HOLDEN TRIPLETT
Mr. Triplett is former director of Counterintelligence at the National Security Council and founder of Trenchcoat Advisers, a state advisory firm on Counter-intelligence
Observations
What was unthinkable is now possible. We are witnessing a full-scale invasion of Ukraine with nuclear implications. So far, the international community has had some relative success organizing a multilateral response, but unity is shallow and ephemeral. Domestic issues in the US and among coalition partners will increasingly take away attention from global threats.
So far, the EU and NATO member states have come together and backed strong sanctions. How long will this last? Western countries face much pain ahead, especially regarding their energy transition. Weaning reliance from Russian oil and gas will be a multiyear process. Russia is still an important part of the world economy, providing valuable commodities, such as coal and rare earth minerals.
Secretary of State Blinken warned that violent conflict could go on until at least the end of 2022. The US Department of Defense has been making plans to support Ukraine for years. The longer war continues, the more cracks will emerge in the coalition.
Some EU countries have recently expressed concern about the refugee crisis. More than 5 million Ukrainians have crossed a border seeking sanctuary; many have fled to Poland. The number of refugees will continue to increase.
Focusing on Ukraine risks neglecting other international challenges, including Iran’s nuclear program; North Korea missile tests; and China threatening Taiwan. With the US and other world powers focused on Ukraine, international actors may see this as an opportune moment to address their grievances.
Russia was emboldened to attack Ukraine because it felt that there would be few consequences, or it could weather the consequences. The international order is not what it was. Russia has been aggressing for decades, using its military in Chechnya, Georgia and Syria.
Governments feel overwhelmed by the enormity of security and economic challenges. They have limited bandwidth to address global problems such as the COVID-19 pandemic, global warming, and countering violent extremism.
Many countries are reluctant to join the US-led coalition against Russia. India procures a significant amount of its defense technology from Russia. Israel, most countries in the Middle East, Asia and Africa are on the fence. These countries don’t have the desire or capacity to confront Russia.
Global inflation has been exacerbated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Inflation, especially increasing energy costs, have a cascading effect on consumer prices.
There is evidence of increased cooperation between Russia and Serbia. We have already seen Serbia acting as Russia’s proxy disrupting regional stability, deploying a Cyrillic-emblazoned train to Mitrovica and limiting the use of Kosovo license plates. Russia has an intelligence outpost in Nis from where it organizes malign influence operations. Russia is a bad actor, generating crises across the region in Montenegro, Bosnia and North Macedonia.
Many parallels exist between Kosovo and Ukraine. Serbia claims Kosovo, like Russia claims Ukraine. Russia says Ukraine is not a real nation. Serbia asserts the same about Kosovo. Both countries have restive minority populations.
However, there is a major difference. NATO already has a presence in Kosovo through KFOR. KFOR’s presence dissuades a large-scale invasion. If Kosovo was attacked, KFOR is already positioned to defend Kosovo. Serbia has considerably fewer resources than Russia. Serbia seeks to amplify its influence by playing the US, the EU, Russia and China off against each other.
The EU has failed to achieve mutual recognition between Kosovo and Serbia through the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. On its side, Serbia has 2 large benefactors, Russia and China, who do not want Kosovo to exist as a nation.
The international community is experiencing a general fatigue from its involvement in Ukraine. EU countries are likely to pressure Kosovo to cut deals in order to avoid another conflict on European territory.
Recommendations
Recommendations are directed toward the Government of Kosovo and Kosovo Albanians.
Counterintelligence
- Own the information environment by developing strategies that target different audiences (e.g. Kosovo Albanians, Kosovo Serbs and EU Member States).
- Get your message out first. By defining the “Truth”, you set the agenda and others will have to respond.
- Understand Serbia’s intelligence network, influence operations, destabilization efforts, and support for corruption that are intended to undermine faith in government, and tarnish Kosovo’s international reputation.
- Expose and counterintelligence cooperation between Russia and Serbia (e.g Estonia model).
- Develop a capacity within the Government of Kosovo to study malign influence operations and develop a counter-intelligence strategy.
Security Concerns
- Develop a mutual defense agreement between the US and Kosovo until Kosovo achieves criteria for NATO membership.
- Establish a longer term and permanent presence of NATO at Bondsteel.
- Engage Kosovo and Albania in a shared counterintelligence program.
- Provide sophisticated defensive weapons to deter aggression by Serbia.
- Expand capacity of Kosovo Armed Forces in accordance with a Membership Action Plan (MAP).
- Strengthen cooperation between Kosovo and NATO, through an accelerated MAP, and the transfer of defensive weapons to Kosovo aimed at deterring cross-border aggression.
Social, Economic and Political Issues
- Encourage more robust US participation in the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue and efforts to gain greater global recognition.
- Promote Kosovar identity independent of ethnicity by addressing the economic needs of minorities and creating more opportunities for both Kosovo Albanian and Kosovo Serb youth.
- Encourage the US and UK to impose sanctions on Serbia now as part of a conflict prevention strategy.
Note: The discussion was organized by the Institute on Foreign Relations (Kosovo) and the Program on Peacebuilding and Human Rights (PBHR) at Columbia University. This report is a summary of the discussion prepared by PBHR’s David L. Phillips. It is not a comprehensive analysis of the meeting. Following is a recording of the discussion: https://youtu.be/NYBGr71-OTw