Masha Lipman at PostGlobal

Masha Lipman

Moscow, Russia

Masha Lipman is the editor of the Pro et Contra journal, published by Carnegie Moscow Center. Lipman is also an expert in the Civil Society Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center. She served as deputy editor of the Russian weekly newsmagazines, Ezhenedel’ny zhurnal from 2001 to 2003, and of Itogi magazine from 1995 to 2001. She has worked as a translator, researcher, and contributor forMoscow bureau of The Washington Post and has had a monthly op-ed column in The Washington Post since 2001. Close.

Masha Lipman

Moscow, Russia

Masha Lipman is the editor of the Pro et Contra journal, published by Carnegie Moscow Center. Lipman is also an expert in the Civil Society Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center. more »

Main Page | Masha Lipman Archives | PostGlobal Archives


The Kremlin's Case Against Kosovo

The West takes advantage of Russia’s weakness, yet again.

» Back to full entry

Featured Comments

ff:

If you want some insight into Russia's attitude with this development, take a look at a map of NATO members. The recent expansions form a continuous wall of allies from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, effectively cutting Russia off from the Balkans. Furthermore, Albania, Croatia and Macedonia are set to join NATO later this year, with Montenegro and possibly Bosnia not far behind. Bear in mind that Russia has historically considered the Balkans to be in 'their sphere of influence,' and you see that they are alarmed at being pushed out of the region, and so have been making a full-court press for influence there. The swing state in all of this is Serbia: the most influential single Balkan state, and a historical ally of Russia. Thus, Russia's staunch (some might say overweening) support for Serbia throughout the conflicts of the 90's, and their backing today. If Russia loses its relationship with Serbia, or if Serbia is marginalized, then Russian influence in the Balkans will be effectively finished. The alarm at Kosovo independence, then, stems not so much from concerns over Kosovo per se (much less the laughable peans to international legal precedent), but rather from unease at the dimunition of Serbia (both territorially and politically) and the creation of yet another Balkan state that is sure to join NATO.

Frankly, things don't look so great for Russia on this front. Kosovo or not Kosovo, it's unlikely that the United States, or NATO, would be able to peel Serbia away from Russia (especially with Russia prepared to do just about anything to keep Serbia friendly). But it is very much possible that the lure of EU membership could draw Serbia into the fold.

Darden Cavalcade:

Very interesting posts.

For those who believe the US was correct in recognizing Kosovar independence, can you explain to me what American national interest was served with our recognition? I reject as implausible the idea that poking Russia early and often is an American national interest.

Does our recognition improve our public standing in Europe? or anywhere else (the Muslim world)?

Does our recognition address an important US geopolitical objective in the region? Is there realpolitik behind this boon granted to Kosovars?

It would be helpful to understand how our position helps the United States, because right now I don't see why we should care whether one group of goons or another is in charge of Kosovo.

krajina:

I can not help but see the parallel between Kosovo and Chechnya – in one case Russia was able to retake its rebel republic with its full military might, in the case of Kosovo, Nato intervened and now Kosovo has declared independence – illegally I might add. There are two operative lessons here.

1) If a country wants its sovereignty respected – by the west, it must be strong enough and its people must have the will to fight for it. While I am not an apologist for Milosevic – he shares some of the blame (along with people like Tudman) for what happened in the bloody break up of Yugoslavia, although he had been made a convenient scapegoat in the western media, he was ABSOBLUTELY right in fighting the terrorists from KLA, an organization that the US state department once branded as terrorist organization!! NATO’s argument of intervening on humanitarian grounds was baseless. No doubt, there were civilian casualties in the conflict, but there are civilian casualties in every conflict. So why is that Kosovo Albanians died at the hands of Serbia security force were considered victims of Serb “genocide”, while innocent Iraqis, by the thousands, met their death at the hands of their foreign occupiers are called collateral damage? Why is NATO not moved by the plight of Palestinian people – are Palestinians less human than Kosovo Albanians? Talk about hypocrisy!!

2) There are no international laws, but the laws of jungle that governs the international relations today. The west and US, in particular, can twist and turn any and all UN resolution to suit its needs. The talk of western respect for rule of law is nothing but a myth perpetuated by a sophisticated western propaganda machine – aka western media.

Post a Comment

Please return to the All Comments page to join the discussion. The best comments will be featured on this page.

Categories

PostGlobal is an interactive conversation on global issues moderated by Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria and David Ignatius of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is On Faith, a conversation on religion. Please send your comments, questions and suggestions for PostGlobal to Lauren Keane, its producer.