Can Kosovo Reach the United Nations Through the Path Paved by Palestine?

The adoption of the UN General Assembly resolution stating that "the State of Palestine is qualified for UN membership" and recommending that the Security Council positively consider its membership in the organization will be remembered by some for the overwhelming number of "yes" votes (143), by others for the protest of Israel's ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, who tore up a copy of the UN Charter at the podium, and by many states for the fact that the accepted document states that the decision is "on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent."

In 2012, Palestine upgraded its status within the UN from "observer entity" to "non-member observer state," and this path is undoubtedly attractive to many aspiring to become members of the global family of states, including Kosovo.

However, legal experts and international relations specialists interviewed by Kosovo Online point out that the cases of Palestine and Kosovo are entirely different and that drawing parallels between them is difficult. While they do not exclude the possibility that Kosovo might attempt to open doors at East River in the future, following Palestine's example, they believe such an action would not end successfully.

Aleksandar Gajic, a professor at the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, told Kosovo Online that the resolution on Palestine adopted by the UN General Assembly on May 10 is unique and a rarity in the practice of the UN. The primary purpose of this resolution, he points out, was to determine the modalities of Palestine’s participation in the work of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, as a non-member entity with only observer status in the General Assembly.

"This issue is not new to UN bodies, as Palestine has had an appropriate status with the General Assembly for years and enjoys the support of a very large number of states. The issue of Kosovo is entirely different. UN Security Council Resolution 1244 placed Kosovo under international administration, and it is clear within the United Nations that Kosovo cannot be considered a state. Resolution 1244 is clear that within the UN, Kosovo can only be treated as an integral part of the Republic of Serbia that is currently under international administration, and the issue of the situation in Kosovo and Metohija, in accordance with Resolution 1244, is before the Security Council," says Gajic.

Dusan Prorokovic, a senior research associate at the Institute of International Politics and Economics, emphasizes that the cases of Palestine and Kosovo are fundamentally different and not comparable. He also believes that it is unrealistic for Kosovo to follow the same path to UN membership that Palestine has taken, although this idea might be entertained by some in Pristina and Washington.

"Palestine was a mandate territory of the British Empire and lost that status in 1947 due to the decolonization process. In 1974, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the recognition of Palestine, which led to the 'strange solution' of granting observer status in the UN General Assembly in the 21st century. The issue of Palestine has primarily been addressed by the UN General Assembly, while in the case of Kosovo, we have a Security Council Resolution, which is not the same," says Prorokovic.

"Kosovo is an integral part of the Republic of Serbia and was not anyone's mandate territory in 1999, nor was Resolution 1244 adopted due to a decolonization process. UN Security Council decisions are binding, must be respected, and are part of international law; they are not in the form of recommendations, calls, or similar categories. These are fundamental differences," he adds.

Prorokovic further notes that if any self-declared independent territory were to enter the UN system, there are about ten other candidates with unresolved status ahead of Kosovo.

"Why should Kosovo be an exception? Western Sahara, or the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, became a member of the African Union, and the vast majority of then-UN members recognized the Polisario Front, yet no unique path like that devised for Palestine was applied in the case of Western Sahara. Also, from the current perspective, the collective West in the UN General Assembly has not been able to muster a majority for even a relatively significant non-binding resolution on Srebrenica for over a month. If they cannot secure a majority on such an issue, where they counted on the support of all Western states plus all Muslim countries, it is unrealistic to expect that they could secure any majority regarding the Kosovo issue," Prorokovic concludes.

Foreign policy analyst Mirko Dautovic told Kosovo Online that the recent UN General Assembly resolution on Palestine states in its third article that this decision is on an extraordinary basis and without setting a precedent. This echoes the statement made in 2008 when many states recognized Kosovo's independence—that Kosovo is a sui generis case, meaning unique in its own right.

"This shows that sui generis means nothing. All cases are sui generis—Kosovo, Palestine, Somaliland, East Timor, Northern Abkhazia, or Crimea. You can say that each is unique and should be an exception. Ultimately, it is decided which exceptions are acceptable and which are not. Therefore, this certainly opens the possibility, not just for Kosovo, but for a whole series of unresolved cases, that at some point, based on certain circumstances, their uniqueness will be enough for them to be recognized as a state," says Dautovic.

Regarding Kosovo's aspirations to become a UN member, Mirko Dautovic notes that while this issue can appear on the UN General Assembly's agenda, it cannot secure enough votes because the UN Charter requires a two-thirds majority of the 193 member states for any General Assembly decision.

"Kosovo cannot obtain such a number of votes in the current General Assembly configuration, based on which countries recognize it and which do not. It must also be noted that the authority over which state will be recognized by the UN lies with the Security Council, where China and Russia hold veto power. Kosovo's current aim is membership in the Council of Europe, which is not recognition of Kosovo in international relations but is a small step. For Pristina, any possible step that could confirm their legitimacy as an independent and recognized state is important, whether it is membership in the Postal Union, the Council of Europe, or observer status in the UN General Assembly," concludes Dautovic.