Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:44:30.592Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kosovo, World Order, and the Future of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2017

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comments: Nato’s Kosovo Intervention
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1999

References

1 Vaclav Havel, Kosovo and the End of the Nation-State, N.Y. Rev. BOOKS, June 10, 1999, at 4, 6 (reprinting address to Canadian Senate and House of Commons, Apr. 29, 1999).

2 Robert Fisk, Who Needs NATO? Progressive, July 22, 1999, at 22, 22.

3 For the text, see UN Doc. S/RES/1244 (June 10, 1999), containing the extraordinary dispositive language as follows: “Decides, on the deployment in Kosovo, under United Nations auspices, of international civil and security presences.” Such terminology hardly accords with the media view that the United Nations merely ratified the NATO victory. This formulation should also be compared with the dictatorial language and tone of the Rambouillet agreement and its explicit empowerment of NATO, especially in its famous Annex B, which gave NATO extensive powers throughout the whole of former Yugoslavia. It is my view that it was “unreasonable” not to attempt to reach a “1244” solution prior to recourse to war.

4 Richard C. Holbrooke, To End a War 339 (1998).