According to Countryaah, on February 1, 1990, the Federal Army is sent into Kosova. On July 2, the Kosovo Parliament declares that the country has the same status as the other republics of Yugoslavia. It leads to the issuance of a decree in Serbia on July 5, dissolving parliament and government. At the same time, the radio and TV station is occupied by Serbian police. Mass layoffs of Albanians from the state institutions are initiated, and the Ministry of Education and Teachers’ College are closed. The daily newspaper Rilindja will be closed, and in September a campaign will be opened for the closure of the Albanian schools. The Kosovo Parliament adopts the Constitution of the Republic of Kosova within the framework of the Yugoslav Federation.
In February 1991, the Albanians themselves begin teaching in the middle schools. In April, the Serbs are suspending teachers’ salaries. On September 1, 1991, the University of Prishtina closed. After four former Yugoslav republics declared themselves independent, Kosovo’s parliament on September 22 declared the country independent. By a referendum 26-30. September, Kosovo residents confirm this decision. The country gets its first government under the leadership of Prime Minister Bujar Bukoshi.
In February 1992, the higher education programs resumed under independent forms of education. On May 24, parliamentary and presidential elections will be held, choosing Ibrahim Rugova as president of the republic. In August, the London Conference sets up a special group for Kosova. Serbia is stepping up its suppression in the following years.
In 1997-98, an Albanian guerrilla, the UCK, builds military operations aimed at the Yugoslav occupation forces.
In March 1999, NATO launches bombing of Yugoslavia after rejecting a Western ultimatum to resolve the Kosovo crisis. In June, a ceasefire agreement is concluded, in which Yugoslavia allows NATO and Russia to invade Kosova. While Serbian military forces carried out massacres against the Kosovan Albanians at the start of the war, sending hundreds of thousands to flee into Albania, it is now the Albanians’ turn to carry out terror against the Serbian people in Kosova. A new stream of refugees is being launched, this time with a direction towards Serbia.
With Security Council Resolution 1244 of June 1999, the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) has political and security responsibilities over the area. Parliamentary elections were held in 2001 and again in 2004. In March 2002, Ibrahim Rugova was elected president.
The November 2007 parliamentary elections were a victory for the Kosovo Democratic Party (PDK), which received 34.3% of the vote. The second largest party was the Democratic League with 22.6%. The turnout of just 45% was disappointing. The PDK chairman, Hashim Thaçi, was appointed prime minister in January 2008. Thaçi was a member of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and in 1997 was indicted and sentenced in absentia by a Serbian court in Prishtina for terrorism. In 1999, he participated in the Rambouillet peace talks as leader of the Kosovo delegation.
The status of Kosovo between politics and international law
The question of the status of Kosovo characterized the entire period of direct administration of the U n and cannot yet be considered resolved four years after the declaration of independence and the entry into force of the Kosovar Constitution. Since the conclusion of the armed intervention of the N ato, in 1999, it clearly emerged that the Kosovars of Albanian ethnicity would have aimed for independence, while the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (now Serbia) and the Serbian minority would have considered as the only possible option that of Kosovo’s autonomy in the context of Serbian sovereignty. Resolution 1244/1999 of the Security Council U n(taken following the conflict, with the aim of establishing the international administration of Kosovo) reaffirmed the obligation of all member states of the U n to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. He then referred to the need to guarantee Kosovo’s self-government, pending a final agreement on the status issue.
The negotiations undertaken in 2006 by Martti Ahtisaari, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General U n for Kosovo, were stranded because of the still diametrically opposed positions of Belgrade and Pristina. Given the situation, Ahtisaari recommended to the Security Council (U nsc) the only option in his opinion possible: independence under the supervision, for an initial period, of the international community. The Ahtisaari plan, however, was not adopted by the US nscand remained a non-binding political document. Following the self-proclamation of independence in February 2008, many states hastened to recognize Kosovo, however insisting on the uniqueness of the situation, which should in no way have set a precedent. Most scholars of international law argued that it was not a case of exercising the right of external self-determination (recognized only to peoples subjected to colonial rule or foreign occupation), nor that it could be considered a case of secession justified by ” exercise of the right to internal self-determination (i.e. the right of peoples to independently choose their own rulers through a democratic process, which in any case should be exercised in compliance with the territorial integrity of the state). To evaluate the international subjectivity of Kosovo it must be taken into account that if, on the one hand, recognition by other states is a purely political act, with no legal value, on the other hand the birth of a state is traditionally perceived in law international as a matter of fact, with respect to which no legality criteria are applicable. The requirements that make it possible to evaluate the birth of a new state entity are effectiveness and independence: a state is the recipient of international standards and as such can demand that the latter be respected towards it, whether it effectively exercises its powers of government over a given territorial community independently of any other state. In the case of Kosovo it is not yet possible to say that these requirements are fully met. This is evident if we consider that some government activities are still exercised by the Un, from N ato and the European Union (Eu), and that the same Constitution of Kosovo, until 2012, recognized an additional international authority (the international civil representative), who was entrusted with the supervision of the independence process. It is also true that the Kosovar government is unable to exercise its powers in the northern areas of the region. On the other hand, it cannot be ignored that, despite the formal recognition contained in resolution U n 1244, since 1999 the Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo has in fact been suspended from the exercise of territorial administration powers by the U n. This situation, which seemed to have produced an irreversible separation even before the declaration of independence, constitutes a peculiarity that distinguishes the Kosovar case from other secessionist claims in other countries of the world.