cognitive Dissonance: (1) removing (existing) dissonant cognitions (2) adding new consonant cognitions (3) reducing the importance of dissonant cognitions (4) increasing the importance of consonant cognitions Cognitive Evaluation of UNMIK UNMIK s Perception are only victims, Serbs only UNMIK s Cognitive dissonance are victims, Serbs Serbs are victims, UNMIK in Gains Frame Better stay on K- side, than risk to protect K- Serbs 23/34 UNMIK s Exit strategy JUNE 1999 TIME 2007 Reconfirm the fait accompli that is de facto independent. Cognitive Conflict Model UNMIK does not stop discrimination UNMIK does of not prevent usurpation of perceive UNMIK/KFOR K-Serb property boycott expel K- supports UNMIK support does not as cut flow cooperation Serbs and K- anti-serbian green of people/weapons light UNMIK/KFOR and eradicate create for and oppression siding from does Albania not prevent parallel historical of with. destruction institutions of traces UNMIK Serb does houses, not UNMIK/KFOR neutralise churches, sources does UNMIK/KFOR not extract of hatemongering monuments illegal evacuates arms ethnocentric from during riots propaganda 24/34

7 Cognitive Conflict Model 25/34 Cognitive Conflict Model 26/34 supports K- expel K- Serbs and eradicate historical traces perceive support as green light for oppression of. perceive UNMIK Rational as Loop anti-serbian Cognitive Consonance and siding Loop with K- boycott cooperation and create parallel institutions Strategic supports level K- perceive support as green light for oppression of. expel K- Serbs and eradicate historical traces supports Independence of Rational Loop Cognitive Consonance Loop perceive UNMIK as anti-serbian and siding with K- boycott cooperation and create parallel institutions criticises Cognitive Consonance criticises Cognitive Consonance Loop 27/34 Human Rights situation for Serbs in unsatisfying dissonant with UNMIK s own statements. (1) remove dissonant cognition, i.e. Improve Human Rights situation or Change cognition about it. (not existent, economic problem etc.) (2) Believe that expulsion of is better for solution of problem. They deserve it, they are guilty. Statements: Peterssen + Ahtisaari The Serbs are guilty as a nation. (3) Outbreak of new hostilities/war is more catastrophic than problems of minorities. (4) Believe that what has been achieved by K- is more important than problems of minorities. Consequences of Cognitive Consonance 28/34 K-Albs + UNMIK position: 1Economic Situation responsible for minorities fleeing 2 do not cooperate with UNMIK/K-Albs. Big Problem 3Independence only realistic solution. + Serb Gov. position: 1Minorities face discrimination, attacks 2Non-cooperation is result of 1. 3Broad ian sovereignty Autonomy under Serbian sovereignty only only acceptable solution for for Serbia.

8 Development of Integrative Explanatory Model 29 U.S. Military Base Oil Pipelines from Caspian regions NATO enlargement Past experience with Serbs Media & PR influence Oppression of K- during Milosevic regime Tito s Federalism praised in the Serbia traditional ally of Russia Geostrategical Importance of Balkan Region U.S. wants to get rid of Milosevic Integrative Explanatory Model Influence Diagram 30/34 Factors related COGNITIVE CONFLICT UNMIK MODEL supports to UNMIK? Wars in Bosnia and Croatia Oppression of K- Serbs during Tito s Yugoslavia not perceived U.S. favours Albanian Perception of Serbs as aggressors, Perception of Moral Right to Self- Determination Perception of historical events by Geopolitical Factors Cognitive / Perceptional Factors Integrative Explanatory Model before UNMIK ( June 1999) 10 th June March /34 Conclusion I 32/34 Serbia traditional ally of Russia U.S. Military Base Camp Bond Steel s Oil Pipelines from Caspian region Geostrategical Importance of NATO enlargement Balkan Region Personal Factors of Importance US/ s negative experience with Serbs during Ex-YU wars U.S. allies with KLA Perceptions of Conflict Oppression towards Perception of not perceived Serbs as during Tito- aggressors, Yugoslavia Tito s Federalism praised in the. Media & PR influence Wars in Croatia and Bosnia Importance of Balkans USA wants to prevent Russian influence in Balkans U.S. wants to get rid of Milosevic Peace Talks at Rambouillet fail fight for independence, create Liberation Army (KLA) Oppression of K- during Milosevic regime NATO Bombing Serbs expel in NATO war U.S favours Albanian K- attack Serbs Mission becomes too costly Democratic Standards not fulfilled by Expulsion of by Destruction of Serbian Churches, Houses Attacks on UNMIK / KFOR by Serbs Perception of UNMIK UNMIK / KFOR does not protect Serbs UNMIK indirectly responsible for expulsion of Serbs KFOR has no order to protect UNMIK has no defined mission strategy UNMIK transforms KLA into KPC UNMIK slows down way to independence UNMIK / KFOR does not protect Serbs Mission Related Factors Democratisation Efforts failed Perception of UNMIK UNMIK s perception Perception of K- Albs. Moral Right to Self- Determination Perception of as aggressors and UNMIK-FRY document Serbs create parallel institutions. frustrated with UNMIK perceive possibility for oppression of UNMIK seeks Exit Strategy UNMIK s fears K- Albanian attacks March 2004 riots Serbs stop to cooperate with UNMIK supports supports Independence of UNMIK Serbia/ 1. This research has highlighted problems in international conflict management by analysing the Case. 2. Reasons for support of independent by the International Community have been investigated. 3. Important issues found out from this research are: Simplistic characterisation of the causes of conflict Insufficient consideration of historical evidence Catastrophic human rights of not addressed

9 Conclusion II 33/34 Future Research 34/34 4. Cognitive Conflict Model has been constructed. Uncovers inherent Cognitive Consonance Loop. Shows that by its own actions exacerbates the conflict. 5. Integrative Explanatory Model of the Conflict has been constructed. Holistic representation of the important factors which led to current outcome. Integrates cognitive perceptional and rational geopolitical factors. 1. Generalisation of Cognitive Conflict Model to other conflicts 2. Analysis of Influence on UNMIK by U.S, EU etc. 3. Analysis of Decision-making process of UNMIK (e.g. Cognitive analysis on personal level) 4. Analysis of Final Negotiation Process THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Extra Material 35 36

10 Alternative Explanations 37/34 Conflict Resolution 38/34 Rational Choice Explanation vs. Cognitive Choice Theory Governing Body Rational calculation from beginning. UNMIK behaviour depending on US etc. UNMIK officials knew they were instrumentalised. Definition of UNMIK or Administrative Body UNMIK officials went into mission with believe to create multiethnicity. There was no plan to seize UNMIK s failure result of its actions and the pressure from. When is a conflict solved? * Both sides decide to live in a new order voluntarily without pressure Both sides feel as stakeholders in process and solution Conflict not likely to arise again in same or other form, does not cause traumas Solution does not affect others (sustainability) * Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, Sweden UNMIK. UNSCR 1244: 1. perform basic civilian administrative functions; 2. promote the establishment of substantial autonomy and self-government in ; 3. facilitate a political process to determine 's future status; 4. coordinate humanitarian and disaster relief of all international agencies; 5. support the reconstruction of key infrastructure; 6. maintain civil law and order; 7. promote human rights; and 8. assure the safe and unimpeded return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes in. 39/34 Standards before Status (2002) 40/34 (1) the existence of effective, representative and functioning democratic institutions; (2) enforcement of the rule of law; (3) freedom of movement; (4) sustainable returns of refugees and displaced persons, and respect for the rights of communities; (5) creation of a sound basis for a market economy; (6) fair enforcement of property rights; (7) normalized dialogue with Belgrade; and (8) transformation of the Protection Corps (KPC) in line with its mandate.

11 Interview Performance 41/34 INTERVIEW RESULTS 42/34 Group Posed Question Intented Result Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 How is the situation in? What are the problems in? How can/could they be solved? How many Serbs have fled? What are the reasons for which the Serbs flee? What they think about UNMIK/the internationals? What a resolution of the conflict would look like? How they evaluate their (own) work? Does deserve independence? What is the situation of minorities? What are the reasons for the conflict? Why does UNMIK not protect the Serbs? Is UNMIK/KFOR not able to protect the Serbs or can t it? What would be necessary to happen for the conflict to be solved? What if became independent? Tell me about questions, guided follow-up, depending on the responses Tell me how they feel? Tell me why you are here? Tell me what has happened to your house? How are the relationships between you and the? Would you like to go back to? (If yes) Why can t you go home? What was the relationship between you and the before the war? Tell me what do you think about the Serbs? Tell me why you think they (the Serbs) don t need to come back? understand perceptions and positions; on what is the Argumentation based get a knowledge about the degree and way of analysis of arguments Open Beginning, how they feel Follow-up questions Group Questioned Person Obtained Answers Group 1 Group 1 Group 3 Serb Politician K-Albanian Politician K-Serb refugees / IDPs 1. Situation is an instable peace. IC, eager to implements its exit strategy has forgotten why it came to. 2. Negotiations have begun, but there is no human rights basis for this. 3. Standards before Status have not been performed, but this is the last compartment to democracy in. 4. have successfully managed to delete all hope of IC to approach Standards before Status. (Message: Violence Pays) 1. Destruction of churches is Serbian propaganda. There are only some, in the riots. 2. is multiethnic 3. Serbs flee out of economic reasons 4. deserves the last compartment to democracy in. 1. Afraid to talk Serbian 2. Have no freedom of movement 3. always wanted ethnically clear

Enver Hasani REVIEWING THE INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF KOSOVO. Introduction

Enver Hasani REVIEWING THE INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF KOSOVO Introduction The changing nature of the conflicts and crises in the aftermath of the Cold War, in addition to the transformation of the