Is There an Emerging New World Order?

Kosovo and American flags wave in city center in Pristina, Kosovo, on June 29, 2020. Ferdi Limani/Getty Images

Commentary

A previous opinion piece discussed how the world had treated the Republic of Kosovo differently to the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. This different treatment reveals the existence of a double standard with regard to secession and self-determination of ethnic groups under international law.

While the West welcomed the secession of Kosovo from Serbia, it opposed the declaration of independence of the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, which were only recognised by Russia and Syria. In contrast, as of March 2020, Kosovo has been recognised by 115 member countries of the United Nations, but 15 of these have since been withdrawn.

This unprincipled approach to secession and self-determination issues is, at least in part, a consequence of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. Adopted on June 10, 1999, in response to NATO’s sustained bombing of Serbia on March 24 of that year, it confirms that Kosovo is still an integral part of Serbia.

Specifically, in its Annex 2, although it promotes “substantial self-government for Kosovo,” it admits that full account must be taken of “the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.” Thus, it intimates that the territory of Kosovo is a part of Serbia—the successor state to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia—and that it will not countenance secession.

The resolution also states that, “an agreed number of Yugoslav and Serbian personnel will be permitted to return to maintain a presence at Serb patrimonial sites” and “a presence at key border crossings.”

It was subsequently agreed that Serbia could have up to one thousand police or military officers at its borders, and it acknowledged Serbs as constituting the majority population of Kosovo.

Kosovo ethnic Serbs pass through barricades near the border crossing between Kosovo and Serbia in Jarinje, Kosovo, on Sept. 28, 2021. Laura Hasani/Reuters

Resolution Failed

In any event, the resolution failed to live up to its lofty promises because, on Feb. 17, 2008, Kosovo unilaterally declared its independence from Serbia. There are no Serbian officers at the border, and Serbs have become a minority in Kosovo. Nevertheless, Resolution 1244 remains legally binding on all parties, but Kosovars and Serbs interpret it in different and mutually exclusive ways.

This dubious application of a double standard can also be discerned in the West’s current response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The West has imposed stringent economic sanctions on Russia to punish it for its invasion, which Russian President Vladimir Putin characterises euphemistically as a “special military operation.” But it also continues to buy cheap energy from Russia.

Aleksandar Vulin, Serbia’s minister of internal affairs, has said that the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 “was a crime against a sovereign nation and its people and seriously violated international law.”

From a business perspective, Russia prepared for this unfathomable situation for the last 10 years. Until recently, it was importing fruit and vegetables from Serbia and other Eastern European countries. But, starting in 2019, it significantly reduced the importation of these goods because Russia, by increasing its own production, became self-sufficient. In 2015, Putin even asked its people to repatriate financial resources from abroad to Russia to prevent them from being seized or blocked by a revengeful West.

Heeding this call, Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, announced that it was exiting Western markets and that, instead, it would concentrate on Central Asia. In the meantime, the bank acquired enormous amounts of gold.

What Does the Future Hold?

These developments indicate that Russia anticipated the West’s reaction to its planned invasion of Ukraine and was preparing its population for the economic pain that would be inflicted. Disturbingly, this long preparation might also indicate that Russia is in it for the long haul and that its invasion of Ukraine is just the first salvo in a protracted power struggle with the West. Subject to the validity of this analysis, Ukraine may only be the beginning of unrest and uncertainty in Europe and in the Middle East.

The drama that is now unfolding in Ukraine causes analysts to ask the question: who is right? Western countries, where people enjoy a refined education, progressive, liberal attitudes, and favour a comfortable lifestyle, naturally lean towards imposing their values and Western standards on Russia.

But the West has changed dramatically during the last couple of years, with licentiousness now taking hold in its societies, combined with declining respect for moral standards, religion, faith, and even personal freedom.

If the ambitions of the emerging market economies of the BRICS nations—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—and their determination to compete economically with the developed world are added to the equation, then one realises that there is definitely something happening that will lead to the development of a new world order—not unlike the world order established after each catastrophic historic event.

To ascertain how this new developing world order is faring, it is useful to closely watch and follow what is occurring in the fiscal world with the movements of money internationally.

Putin’s exhortation to his compatriots in 2015 indicates that this may be the key to understanding world developments because fiscal policies and activities are predictors of how countries might behave in the future.

One thing is certain: the world has become an unstable place, and the embrace of double, and non-principled standards, are not likely to bring stability, prosperity, and lasting peace among the nations of the world.

Instead, it may augur the establishment of a new world order.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.