Vol. XXXVIII / 1 - Studia Moralia

214 M. B. RAMOSE
To the question of title to Kosovo territory NATO continues
to provide “autonomy” as the solution. 46 The underlying
consideration here is to preserve the geopolitcal status quo in
the Balkans. 47 However, “autonomy” within the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia is no longer acceptable to the ethnic
Albanians whom NATO purportedly sought to protect. 48 Despite
the massive destruction 49 and arguably disproportionate harm
that NATO has inflicted upon the ethnic Albanians and the Serbs
alike the question of sovereignty over Kosovo remains as before
a matter of life and death. 50 The deep-seated convictions on
either side of the ethnic divide have survived the NATO
bombardments. Their survival questions the effectiveness of
bombs which in the massive destruction that they sowed in
Yugoslavia destroyed also themselves irretrievably but not the
contending convictions about sovereign title to Kosovo territory.
For this reason only precarious peace has been established in
Kosovo. No doubt NATO bombardments have brought an end to
gross violation of human rights by the Serbs and one of her war
aims has therefore been achieved.
Conclusion
We have shown in the foregoing that the principle of the just
war theory stipulating that only the sovereign may declare war
was not initially conceived to cover human rights violations. In
its unadulterated traditional context and form this principle can
no longer be applicable to the reality of contemporary
international relations. In order to avoid obsolescence the
principle requires both refinement and expansion to be relevant
to contemporary experience regarding sovereignty and human
46
NAVO Kroniek, Nr 1 voorjaar 1999, p. 21.
47
Detrez, R., Kosovo, Antwerp 1999, p. 188-89.
48
De Morgen (Er moet een Chinese muur tussen Kosovo en Servie
komen) zaterdag 5 juni 1999, p. 16.
49
Financial Times (EU counts cost of reconstruction) Thursday June 24
1999, p. 3.
50
Detrez, R., Kosovo, Antwerp 1999, p. 189.