The Kosovo Albanian War drips with International Relations’ theory. Steeped lavishly with interactions, mostly violent unfortunately, there is ample breeding ground for one’s crop of theory. With societal rifts of anguish, for each side unable to appease the other, the land slipped into an entrenched ideology of nationalism against one another. The extent of the war pre-dates NATO and the UN, institutions that made a firm stand in Kosovo, and even the whispered declaration of war. Theory provokes the profound understanding of engagement, with the Kosovo Albanian Conflict subsiding nicely among the shelf of examples.
According to the Oxford Handbook of International Relations, one of four defining principles of Classical Realism is Groupism. Groups create politics, by how they choose to work together, or against each other. In the Kosovo Alabanian Conflict, Yugoslavia, as a nation state, implemented injustices against the Kosovars, and later its breakup allowed for them a stage to declare their independence. Originally Kosovo was peaceful, yet the cyclical injustices demonstrated by the Serbians led to the foundation of the Kosovo Liberation Army, also known as the KLA, signifies Kosovo’s growing resentment towards their oppression by the Serbians, and their willingness to take up arms to defend their dignity. NATO and the UN play crucial parts in helping to end the war; NATO carried out its first ever air strikes against the Serbians, and the UN publicly condemned Yugoslavia’s use of excessive force and imposed not only economic sanctions, but banned the sale of arms to Serbia (Oxford, 133). The United States and other Western Nations became involved in the Conflict, most probably because of the United State’s push. The United States disapproved of Yugoslavia’s known ties to Communism and may have used to the conflict to push their ideology into the area.
The second division of Realism, as presented by the Oxford Handbook of International Relations is Egoism defined where groups are “driven principally by narrow self- interest”. All parties acted within their self- interest. Kosovo acted in means that were congruent with achieving independence, as many fights for freedom before them demonstrated (Oxford, 133). Serbia acted to remain in power of territory and people. NATO and the UN acted to prevent further crisis and deaths, also against international criticisms. The United States and Western allies acted to demonstrate their power over and to control their spheres of influence.
Anarchy, the third principle demarcated by the Oxford Handbook of International Relations, establishes that the absence of an international government provides feeding ground for self-help to accumulate (Oxford, 133). Though NATO and the UN act as international interventionists, they are not an international government, and as much as the United States to assert itself as an international policeman, it does not step its foot into every state’s affairs. Without an...