On December 17, GMF hosted a breakfast discussion entitled "Serbia and Kosovo: Conclusion of the Troika process," featuring Daniel Fried, assistant secretary for the bureau of European and Eurasian affairs at the U.S. Department of State, and Dr. Klaus Scharioth, ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany. The response was led by two of GMF's transatlantic fellows, Laurie Dundon, former advisor to the U.S. special envoy for the Balkans; and Michael Polt, former U.S. ambassador to Serbia.

GMF Audio: To listen to a podcast with Secretary Fried and Amb. Scharioth, please click here.
(Additional GMF Audio is available on the Virtual Forums page)

The meeting was held observing the Chatham House rule to allow for free and frank discussion.

Regarding the Troika negotiations between the United States, European Union, and Russia, it was argued that limited independence for Kosovo, based on the UN Ahtisaari Plan, is the only way forward. The Troika negotiations demonstrated to the international community that a negotiated solution was not achievable, given Belgrade's refusal to accept any of the Troika proposals.  This result showed that any extension of this process was unlikely to lead to a more positive outcome. The scenarios discussed included "qualified independence" for Kosovo, putting limits on its governmental institutions and security structures, and extensive protections for the minority Serbian population in Kosovo, perhaps the most extensive provisions for a single minority population in any country. In a seperate podcast interview, Secretary Fried said the United States and Europe need, "unity and determination to take action," on Kosovo.

Serbia's possible candidate status for European Union membership was discussed as an alternative to Serbian nationalist visions which would only lead to its isolation. Following a relatively short period of nationalist-fueled anger, the majority of Serbs will drive their leaders to pursue the European perspective with the eventual goal of EU membership. While incidents of violence may occur during the post-status period, such events should be manageable. The discussion recalled NATO's determination to maintaining stability in all of Kosovo and the European Union's commitment to a democratic, multi-ethnic Kosovo.

Russia's likely response to a Kosovar unilateral declaration of independence was the topic of much of the question and answer session. While it was agreed that a new resolution by the United Nations Security Council would be preferable, many argued that UNSC resolution 1244 was sufficient legal basis for a continued international presence in a newly independent Kosovo. Russia's stance was regrettable, as it had missed the opportunity to be a constructive partner alongside the U.S. and the EU on the issue of Kosovo. The potential recognition by Russia of the Georgian region of Abkhazia following Western recognition of Kosovo was discussed, although such a move would likely be met by a firm diplomatic response from the West.  The concluding discussion suggested that while the Troika process did not achieve its desired outcome of a negotiated solution for Kosovo, it contributed to shaping the way forward by reaffirming U.S.-EU unity on resolving Kosovo's status, shoring up EU internal unity, and demonstrating to the international community that both the U.S. and the EU are committed on moving forward without allowing Russia to continue to block the process in the UN Security Council.