Editing Rambouillet Agreement (section)

===Aftermath===
Events proceeded rapidly after the failure at Rambouillet. The [[Kosovo Verification Mission|international monitors]] from the [[Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe|OSCE]] were withdrawn on 22 March for fear of the monitors' safety ahead of the anticipated bombing by NATO.  On 23 March, the Serbian assembly issued a resolution that condemned the withdrawal of the OSCE monitors,<ref>{{Harvnb|Herring|2000|p=227}}.</ref> and accepted the principle of "autonomy" for Kosovo<ref name="conclusions">{{cite web| url=http://www.serbia-info.com/news/1999-03/24/10030.html  |title=Conclusions of Serbian parliament |work=SerbiaInfo |publisher=Serbian Government |date= 24 March 1999 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080214160503/http://www.serbia-info.com/news/1999-03/24/10030.html |archive-date = 14 February 2008}}</ref> and non-military part of the agreement.

NATO leaders had expected that a brief bombing campaign would lead to Serb forces withdrawing from Kosovo, hence ending the humanitarian crisis; but [[Slobodan Milošević|Milošević]] may have gambled that his government and armed forces could withstand a few days of bombing without serious harm.<ref name = "Judah 324">{{Harvnb|Judah|2009|p=324}}.</ref><!--
Article 2 of the UN Charter states that "[a]ll Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state";<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter II |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-i/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref> Article 39 stipulates that "[t]he Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security";<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter VII |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-vii/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref> and Article 53 states that "no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council".<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter VIII |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-viii/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref>
== Use of force ==
A highly controversial facet of the negotiations at Rambouillet was the [[Threat of force (public international law)|threat of force]], against the FRY, that girded them.

Article 2 of the UN Charter states that "[a]ll Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state";<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter II |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-i/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref> Article 39 stipulates that "[t]he Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security";<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter VII |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-vii/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref> and Article 53 states that "no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council".<ref>{{Cite web |title= Charter of the United Nations » Chapter VIII |url= http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/chapter-viii/index.html |website= un.org |access-date= 13 March 2016 }}</ref>

Proponents and critics of the bombing differ on, for example, whether NATO's threatened and then actual use of force were violations of the territorial integrity and political independence of the FRY, and whether NATO meets the criteria of a regional agency.<ref></ref>-->