yugoslavias implosion

ut also because of different approaches to the principles of territorial
integrity and self-determination, which reflected each country’s
own internal considerations. These differences became more evident
as the situation in Yugoslavia deteriorated.
The missions that were launched in the Balkans were pioneering
in character and had to operate in an environment where the institutions
of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had become delegitimized
and paralyzed while the legitimization of international
mechanisms was in its embryonic stage. In such circumstances, the
Milošević regime with its brutality managed to present the major
international actors with a series of faits accompli—among them, the
establishment of the Republika Srpska Krajina, the Republika Srpska,
and the north of Kosovo as quasi-independent entities. Milošević
showed an impressive mastery of diplomatic and propaganda skills,
which helped him to successfully manipulate the international community
by playing on its divisions, in particular in the eu at the outbreak
of the crisis.
COMPLEX CONFLICTS REQUIRE A LONG-TERM
INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE AND A SERIOUS AND SUSTAINED
PEACEBUILDING AND STATE-BUILDING EFFORT.
After its missteps in the 1990s and early 2000s, the West has managed
to establish a three-tier mechanism for normalizing and stabilizing
the Balkans: membership in the Council of Europe, adoption
of the eu Stabilization and Association Agreement (saa), and accession
to the Partnership for Peace with nato. The saa has been especially
instrumental in helping to stabilize the Balkan states by
providing political guidance and technical and financial support for
democratic institution-building and the adoption of political and
economic reforms. Co-operation with the Hague Tribunal has also
become instrumental in channeling developments in individual
countries toward the rule of law, respect for human and minority
323
ChApter 5