Dilettantes, Poseurs, and Idiots
by Srdja Trifkovic
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
The quality of expert foreign policy analysis and commentary in the United States has never been lower. During the Cold War many area specialists (especially East European-born Kremlinologists) were prone to tailor their analysis to suit their personal prejudices and ideological preferences, but at least their hold on the basic facts of history was firm. Today it’s free for all.
The main culprits are the Washingtonian quasi-academic Agitprop outfits in which not toeing the Party line will cost you your job; but things are hardly better in the commercial sector. “With an unrivalled blend of strategic and tactical expertise, Stratfor specializes in providing situational awareness, focused insight and actionable intelligence in the areas of geopolitics, security and public policy to help our clients prepare for uncertainties and take action for maximizing results,” claims a leading strategic forecasting outfit. Its “Geopolitical Diary” for June 11, “Kosovo Divides the International Community,” combines a poseur’s professional tone with a dilettante’s ignorance.
The report opens with the bland assertion that President Bush’s recent trip to Albania was “historic.” If this term was used in the sense of “the first by a U.S. President,” then it’s meaningless rhetoric; by the same token Mr. Bush’s visits to Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, to name but some, have all been “historic.” If it meant “memorably unprecedented,” we have only the mystery of the President’s disappearing watch to justify the claim. If, on the other hand, Stratfor’s analysts seriously believe that Mr. Bush’s fleeting visit to Europe’s poorest and most lawless country will be remembered in the annals of anyone’s history (except, perhaps, those of Albania itself), they are mad.
In the next paragraph comes the straightforward claim that Kosovo “will be the first real test of relations between the global powers in decades.” If “decades” is another piece of meaningless rhetoric, then instead of Stratfor’s geopolitics you may as well read Wall Street Journal editorials—they come cheaper and take less time. If it is meant literally—“more than one decade,” i.e. at least 20 years—then the assertion, presented as fact (“Kosovo will be”), is absurd. Far more important “tests of relations” were Reagan-Gorbachev summits in December 1987 (eliminating intermediate-range nuclear forces), May-June 1988 (the INF treaty), or December 1988 (armed forces reduction), not to mention the ensuing issues of Germany’s unification, the withdrawal of Russian forces from Central Europe, or—more recently—the major U.S.-Russian dispute over Mr. Bush’s plans to deploy an anti-ballistic missile system in Central/Eastern Europe.
Stratfor’s bland assertion, in the same paragraph, that “the Serbs and Kosovars are growing impatient with the delays” over the final status of the province is factually incorrect. While Kosovo’s Albanians are increasingly impatient for the United States to deliver on the promise of independence—a reckless and destabilizing promise reiterated by Bush in Tirana—the Serbs (including the country’s “pro-Western reformist President, Boris Tadic) want the exact opposite: no artificial and arbitrary deadlines, but the opening of fresh negotiations without any preconceived outcome.
In the next paragraph comes the remarkable claim that “Serbia still maintains a tight hold on the province.” Proponents and opponents of Kosovo’s independence may differ on many points, but both will agree that this assertion is simply untrue. The former argue that Kosovo is already de facto independent, and has been since the 1999 NATO military intervention, which is one reason why Kosovo’s return to Serbian rule is unthinkable. The latter bewail the fact that not even symbolic Serbian presence in Kosovo has been allowed by the United States, in violation of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244 that ended the war.
Stratfor’s assertion that “[t]he relationship between the Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo now has reached a breaking point” implies the existence of two equal, equally intransigent camps within the province. It ignores the reality that the remaining Serbs—less than one-third of the pre-war population—live in isolated ghettos, subject to occasional pogroms and constant violence and harrassment. Stratfor’s depiction of the internal situation in Kosovo is on par with saying, after the November 10, 1938 Kristallnacht, that “the relationship between the Germans and Jews in the Reich now has reached a breaking point.”
“Negotiations between the Serbs and Albanians have failed” is not true, because there have never been any status negotiations between them. In 2006 Marti Ahtisaari presided over a series of highly choreographed meetings in Vienna on a host of peripheral issues (local administration, protection of cultural monuments, etc) and then issued his plan for Kosovo’s independence that was, at its heart, completely unrelated to those previous discussions.
“The biggest roadblock for Kosovar independence is Russia,” Stratfor goes on, “more for Moscow’s own reasons than anything else.” Does this imply that the U.S. motives for supporting Kosovo’s independence are not related to “Washington’s own reasons,” however misguided? That Tom Lantos was not on to something real and bipartisan when he asked some weeks ago “the predominantly Muslim-led governments in this world” and “jihadists of all color and hue” to take note that in Kosovo we have “yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe,” and then repeated that “the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe”?
In any event, for a foreign policy analyst to “reveal” that a great power supports an issue “more for her own reasons than anything else” is the intellectual and logical equivalent of a behavioral scientist “revealing” that the activities of and interactions among groups and individuals are motivated “more by their survival than anything else.”
Stratfor’s brief reference to history is in the same league: “Over the past century,” it says, “Moscow has promoted itself as the protector of Serbia, a fellow Slavic state.” In fact, “over the past century” Serbia did not exist as a “state” between 1918 and 2003, while it was part of Yugoslavia. During that period the relations with Moscow were non-existent between 1918 and 1940, because the Kingdom of Yugoslavia refused to recognize the Soviet state. In April 1941 Stalin did not move a little finger to help Belgrade when Germany attacked Yugoslavia because he did not want to jeopardize the Ribbentrop-Molotov past. Between 1948 and 1956 the relations were again broken, because of Tito’s breach with Stalin, and remained ambivalent thereafter—so much so that the military doctrine communist Yugoslavia always assumed that an attack from the Warsaw Pact was far more likely than from NATO. And finally, in the 1990s Boris Yeltsin repeatedly left the Serbs in the lurch—over Bosnia, the Krajina, and, spectacularly so, over NATO bombing in 1999.
In short, Stratfor’s “analysis” is unadulterated rubbish—but not more so than the output of the United States Institute of Peace, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, or Rand.
As it happens, on June 13 a leftist British daily, The Guardian, gave us—in 700 words—an account of what is going on in Kosovo and over Kosovo that is more accurate and more intelligent than anything produced in American mainstream think-tanks for years.
What is at stake is not just the illegal seizure from Serbia of the cradle of its national history, Neil Clark writes, and rewarding the campaign of violence by ex-KLA members which has driven hundreds of thousands of non-Albanians. There is also the question of whether the U.S. has the right to redraw the map of the world in any way it chooses, and the arbitrariness of supporting Kosovo’s independence but dismissing the claims of the pro-Russian breakaway provinces in Georgia and Moldova. This is the final stage in what has been called the west’s “strategic concept,” Clark goes on, the destruction of the genuinely independent and militarily strong state of Yugoslavia and its replacement with a series of weak and divided protectorates.
Reminding us of the verdict of the Minority Rights Group that “nowhere is there such a level of fear for so many minorities that they will be harassed simply for who they are . . . nowhere else in Europe is at such a high risk of ethnic cleansing occurring in the near future—or even a risk of genocide,” Clark concludes that the creation of another new state in the Balkans will destabilize the region further:
Albanian separatists both in Montenegro and in Macedonia, where military hostilities took place as recently as 2001, will be encouraged. Serbia will face further disintegration: Albanians in the south of the country are keen to be included in a new Kosovo, while Hungarian demands for self-determination in Vojvodina are also likely to intensify. Far from being concerned about this fragmentation, Washington encourages it. “Liberating” Kosovo from direct Belgrade control, achieved by the illegal 1999 bombardment of the rump Yugoslavia, has already brought rich pickings for US companies in the shape of the privatization of socially owned assets. Even more important, it has enabled the construction of Camp Bondsteel, the US’s biggest “from scratch” military base since the Vietnam war, which jealously guards the route of the trans-Balkan Ambo pipeline, and guarantees western control of Caspian Sea oil supplies.
Yes, dear reader, regional impact, ex-Soviet enclaves, control of Kosovo’s assets, Bondsteel, Ambo, Caspian oil: That is strategic analysis. But don’t try explaining that to the dilettantes posing as strategic analysts inside the Beltway; after all, they are only obeying ze orders . . .
[Subscribe online to Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. Click here for details].
1 Comment by Boba Borojevic on 13 June 2007:
Dr. Trifkovic, This is a brilliant and a long overdo slap in the face not only to Stratfor but also to every mainstream media from Canada to the US and beyond !
The significance in Bush’s visit to Albania is that Benito Mussolini was the only foreign ruler before Bush greeted as enthusiastically by Albanians!
2 Comment by Gene on 13 June 2007:
“The significance in Bush’s visit to Albania is that Benito Mussolini was the only foreign ruler before Bush greeted as enthusiastically by Albanians!”
How true but Mussolini was much smarter than Bush. In fact Bush’s dog is much smarter than Bush! I wonder what the leader of Albania did to frighten his people into delivering a good performance for and on behalf of the moron in the White House?
3 Comment by ECHS1967 on 13 June 2007:
Bravo.
4 Comment by Michael Averko on 13 June 2007:
Tragically like Serbia, Russia didn’t exist as a state as well for a good portion of the last century.
5 Comment by Juan De Los Angeles on 13 June 2007:
Bush has definitely demonstrated more than ever the the “Global War on Terror” is a fraud.
The Albanians contribute about a platoon and get someone’s sovereign territory in return.
The Russians and Serbs who have actually fought terror get the back of the hand because they don’t fit the parochial provincial world view.
Meanwhile back at the ranch (almost literally), the borders are wide open.
As Merle Haggard put it, “Let’s get out of Iraq and get back on the track.”
6 Comment by Michael Kenny on 13 June 2007:
I don’t think these “prognosticators” are there to tell the truth. They are trying to manipulate public opinion by creating the false impression that what their paymasters want is already established fact (i.e., you’re wasting your time trying to stop it!). The whole neocon/Israel Lobby “mouvance” is a master of this sort of thing. In fact, its the old Dr Goebbels tactic: repeat a lie often enough and people start to believe it simply because “everybody’s saying it”.
7 Comment by Iliya Pavlovich on 13 June 2007:
Gentlemen, allow me to verbally explore some other possibilities, which could be called “secret agenda” if they were proved to exist.
Kindly employ your suspension of disbelief for the next few minutes and ignore the Orwellian overtones – I’ll get back to that at the end.
GW Bush is anything but stupid – I can’t speak about his dog. The old diabolical premise that a person should start with a dozen “What if..” questions whenever there is some obvious fallacy, could prove worthy in examining this last most unlikely visit to a most unlikely ally, for most pedestrian reasons – UNLESS….
This is where some mélange based on thinking, intuition, ghost stories and history comes to exist. For brevity’s sake I’ll ask and answer most questions:
1. What if it was a goal of the Western powers all along to continue where Hitler left off?
1A: It would make perfect sense – re-united Germany now even has a pope. World dominance is a serious business and should not be treated as if were only found in Marvel comics.
2. What if “divide et impera” was a sustainable political goal?
2A: It never went out of fashion, it remains one of the most potent political tools, while it is motivated by the idea of splitting a large system into manageable portions of a larger “whole”
3. What if there were solid plans how to attack and destroy Islam?
3A: Extremely difficult to prove since American policy allows far too much tolerance to such an obvious Hater of all things American, on the other hand we need the oil so we can’t alienate all the Muslims just yet (see divide et impera section above)
4. What if eradication of islam was planned (we know they are playing “war games” – so are we).
4A. The potential eradicator would need a real massive army – lots and lots of humans on all continents in order to insure lasting victory. Islam is no pushover.
5. What if the Allies were not able to provide such massive manpower on all continents at all times?
5A. Let’s envision a plan where Islam had devoured chunks of other people’s lands (Kosovo from Serbians, Chechnya from Russians, etc. etc.) This would make the land-loosing parties a natural, spontaneous ally to the impending eradication without any need of re-creating the Gulf of Tonkin, Archduke Franz Ferdinand accidental presence in occupied Serbian lands coinciding with St. Vitus Day (end of June), or the Bay of Pigs type, of poorly staged melodrama. By virtue of such pre-arranged political and economic subjugations, the Allied Powers would be able to foam up to the point of getting more than enough people who wouldn’t even be aware they were “volunteered” by prior actions of those same “allies.
There you have it in clear stages:
1. We support the peaceful Islam (an obvious fallacy, but a well designed shroud on plausible deniability)
2. We support the independence movements of all sorts of marginal ethnic groups far away from our shores (they too can be a source of “volunteered combatants”).
3. Once there is an opportune moment (allowing for an ample surprise, and swift retribution) to stage some sort of a hostile missile fired from the present day’s Russia – we were only “compelled” to act.
4. By virtue of acting with impunity we can rid the world of:
a) Rogue states/regimes
b) Axis of evil
c) Muslims
d) Anybody who doesn’t agree with us
Is it ethical? No, not entirely but the history of those future events will be written by the victors and sanitized of all the nasty little plans that we are unable to understand at present day.
Now you can finish with your suspended disbelief and come back to a more normal mode of thinking. Aside from George Orwell’s overtones we have two much clearer examples, much closer to home.
1. Abraham Lincoln’s presidency and true causes (and nature) of the American Civil War (Dr. Wilson is far better equipped to enter this topic alone, so I’ll quiet down on Lincoln)
2. Huey Long (The Kingfish) said: “if fascism ever comes to America, it will be wrapped up in an American flag, (my interpretation: it will come costumed as national security, or some other safety device – that’s very similar to Fascism’s entry in German daily lives – Völkischer Beobachter was full of warnings and many successes in combating the Anti-German elements throughout the 1930s – that’s pretty close to what we have today in our media.
8 Comment by jack bailey on 13 June 2007:
Extremely important article and dead-on. I think part of the problem is that there is no cost to be paid by jackasses like Bugajski (from one of the must read links in the article) who feels qualified to talk about the Balkans. The personal cost he does not have to pay is his life: If the situation was reversed and Kosovo was wrestled from the muslims, the jihadist suicide bombers would have taken him out a long time ago. This is the crucial difference and I wish someone would have asked him this question in addition to asking how anyone can be so debauched and perverted to claim that this is a great success for democracy worldwide. As far as the new pronouncments on Kosovo by Bush: Of all the major radio talk show hosts, Michael Savage came on the right side here and was outraged by Bush’s behavior while correctly pointing out to a caller that Kosovo has always been a part of Serbia and Christian. You can see the follow-up articles on his site. Dr. Trifkovic, I wish you could get on his show.
9 Pingback by Eunomia · More On Kosovo on 14 June 2007:
[...] Wednesday, June 13th, 2007 in politics, foreign policy by Daniel Larison Albanian separatists both in Montenegro and in Macedonia, where military hostilities took place as recently as 2001, will be encouraged. Serbia will face further disintegration: Albanians in the south of the country are keen to be included in a new Kosovo, while Hungarian demands for self-determination in Vojvodina are also likely to intensify. Far from being concerned about this fragmentation, Washington encourages it. “Liberating” Kosovo from direct Belgrade control, achieved by the illegal 1999 bombardment of the rump Yugoslavia, has already brought rich pickings for US companies in the shape of the privatization of socially owned assets. Even more important, it has enabled the construction of Camp Bondsteel, the US’s biggest “from scratch” military base since the Vietnam war, which jealously guards the route of the trans-Balkan Ambo pipeline, and guarantees western control of Caspian Sea oil supplies. ~Neil Clark (via Srdja Trifkovic) [...]
10 Comment by Sean Scallon on 14 June 2007:
I think passage says it all what will happen if Kosovo is made “independent”
Albanian separatists both in Montenegro and in Macedonia, where military hostilities took place as recently as 2001, will be encouraged. Serbia will face further disintegration: Albanians in the south of the country are keen to be included in a new Kosovo, while Hungarian demands for self-determination in Vojvodina are also likely to intensify. Far from being concerned about this fragmentation, Washington encourages it. “Liberating” Kosovo from direct Belgrade control, achieved by the illegal 1999 bombardment of the rump Yugoslavia, has already brought rich pickings for US companies in the shape of the privatization of socially owned assets. Even more important, it has enabled the construction of Camp Bondsteel, the US’s biggest “from scratch” military base since the Vietnam war, which jealously guards the route of the trans-Balkan Ambo pipeline, and guarantees western control of Caspian Sea oil supplies.
It’s good thing we have Dr. Tifkovic and Chronicles to plow through all the BS for us. Its a dirty job but someone has to do it.
One thing about Kosovo that links to U.S. immigration politics: The Albanians became a majority in Kosovo in World War II and in subsequent years due to ethnic cleansing by the Waffen SS (Albanian branch) and demographic birthrates and intra-migration throughout the old Yugoslavia. If Kosovo can be “independent” through such means, could not the southwest U.S. be joined with Mexico or or become another Quebec through similar means? Clearly the administration doesn’t realse the pandora’s box they are opening if Kosovo becomes independent.
11 Comment by Michael Averko on 14 June 2007:
Jack Baily
As I believe the good doctor noted in another piece of his: Bugajski has served the National Albanian American Congress (hope I’ve its name right) and was a consultant to the Albanian nationalists’ preferred Montenegrin in Milo Djukanovic.
Bugajski has been paid to hustle a certain agenda. He has a clear disdain for mainstream Serb and Russian views.
In the US, there’s a market for his kind of advocacy. This is why I’m not a great fan of a supposed Russia friendly media person, who has given Bugajski an easy time. Ditto some of the other court appointed Russia friendlys, who haven’t done such a great job when matched against Bugajski
12 Comment by Disgusted on 14 June 2007:
How many of these commentators are intelligence plants, freemasons, or both? Where’s Malcolm Muggeridge when you need him –
13 Comment by David Rolfe on 15 June 2007:
Michael Kleen has posed the following question on VDare -
“… if George W. Bush is in favor of such irredentism in the Balkans, how does he feel about it here?”
and has offered the following reply –
“He gave his answer when he openly supported Senator McCain and Senator Kennedy’s Amnesty/Immigration Surge bill. It would open the floodgates to immigration in the Southwest and give citizenship to millions of Mexican nationalists who, like the Albanians in Kosovo, have no love for their adopted country and who seek the eventual cultural and political severance of large swaths of territory.”
If so, the more far-sighted think-tanks are probably working on the required ‘analysis’ at this very moment.
14 Comment by Ljubinko Jovicic on 20 June 2007:
Mr. Trifkovic,
still I am looking forward to see “An Open Letter”
published in The Chronicles Website.
Kind regards
Ljubinko Jovicic
Auf deutsch: Mühsam ernährt sich das kleine Eichhörnchen.
15 Comment by comrade sandalio on 20 June 2007:
The parallels with Serbia and its negotiations with Kosovo are remarkably similar to that of Israel and its negotiations with Palestinians.
Both involve western states facing Muslim insurrections and outside powers impatient to create yet more Islamic states.
16 Comment by Ljubinko Jovicic on 22 June 2007:
AN OPEN LETTER
To British Journalists
Kosovo,Mr. Blair and others
Unfortunately, not-inbedded, unbiased journalists push aside Mr. Blairs primordial sin: warmongerings and 78 nights of bombing Serbia. Ethnic cleansing and mass executions as casus belli is still common place May I expose my personal experience on the events.
Ten days before NATO raids took place, I finished my ski vacation at the Sara mountains (Sarplanina) on the boarder to Macedonia. I can proof it with receipts, photos, audio tapes and a copy of my interview with the Free TV station Studio B. En route to Belgrade I visited the towns Strpce, Drenica and Pristina which were at peace. Some ethnic cleansing! An atypical walker sauntering without problems among Albanien population. Police, paramilitaries not visible.
On different locations at the time, Albanian peasents used to temporary leave villages for the woods during the fights between the rebels and federal forces, only to teturn home with sease fire.
With the initial air raids, the local Albanians moved toward Macedonia, Christians, Turks and Ashkenazi tried to reach the heartland of Serbia. Also some atrocities by federal troops occured, pushing the Albaninans to leave the country, but that was not reason for illegal war, because it took place in aftermath of attacs. The bombing of Kososvo cities is wa tscared the people and put them on the road.
General Clarc was proud of “conducting and winning of a modern war”. Martial effect was lousy: som dummy tanks destroyed, one suicide pilot shot down, catastrophic demolition of industry and residental communities, casualities among civilians as consequence of “colateral damage”. Destruction of the bridges over the Danube was idiotic because contingent of the army troops in Vojvodina was insignifcant. Bombing of the tecnical wing of TV Beograd (some 20 blue collar victims) was authorised by Mr Clinton because “there was the center of lies and propaganda”. What should Almighty do to Fox News then? Invite Kristo to wrap up the construct? Attac on maternity Hospital, bombing of refugie treks, scattering cluster bombs garnished with depleted uranium over residential quarters… Targets were marked by then Bundeminister Scharping, a former Strassenjunge, later suspendet for petty corruption. This charactter spoke at Bundestag about concentration camps in Kosovo which-as it turned out later-were nonexsistent. The other marrksman was general Reinhasdt, sciom of Prussian militaries. Later as the Albanins were slaughtering ethnic Serbs, he declared “in Kosovo is less crimes than in Hamburrg”.
Nowadays, the number of casualities in combats between the Serbian Army and Albanian rebels is officialy fixed at abot 20.000 victims on both sides. After the 1999 bombing the western media were talking about 20.000 dead Albanians, possibly 100.000 dead. Fortunately it turned out that nothing of that was true. Rcently, in “Free Kosova” the christian orthodox medieval chorches and monasteries were blown up or burned down, elderly residents killed, 35.000 persons expulsed, the others dislocated. As the journalists asked Mr Blair for the opinion on the events in Kosovo, he could not comment whilst “actualy dealing with global problems”. However, your colleages cried “have we bombed the wrong side?”
Ljubinko Jovicic
Mr. Trifkovic, dear Chronickes readers,
I mailed my text to Mr. Timothy Garton Ash at Guardian.uk, to Mr. Sidney Blumenthal, to academics Cavoski, Kosta and Vasilije Krestic. I asked them to help by publishing the text. Without response. Mr Robert Fisk at the Independent was in the field during the attacs. He confirmed my reporting.
17 Comment by Nomen Nescio on 22 June 2007:
Dear Mr. Jovicic,
Thank you for the most valuable information provided in your letter.
I took the liberty of correcting the spelling errors in your letter. Since I do not have your e-mail address, please find the corrected version below:
—————
AN OPEN LETTER
To British Journalists
Kosovo, Mr. Blair and others
Unfortunately, not-imbedded, unbiased journalists push aside Mr. Blair’s primordial sin: warmongerings and 78 nights of bombing Serbia. Ethnic cleansing and mass executions as casus belli are still commonplace. May I expose my personal experience on the events.
Ten days before NATO raids took place, I finished my ski vacation at the Sara Mountains (Sarplanina) on the boarder to Macedonia. I can prove it with receipts, photos, audio tapes and a copy of my interview with the Free TV station Studio B. En route to Belgrade I visited the towns Strpce, Drenica and Pristina, which were at peace. Some ethnic cleansing! An atypical walker sauntering without problems among Albanian population. Police, paramilitaries not visible.
On different locations at the time, Albanian peasants used to temporary leave villages for the woods during the fights between the rebels and federal forces, only to return home with cease-fire.
With the initial air raids, the local Albanians moved toward Macedonia, Christians, Turks and Ashkenazi tried to reach the heartland of Serbia. Also, some atrocities by federal troops occurred, pushing the Albanians to leave the country, but that was not reason for illegal war, because it took place in aftermath of attacks. The bombing of Kosovo cities is what scared the people and put them on the road.
General Clark was proud of “conducting and winning of a modern war”. Martial effect was lousy: some dummy tanks destroyed, one suicide pilot shot down, catastrophic demolition of industry and residential communities, casualties among civilians as consequence of “collateral damage”. Destruction of the bridges over the Danube was idiotic because contingent of the army troops in Vojvodina was insignificant. Bombing of the technical wing of TV Beograd (some 20 blue-collar victims) was authorized by Mr. Clinton because “there was the center of lies and propaganda”. What should Almighty do to Fox News then? Invite Kristo to wrap up the construct? Attack on maternity Hospital, bombing of refugee treks, scattering cluster bombs garnished with depleted uranium over residential quarters… Targets were marked by then Bundminister Scharping, a former Strassenjunge, later suspended for petty corruption. This character spoke at Bundestag about concentration camps in Kosovo, which – as it turned out later – were nonexistent. The other marksman was general Reinhasdt, scion of Prussian militaries. Later, as the Albanians were slaughtering ethnic Serbs, he declared, “there are fewer crimes in Kosovo than in Hamburg”.
Nowadays, the number of causalities in combats between the Serbian Army and Albanian rebels is officially fixed at about 20,000 victims on both sides. After the 1999 bombing, the western media were talking about 20,000 dead Albanians, possibly 100,000 dead. Fortunately, it turned out that nothing of that was true. Recently, in “Free Kosova” the Christian Orthodox medieval churches and monasteries were blown up or burned down, elderly residents killed, 35,000 persons expelled, the others dislocated. As the journalists asked Mr. Blair for the opinion on the events in Kosovo, he could not comment whilst “actually dealing with global problems”. However, your colleagues cried, “have we bombed the wrong side?”
Ljubinko Jovicic
18 Comment by Nomen Nescio on 22 June 2007:
P.S.
Also, “on the boarder to Macedonia” should be “on the border of Macedonia”. Etc. (I do not guarantee I corrected everything.)
19 Comment by Ljubinko Jovicic on 24 June 2007:
Dear Nomen est Omen,
Thank you for your interest and help.
Ljubinko Jovicic
Nikole Sovilja 6
11050 Beograd
Rest of Serbia
phone +381(11)44-476-70
E-mail jovihaljubinko@yahoo.com
ljubinkojovicic@732.laposte.net
Send me a word. I would like to inform you about my political background.
Could you try to publish brushed-up text in US newspapers?
Thank you iun anticipation
Ljubinko
20 Comment by EMete on 24 June 2007:
To Gene::
Learn or do not distort history: Benito Mussolini never paid a visit to Albania !!!
21 Comment by Boba Borojevic on 25 June 2007:
Re: 21EMete you do not know your own history!
Mussolini visited Albania on several occasions. Here is a link to a photo of Mussolini in Albania with his military commanders directing the attack against Greece in 1940:
http://www2.fhw.gr/projects/cooperations/f_policy36_45/en/photo/410.html
After Italy conquered Albania in 1939, Mussolini did make visits to Albania. Mussolini and his foreign minister Ciano sponsored a Greater Albania that included Kosovo from 1941 to 1943, when Germany took over Greatre Albania. Carl Savich talk about this material in his piece KOSOVO’S NAZI PAST. http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/
Mussolini and Ciano sponsored Greater Albania, then Hitler and Himmler became the main sponsors in 1943 when Italy surrendered. I will see if I can find specific dates for Mussolini’s visits to Albania.
22 Comment by EMete on 27 August 2007:
I understood what you mean by Mussolini’s visits to Albania. You call ‘visits’ his inspections of Italian troops in Albania. This is another pair of shoes. On such ‘visits’, Albanians could not turn out on the streets to show their “affection’ for him because they might have not known that he had ever ‘landed’ on the occupied Albanian territory.
23 Comment by AnnoupGop on 4 October 2007:
Привет.
Продаю персональный сертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Всё чисто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерянные документы. Всё законно.
Если нужно, то есть сертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Это не спам. Не пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
24 Comment by AnnoupGop on 7 October 2007:
Привет.
Продаю персональный сертификат WebMoney за $99.
Можете проверить: WMID 322973398779 Redfern
Всё чисто, не одной жалоб. Сделан на утерянные документы. Всё законно.
Если нужно, то есть сертификаты ещё.
Стучацо в личную почту на Вебмани.
Это не спам. Не пишите на мой WMID жалобы в арбитраж Вебмани.
25 Trackback by Anonymous on 13 December 2007:
youngkeafs…
In spite of valley, elements philip Jamie Elle. Youngkeafs Raven Black youngkeafs added principal. …