Sir, - It has long been accepted that the EU powers were too prompt and unthinking in their recognition of the independence of Croatia and Bosnia, two countries which, on becoming sovereign states, utilised as international frontiers their previous Yugoslav provincial boundaries. Yet it was a known historical fact that Yugoslavia's internal (and external) borders were arranged largely by Tito, to cope with half-a-dozen competing ethnic, national and religious groups. In the same way, Milosevic's termination of Kosovo's special autonomy within Serbia further ensured conflict.
Unfortunately, NATO has not permitted any discussion or understanding of the matter, despite silently breaking the postwar golden rule - the inviolability of the boundaries of the 1945 settlement - and the Helsinki Agreement to boot. As a result, NATO and the EU are presiding over the deliberate dismemberment of a sovereign state without mentioning the fact. The unfortunate result is that diplomatic efforts are incapable of resolving the question because of NATO's dishonesty or naivety and Milosevic's bizarre Sovietised nationalism.
NATO has the power to bring Kosovo out of Serbia and will so do, yet we pretend that the deal on offer to Milosevic - one that will involve effective loss of sovereignty through a requirement for all his controlling armed forces to leave - can maintain (in the short term anyway) Serbian territorial integrity. As it plainly will not, the only hope of settling the issue short of a bloody land war is to end the fiction. Such a war would not be difficult to win, but it would involve making refugees of the entire Serbian minority, as happened to the Krajina Serbs in Croatia. This might appeal to some people's sense of balance, but it is not humanitarian.
An independent Kosovo or a marriage with Albania (a concept remarkably absent from the ethnic Albanian agenda) has to be the end-product - and fast. But with one proviso: the frontiers of Kosovo were set for the requirements of Serbian-Yugoslavian balance and not for possible independence or Albanian unity. Although Milosevic, who has never had the courage or wisdom to utilise his army or air force in the field, could not be seen to propose partition, NATO can so dispose of Kosovo. Such a partition solution must leave a small proportion of the lands contiguous to Serbia - that 20 per cent with Serbian (and Gipsy) majorities along with some historic sites within new Serbia. The failed Dayton Agreement, with its unenforceable, if well-meaning, intention to get refugees home, must not be repeated, as it will only prolong the agony.
Partition can never solve ethnic disputes, but it does lance and stabilise them for many decades by bringing more people into their state of choice. It is therefore infinitely preferable to final solutions. Noticeably, NATO's bombardment has not been given any significant political or public support in Northern Ireland as people here are aware, if at times discreetly, that re-arranged frontiers - that is artificial man-made borders, not entities of an imagined or spiritual nature - ultimately save lives. - Yours, etc., Jeffrey Dudgeon,
Mount Prospect Park, Belfast 9.