No Kosovo War

I'm a bit surprised that nobody has brought this up, given that this week marks the tenth anniversary of the war's outbreak.

So, no Kosovo War. [handwave] Let us say the POD is a negotiated climbdown at Rambouillet. Freely granted, that's a stretch. OTL Milosevic seems to have treated Rambouillet as a joke. He certainly wasn't going to let NATO ground troops into Kosovo. And he seems to have thought the bombing would be like the NATO bombings a few years earlier in Bosnia -- a few days, then back to the negotiating table.

But let's say Slobo has a sudden attack of reality and realizes that double-downing the world's most powerful military alliance is sort of a dumb idea. So he goes with the Rambouillet proposals of February 1999. (Note: these did not include the controversial annex allowing NATO forces to move through the rest of Yugoslavia.) These grant broad political autonomy to Kosovo, but not independence; the KLA, meanwhile, is supposed to disarm.

Odds of this working?

If it breaks down, how so, and what happens then? (Note that there will now be ~28,000 NATO peacekeepers in Kosovo.)

Effects on Serbia? On Milosevic?

(BTW: it would be nice if we could have a thread about the 1990s Balkan conflicts without nationalists from one side or the other popping up to insist that peace on these terms would be IMPOSSIBLE, because the other guys are BLOODTHIRSTY DOGS, gangsters human traffickers drug dealers fascist apartheid oppressors blah blah und so weiter et seq. Worth a try?)


Doug M.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Probably a second Kosovo crisis in the making; KLA doesn't disarm, but continue their activities, NATO peacekeepers powerless since neither Albanians nor Serbs like them. Slobo get impatient and mobilize his forces on the borders demanding NATO to withdraw.
 
NATO ultimatium was AH ultimatum 85 years later. There is no way anybody anywhere would accept it. Slobo thought NATO was bluffing, NATO thought it will take just a few bombs to convince him they mean bussiness.

Why do you think there is so little talk about OAF? Nobody wants to talk about it and everybody pretends it didn't happen. NATO are embarrased that it took them more than 70 days to bomb what was basically third rate power into submission. Serbs are embarrased that they got their country bombed around them back to 1960s and that they couldn't remove Slobo from power.

"OAF? Never happened, Kosovo just became UN protectorate all of a sudden."
 
Interesting premise. Earlier Montenegrin independence? More confidence in Vojvodina (although they're relatively well-off) and the ethnic Bulgarian parts of Serbia for regional authonomy? Less friction in Macedonia? Arkan and the mafia killing Milosevic to keep their power that is largely based on the embargo? Less influence of Russia in Europe, maybe leading to the FSB not bothering with recruiting Schroeder and less Russian influence on European energy policy, resulting in real progress with the southern pipelines through Turkey and Turkmenistan ending up supplying Europe through Azerbaijan and Georgia and Turkey rather than through Russia? No Georgian war or a far more bloodier one, possibly involving also Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Trukey? P.S. Do you by any chance have anything to do with the blog called "A Fistful of Euros" that I have been following for a few months now? Because there is a regular poster there that goes by the name of Douglas Muir and they just posted about this same anniversary. Also I am quite sure I have encountered both Douglas Muir and Doug M in a lot of other forums and such contexts I frequented for the last decade. I have been increasingly amazed at what a small place that world and especially the internet is, lately.
 
Last edited:
NATO ultimatium was AH ultimatum 85 years later. There is no way anybody anywhere would accept it."

...except for Bosnia, which was already full of peacekeepers. Or Macedonia, which would be full of them a few years later. Also UNCRO and UNTAES in Croatia.

The Rambouillet terms were hardly unacceptable to /Serbia/. Serbia would still own Kosovo, and Belgrade would still have ultimate authority in the province.

But they would probably have been disastrous for /Milosevic/. Which is why OTL he wasn't interested.


Doug M.
 
Interesting premise. Earlier Montenegrin independence?

They had de facto independence already in 1999. They only moved for de jure independence because Djukanovic and his friends thought they'd be in a better position running an independent country. Why would this be accelerated in TTL?


Less friction in Macedonia?

Good one! Yes, quite possibly -- the M-Albanians were definitely energized by the Kosovo war.


Arkan and the mafia killing Milosevic to keep their power that is largely based on the embargo?

Arkan had already survived several non-embargo years. And Slobo would not have been easy to kill -- he was paranoid and spent a lot of time in "undisclosed locations" (really in his villa in Dedinje).


P.S. Do you by any chance have anything to do with the blog called "A Fistful of Euros" that I have been following for a few months now?

Yah, that's me. Been posting there for almost five years now.


Doug M.
 
One butterfly would be a much better showing by the SNP in Scotlands first parliament elections. They dropped a lot in the polls when they decided not to support action in Kosovo...
 
...except for Bosnia, which was already full of peacekeepers. Or Macedonia, which would be full of them a few years later. Also UNCRO and UNTAES in Croatia.

different cases. there peacekeepers were to separate warring sides. In Macedonia they were there to prevent war from spillin to that country as well. Hardly comparable

The Rambouillet terms were hardly unacceptable to /Serbia/. Serbia would still own Kosovo, and Belgrade would still have ultimate authority in the province.

But they would probably have been disastrous for /Milosevic/. Which is why OTL he wasn't interested.


Doug M.

NATO would maintain administration, NATO troops would be free to travell anywhere, anytime, unhindered throughout FRY and be extempt from FRY law. as i said, no country would accept that as it would mean surrender to occupation.
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
The problem is I don't think the KLA would disarm, they see no reason to do it. And when the KLA do not disarm Slobo would see the NATO deal as more of a failure than he previously thought and things could get really ugly.
 
NATO would maintain administration, .

I'm sorry, but that's factually wrong.

Go and read the Rambouillet draft agreement. NATO's only function would be "to establish a durable cessation of hostilities". The details of this were spelled out in Annex 2, Article 8, Sections 1-3. It included things like "enforce demilitarization [of the KLA]" and authority to observe, monitor and inspect -- but it didn't include any form of governance or administration.

Belgrade would retain responsibility for defense, foreign policy, monetary policy, currency, customs, and federal taxation. Local affairs would be run by Kosovo's elected government. Foreigners wouldn't administer anything.



NATO troops would be free to travell anywhere, anytime, unhindered throughout FRY and be extempt from FRY law.

...as I said in the OP, we're assuming the controversial language in the final draft Annex is never added.


Doug M.
 
Top