Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-2l2gl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T07:01:45.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kosovo, World Order, and the Future of International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2017

Richard A. Falk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
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
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 93 , Issue 4 , October 1999 , pp. 847 - 857
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).