The President’s Painted Corner
A prudent power will always seek to keep open as many options as possible in its foreign-policy making. An increasingly rigid system of alliances, coupled with mobilization blueprints and railway timetables, reduced the European powers’ scope for maneuver in the summer of 1914 and contributed to the ensuing catastrophe. The United States, by contrast, entered the war in 1917 because Woodrow Wilson wanted to do so (rightly or wrongly), not because he had to do so.
A mature power will never allow its promises to foreigners to entail risks of conflict that exceed the benefits of discretion. Bismarck would have been appalled at the manner in which his inept successors had committed Wilhelmine Germany to upholding and defending the moribund Habsburg Empire, come what may. The end result was the death of both; but, without that carte blanche from Berlin, Austria could have behaved more responsibly in July 1914, possibly saving Europe from self-destruction.
A sensible power will not allow its weaker overseas protégés to call the shots. Algérie Française was not a colony but an integral part of metropolitan France inhabited by millions of non-Arab French citizens who believed that they were owed open-ended protection. De Gaulle told the pieds-noirs that he “understood” them; then, he promptly cut Algeria off when he decided that the cost of keeping her exceeded any possible benefits. This painful act enabled the Fifth Republic to embark on an economic and political recovery that halted half a century of decline.
A rational power will not create new hotbeds of instability while the old ones remain unresolved. Mussolini’s unprovoked attack on Greece in October 1940, while his forces in North Africa were at grave risk from the British, was a madness repeated on a grand scale in June 1941, when Hitler unleashed the Barbarossa even though England remained undefeated.
And finally, a responsible power will avoid foreign entanglements that violate its moral and cultural norms. The Crimean War was a crime; the Eastern Question, its punishment. Supporting jihadists against Christians in Bosnia in the 1990’s has yielded scores of Bosnian-trained or -connected jihad-terrorists.
Washington’s Kosovo policy violates all five principles.
It is not prudent for the United States to insist that Kosovo should and will become independent—as President George W. Bush did in Tirana last June, followed by similar sermons from Dr. Rice and her aides on an almost daily basis—even as it is obvious that Russia will veto any attempt to achieve that goal through the U.N. Security Council, and even as the European Union is increasingly reluctant to participate in any scheme to bypass the United Nations. Statements by U.S. officials that Kosovo’s independence is “inevitable” are a classic case of irresponsible policymakers painting themselves into a corner on a peripheral issue, and then claiming that the issue had morphed into a test of American resolve.
A mature, self-confident and globally hegemonistic “hyperpower” would never allow Kosovo to become such a test for three reasons.
Quite apart from its historic, cultural, moral, and legal aspects, the issue of who controls the southern Serbian province is perfectly irrelevant to American interests. It is a small, land-locked piece of real estate, of dubious “objective” value, away from all major Balkan transit corridors, and not nearly as rich in natural resources as both Serbs and Albanians like to imagine. If Kosovo were to disappear tomorrow, no ordinary American would be able to tell the difference.
The change of Kosovo’s status against the will of Belgrade, in addition to being a clear violation of international law, would set a precedent potentially detrimental to U.S. interests. To enable an ethnic minority to secede from an internationally recognized state on the grounds of that minority’s numerical preponderance in a given locale would open a Pandora’s box of claims all over the world, not least among Russian speakers in the Crimea, parts of Estonia and Latvia, northern Kazakhstan, and eastern Ukraine. It could also affect the future of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and perhaps even California, when Mexicans achieve a simple majority in those states. (The question is indeed “when,” not “if.”) State Department officials Nicholas Burns and Daniel Fried still insist that no precedent would be set by creating an independent Kosovo, but they cannot control reality, and their assurances are nonsensical.
The Muslim world will not be appeased by Kosovo today any more than it was appeased by Bosnia a decade ago. America will not earn any brownie points among the world’s “Jihadists of all color and hue” (to borrow a phrase from Rep. Tom Lantos) for creating a new Muslim state in the heart of Europe. Albanian “gratitude” would prove as valuable to America today as it has, over the years, to Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and Communist China. On the other hand, the failure to create an independent, internationally recognized Kosovo would be yet another sign that Emperor Bush has no clothes and that America has no sureness of touch. Furthermore, favoring the imposition of a “solution” from the outside against the will of one of the parties could set a dangerous long-term precedent for Israel.
Our policy is not sensible. It panders to the aspirations of a small and primitive, yet shrewdly opportunistic, polity with territorial pretensions against all of her neighbors. President George W. Bush declared in Tirana last June that America is committed to Kosovo’s independence, and he was greeted almost as enthusiastically as Benito Mussolini, Nikita Khrushchev, and Chou En-Lai had been greeted by the Albanians over the decades. As Nicholas Stavrou noted in the National Herald, Mr. Bush reflects the Albanians’ talent for choosing patrons who fulfill three criteria: They must be big enough, far enough, and willing to offend the interests of Albania’s neighbors:
President Bush’s venture into the Balkan tinderbox is nothing short of a blatant provocation aimed at two nations that stood side by side with the United States in two wars, Serbia and Greece. It is part and parcel of a neo-conservative agenda, formulated by the same gang that produced the Iraq war . . . and threatens to engulf the Middle East into a regional conflagration. The ultimate goal, of course, is the conversion of Russia into a first class enemy. The new Cold War warriors view the Balkans as a “logical extension of the Middle East” that ought to be part of a new arrangement that would facilitate integration of Islamic and non-Islamic cultures. Russia, in their view, cannot be trusted with any role in their nefarious schemes to “modernize” Islam and redefine the Middle East as a “region that starts in the Persian Gulf and ends in Sarajevo.”
It is plainly irrational to insist on Kosovo’s independence, with all the risks such a policy entails, while the United States faces so much other “unfinished business” around the globe. The list is well known and depressing. Iraq is a disaster, and there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Afghanistan is a lesser calamity only when compared with Iraq. Any solution to the challenge presented by Iran will depend on Washington’s ability to have Russia on its side as a partner, which is impossible if Moscow’s concerns over Kosovo are treated as illegitimate. Russia is also an essential partner in helping control Kim Jong Il and devising a sustainable long-term energy policy for the Western world.
Far from being deterred by Washington’s apparent commitment to Kosovo’s independence, Russian President Vladimir Putin sees it as a golden opportunity to embarrass Mr. Bush and show the world that Russia can no longer be treated with the disdainful arrogance she endured under Boris Yeltsin. With the Bush administration’s options diminishing, Putin’s are increasing.
On the diplomatic front, Russia can and will veto any resolution presented to the Security Council that is based on Ahtisaari’s moribund plan and that assumes independence as the final outcome. Resolution 1244 cannot be legally bypassed, and it is unequivocal concerning Serbia’s sovereignty. If the European Union (under American pressure) tries to bypass the United Nations, however, Putin can retaliate by playing his energy card. According to Russian and global-affairs analyst George Friedman of Stratfor,
The Russians would cut supplies if provoked. Kosovo really is that big of an issue to them. If they gave in on this, all of Putin’s efforts to re-establish Russia as a great power would be undermined. Putin wants to remind Germany in particular—but also other former Soviet satellites—that thwarting Russia carries a price. If the European Union were to unilaterally [sic] act against Russian wishes, Putin would have to choose between appearing as if he is all talk and no action, and acting. Putin would choose the latter.
According to the same source, Putin also has a military option. Contrary to popular belief, the Russian military retains an excellent core, particularly in its airborne regiments. Moscow could fly a regiment of troops to Belgrade, use Serbian trucks to move to the administrative line dividing Kosovo from the rest of Serbia, and threaten to move into Kosovo to take their place in KFOR:
To do this, they would have to fly through Romanian or Hungarian airspace. They might be denied over-flight privileges, but the Russians might not ask permission and [the Rumanians and Hungarians] have no appetite for that kind of confrontation. Assume, then, that the troops reached the Kosovo border and crossed over. Would KFOR troops open fire on them?
Of course not. Western Europe is heavily dependent on Russian natural gas, and it cannot afford to follow Washington into an open-ended confrontation over a peripheral issue. Signals from Moscow indicate that challenging Kosovo’s independence militarily would prompt Russia to call NATO defense capabilities into question, which could leave the Europeans even more fractured. “Do not assume that the Russians would not dare try such a move,” the Russian source insists:
The Russians are itching for an opportunity to confront the West—and win. In the case of Kosovo, should they choose to make an issue of it, they have the diplomatic, economic and military options to force the West to back down. Condoleezza Rice has said that Kosovo will never be returned to Serbian rule. Putin would love to demonstrate that it doesn’t matter what the U.S. secretary of state wants.
In short, Kosovo is an asymmetric issue. Mr. Bush cares about it only as it relates to U.S. “credibility.” The second greatest blunder of his presidency may result from his willingness to accept the assurances of inherited Clintonite bureaucrats of Mr. Burns’ ilk, who have insisted that the Serbs will cave in and that the Russians will budge.
If push comes to shove, Mr. Bush will face Moscow all alone. There is a great deal of dissent in Europe, from Madrid to Athens to Bucharest and Bratislava, but not even those Europeans who are nominally pro-independence—notably, the Germans—would sacrifice a single day’s supply of natural gas over Albanian claims. By contrast, this is, for Serbia, an existential issue and, for Russia, a litmus test of her ability to be a great power once again.
The most important reason the United States should not support Kosovo’s independence is and always has been cultural and civilizational; but trying to explain that to the chief executive who is fanatically supportive of a blanket amnesty for tens of millions of illegal aliens in the United States is as futile as trying to reform Islam.
George W. Bush has painted himself into a tight corner in the Balkans, and he will get a bloody nose if he does not relent. That is bad news for the church-burning Albanian Muslims of Kosovo, and bad news for their heroin-financed lobby in Washington, but it is very good news for America and the civilized world.
Srdja Trifkovic is Chronicles' foreign-affairs editor.
This article first appeared in the August 2007 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of Culture.
83 Responses »
Trackbacks
- Eunomia · No Independence For Kosovo
- News | Serbian Unity Congress » Drawing the Line - A Fight Empire Can’t Win, antiwar.com/Nebojsa Malic
- » The Badly Painted Corner The Third Site: Resources and discussion of the proposed U.S. Missile Defense Project in Eastern Europe
- Jessie
- the role of horses in the civil war
Entries(RSS)
Just as it was during the height of Stalinism the recent history gets deleted and a new one written in its place. I own several large dictionaries but often I doulbe check to see if the Internet version supports the definition I found in a hard copy. My old American heritage disctionary (1976 edition) has the word Arnaut listed as a noun Turkish in origin designating Albanian persons who served their stables and catered to Turkish army. The 2006 and 2007 American Heritage no longer has that word. I suspect that pages 103 to 120 in most old dictionaries will be worth a lot of money on account of this politically correct omission. Even most Albanians refer to themselves as Arnauts. The word is well deserved and equally true.
I told you before you live in a fluxional world ---- Now for the god's sake is Manhattan!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And the last
The word Serbs according to the same dictionary derives from SERV = service = slaves = servants. The word is well deserves and equally true
..."Mean envy vomits forth darkness upon your illustrious grave,
but who can put out the powerful, celestial light of your soul?
Miserable, ugly darkness - can it dim the glow of such light?
Darkness hides from the light, and yet it only makes the light more bright[22].
The life-giving flame of your torch will shine for the Serb forever,
and it will grow more luminous and miraculous for ages.
Serbian women used to give birth to Dusan[23] and nurse Obilic[24],
and now Serbian women give birth to such heroes as Pozarski[25],
all wonderful and noble men! Serbdom breathes nobility now.
Away from the Serbs, you vile curse - the Serbs have now fulfilled their vow![26] .."
"The Mountain Wreath", by Serbian writer, Petar II Petrovic Njegos
Unlike the available public sources which substantialy show that Aranut is a noun of Turkish origin meaning a servant in the Turkish Army - stable cleaner, living in the mountinous regions of today's Albania - the only variation of the noun Serbs is Sorboi which in no way traces any of its roots to servant, slave and similar rubbish. Even the worlds dictionaries are indicative of Albanian lack of Christianity and their LOW station in life under the Turkish occupation. Let alone the fact that it was London (after Creamiean Wars - fought to protect Turkey - but on Russian soil) was the sole creator of Albania. How come no explanation to the presence of all the Serbian churches and so many Serbians on what is claimed to be Albanian lands? Why don't wee see McDonald's in the Afghan mountins of Tora-Bora, or Bagdada, Kabul? Those are equally hostile grounds to the U.S. Perhaps you are avoiding to mention the obvious - these lands were Serbian and remain Serbian.
If the linguistics are to be the sole source of the land's origin, we must take into account many of the villages in KosvO: Obilic, Vucitrn, Glogovac, Urosevac, Suva Reka, Klina, Lipljan, Janjevo, Kamenica, Zubin Potok, Istok and Brod. Anybody that has even the remotest knowledge of Serbian language will see that these are all Serbian words. Not to mention the following about the name of the entie province:
By: J. P. Maher Ph. D.
Professor Emeritus of Linguistics
Northeastern Illinois University Chicago
"Kosovo" is a Serbian place name, more fully "kosovo polje", meaning the 'field (or plain) of blackbirds'. "Kosovo Polje" lies just outside the city of Prishtina.
Ornithology lesson: Among North Americans, Australians, and South Africans, only ornithologists can identify the species in question. Kosovo's "black bird" is no crow, nor raven, no starling nor grackle, but "turdus merula", European cousin of the North American rusty-bellied thrush ("turdus migratorius"), which Yanks call the "robin".
In Britain and Ireland "robin" is the name of another species, "erithacus rubecula".
(The "four and twenty 'blackbirds' baked in a pie", of the English rhyme, were of the species "merula", in Serbian called "kos". From this term "kosovo" is the derived possessive adjective.
Like America's harbinger of spring, the black bird called "kos" in Serbian language sings sweetly in the springtime and early summer.
For North Americans the feel of the Serbo-Croatian place name "Kosovo" can only be had from a free translation, "Field of Robins".
Albanians have borrowed the word from the Serbs, whose once overwhelming majority was driven down, especially since the Congress of Berlin, by savage aggression from Albanians incited then and in WW I by Austria-Hungary and Germany, in World War II by Mussolini's puppet Albanians, and after WW II by the discriminatory ethnic cleansing of the Stalinist dictator Josip Broz.
Native Indian place names in America have no meaning in English: e.g. "Michigan" means nothing in English. In Ojibwa "mishshikamaa" means "it is a big lake".
Just so the place names of Ireland have transparent meaning in Gaelic but are meaningless tags in the colonialist English, e.g. "Dublin" is Gaelic "dubh lin" 'black pool', and "Kildare" is "cil dara" 'church of the oak',
Just so the names of the Serbian province of Kosovo are clear Serbian formations, but have no meaning in the Albanian language.
Proof of the Serbian origin of the name and the loanword status of the immigrant Albanian term is that the word "kosovo" has a clear etymology to anyone who knows a Slavic language, while Albanian "Kosova" is an opaque, meaningless place name in the Albanian language.
Kosovo is Serbian.
(End of quoted text by Professor Maher)
It's pretty clear, with or without Manhattan that Kosovo is named by Serbians using Serbian names all accross the province (the villages I chose are scattered all over Kosovo (Brod in the very South; Mitrovica in the Very North; Novo Brdo, Kamenica in the far East and Istok, Pec, Decani, Junik in the far West), not a single Albanian name.
Mr. Mona clearly shows that Albanians ARE Turks by any other name by stating "In 1912 Serbia conquered Kosovo. In 1999 Serbia has lost its colony, through the intervention of the NATO bombing campaign. In 2007 Serbia tries again to gain domination to his colony, through the process of the “status resolution”.
It is therefore most logical that all Albanians (from Kosovo, Albania and elsewhere) return to their mother ship (Turkey) - which is in its own right wrestled away from the Greek Anatolia.
I'll never forget a Sunday afternoon lunch several years ago with my relatives in East Tennessee... some of them had been watching media reports regarding the "genocide" in Kosovo, and they said, "How could we not go in and help those poor, poor people?"
And I thought, "Boy, East Tennessee was dumb in 1861 and is even dumber now."
Mr. Popovic,
In 1912 Albanian people began first the revolt on Ottoman power. The Serbian-Montenegrin alleance intervened in the conflict when the Ottoman power was in colapse in the Albanian territories. So, Serbia and Montenegro fought more against Albanians than against Turks.
hi
Albanian territories? Visoki Decani, Pecka Patrijarsija, Gracanica, over 150 churches that your people burned under supervision of the New World Order? Illiterate albanian islamized tribes built them? Why then did you burn them?
Revolt on Ottoman power? Maybe some albanian tribes found Ottoman rule to oppressive from time to time. Serious albanian resistance to Ottoman power was almost nonexistent.
Re:"NATO state"
In a statement to the Tanjug news agency, Serbian PM Vojislav Kostunica stressed how unfavourable it is that Ahtisaari’s plan for the Serbian province of Kosovo-Metohija envisages that NATO should play a role in the province which no other military organisation has ever played in the democratic world.
Is it in the American Interest to give NATO unlimited power as to attack, partition and occupy parts of a sovereign state and practically disregard any existing law? Whom does NATO answer to?
All of you people should fear what the Zionst is doing to our country,forget about the Balkins they are lost!
Mike Popovich says: "Albanian territories? Visoki Decani, Pecka Patrijarsija, Gracanica, over 150 churches that your people burned under supervision of the New World Order? Illiterate albanian islamized tribes built them? Why then did you burn them?"
Which New World Order? It sounds like communist rhetoric. Was NATO instrumental or did it aid and abet people to burn your political tools turned churches and monasteries?
Why did the Albanians burn them? As I have heard and read, religion and state in Serbia and Greece are the same. The state serves the Church and the Church helps the state to carry out the policies, which have the blessings of the Church. Church-State - one and inseparable.
Serb churches and monasteries in Kosova have always been the spearhead of Serb ultranationalism. They are political instruments in pursuit of the Greater Serbia idea.
Don't the Albanians understand this fact? This fact is known to all the Serbs too, but they hide it. Some do not know it and believe what the Serb ultranatioanlists have cooked up.
One quick question:Why did the Serbs themselves burn their own churches? To tell the World that the Albanians did?
How bad!
Too sad!
This article is so boring! It repeats the same old stale theses that the articles on the Kosova issue on this website dish up to the readers.
In fact, the most interesting part are the comments on the comments and not the article, especially those by I.P., the initials of Iliya Pavlovich, used by a reader who posts his/her comments on this website, and those by a certain Bee Bee (Boba Borojevic) and an M.P. which somebody may think stand for Member of Parliament. I would like to call on the above persons in particular to concentrate on the article. If they don’t, I am sure they must have experienced the same feeling as mine, which is why, they are attracted to what others say or make up.
The above persons’ negative and offensive reactions to other people's comments, especially the comments posted by Albanians are understandable. This is what happens when you hear things that you have never heard before, which is dependable on what you have been educated with, what you have read and what propaganda you have been subject to. I think it’s nobody’s fault.
In this comment, which is more or less similar to one I have posted about another article, I'll dwell in passing on some issues that the above gentelmen or some others who are not aware of the real state of things, always raise in their posts on the different articles that appear on this website.
That the Illyrians are the forefathers of today’s Albanians is true beyond any doubt /see: http://members.lycos.co.uk/illyrians/ Arguments, no matter how they are presented, should not be disregarded out of hand because somebody has not heard or read about them before. Every argument, despite the source, should be taken seriously. This is what I always do, no matter how it is worded or who dishes it up, be it the “famous” I.P., Bee Bee, or somebody else.
As to the names ‘Albania’ and ‘Albanians’, I would say that they derive from ‘Arber’ [the name of an ancient Illyrian tribe] or ‘Arberia’ [the country of the Arbers, the Albanians]. Such terms to denote Albanians as Arvanitis (Greek), Arnauts (Turkish), Arberesh (Italian) derive from the term 'Arber". The terms 'Albania', 'Albanians' are used by foreigners to denote the country of the Albanians and the Albanians themselves. Such names have gone through a process of evolution.
The change of nations’ names through the ages is not a new phenomenon. The inhabitants of today’s Greece, for instance, were not always called Greeks. The denomination ‘Greek’ is relatively new. Or, let’s take the name of the country of the Serbs, ‘Serbia’. Until the 1930s, Serbia was called ‘Servia’ and the Serbs were called ‘Servians’ from the Latin word ‘servus’ meaning ‘servants’, or ‘slaves’. The terms ‘Servia’ and ‘Servians’ make sense because the Serbs came to the Balkans as mercenaries, namely, as servants of the Byzantine emperor in 630 AD. And the Servians (servants) settled in part of Illyrian territories, which we call Serbia. Why do we say ‘Serbia’ and not ‘Servia’, today? In 17th and early 20th century English works, the country was often referred to as ‘Servia’. The usage of this term offended the Serbs because “Servia”, as already said, linked the Serbs to the Latin ’servus’, a slave or a servant. Because of the protests by Serbs, the British press stopped using the term by the 1930s, because, as can be seen, it was too offensive to the Serbs.
The other Slavs (Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians) had settled in other parts of Illyria not long before the Serbs set foot on Balkan soil. They mingled with the Illyrian local population and today, we have such names as Croats, Slovenes and Bosnians (Muslim, Catholic or Orthodox), the product of the then admixture of the local population and the new comers. As to the origin of the names Croat, Slovene and Bosniac, I would like I.P. or Bee Bee to give us some explanation as the experts that they are.
As regards Constantine the Great, he hailed from today’s Nish (Naisus) located in Serbia. Since Nish is in Serbia, it does not mean that he was Serbian and not Illyrian. Things are not as simple as that. In his time, the Serbs were still living in Asia. Since the majority of scholars consider the Albanians to be the descendants of the Illyrians, we may as well say that Constantine the Great who made Christianity the official religion of the Empire, must have been Albanian. But this does not exclude other options. For example, he might have come to Naisus from Allemagne, Galia, the British Isles, Normandy, the Alps of Switzerland or from the Baikal Lake area, the original location of the Servians. Nothing can be ruled out. The question is: How can you prove that he was not Illyrian and that the Albanians are not the descendants of the Illyrian population that lived in what until recently was called Yugoslavia? You can in no way rely on hearsay or wishful thinking. Far from it.
Don’t blame others when they say something you don’t know. Blame yourself for not knowing it.
-- Dan Burton, Indiana Republican, ranking member of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Subcommittee, writes in the Washington Times on August 20:
..."But against this clear standard for Kosovo's future, the U.S. State Department has insisted the only possible solution for Kosovo is not autonomy, but independence — even though Serbia refuses to give up 15 percent of its territory. Even worse, during his recent trip to Albania, President Bush suggested that if a Russian veto blocks any new Security Council Resolution to separate Kosovo from Serbia, the U.S. might take the lead in recognizing a unilateral declaration of Kosovo independence with no legitimate claim of authority at all. Within Europe itself there are growing misgivings and decisions about this course.
This is a terrible idea. To start with, our policy is in contravention of international laws and will create a dangerous precedent. Also, there is no reason to suppose an independent Kosovo would be a viable state, either economically or politically. Terrorist and organized crime influences, already rampant in Kosovo, would be granted a consolidated haven for their operations. Independence would likely be followed by renewed anti-Serb attacks, at least against the smaller enclaves, if not against Northern Mitrovica, where most of the remaining Serbs enjoy relative security. Unrest in neighboring Albanian-dominated areas of southern Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia, even Greece, could be reignited.
Perhaps most damaging, an imposed separation of Kosovo from Serbia would send a message to other trouble-spots, not just in the Balkans, that state borders are up for grabs.The American relationship with Serbia would suffer badly if we insist on inflicting on a democratic country of 10 million people an offense they cannot accept and never will forget. An imposed separation of Kosovo, the cradle of Serbia's national and spiritual life, would alienate Serbs of all political stripes and could very well result in the implosion of Serbian democracy, with incalculable negative consequences. In short, an imposed independence of Kosovo could set the region back another decade."...
As with any genuine negotiation, the eventual outcome cannot be foreseen with certainty. However, it is certain that unless we hit the reset button and reevaluate the situation, Kosovo may once again become a trouble-spot requiring American and NATO attention at a time we can least afford it. As Kosovo re-emerges from years of obscurity, we neednow to take another serious look at America's options and long-term interests. As I stated before, the solution must come from negotiations between Serbia and Kosovo Albanians.
Kosovo’s Grim Future – David Binder, Washington Times
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20070829/EDITORIAL/108290006/1013
..."They continued: "It is a Mafia society" based on "capture of the state" by criminal elements. ("State capture" is a term coined in 2000 by a group of World Bank analysts to describe countries where government structures have been seized by corrupt financial oligarchies.
In the authors' definition, Kosovan organized crime "consists of multimillion-Euro organizations with guerrilla experience and espionage expertise." They quote a German intelligence service report of "closest ties between leading political decision makers and the dominant criminal class" and name Ramush Haradinaj, Hashim Thachi and Xhavit Haliti as compromised leaders who are "internally protected by parliamentary immunity and abroad by international law."
The U.N. Mission in Kosovo, they add, "is in many respects an element of the local problem scene." They describe both UNMIK and KFOR as infiltrated by agents of organized crime who forewarn their ringleaders of any impending raids..."
Is it only me, or is it a fact that Albanian posts are composed of nothing but hatred. This is a welcome observation as it is indicative how Albania (with or without KosovO) will be served (justice only as an abstract noun, peace - only as War and Peace in literature, etc.)
Mr. Srdja Trifkovic,
I wanted to personally thank you for the book. It made a big difference in my understanding of the Muslims and what is happening in Europe.
Must Reading
The Sword of the Prophet
by Srdja Trifkovic
http://www.amazon.com/Sword-Prophet-History-Theology-Impact/dp/1928653111/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0896254-8892905?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1188414364&sr=8-1
For $14.00, what a bargain, one of the best reads ever.
Some background on me, I am of Northern Greek descent, raised in Canada, well read on history, especially Ancient History, I knew my Grandparents well and know my people,
know what the Muslims, Turks, Bulgarians, and Communists did to my people. Your book was valuable in understanding history, what, where, when, why, how ?
You have always been a leader.
Again Thank You.
It is must reading for those that have not read it. A lot of documentation and leads for further more detailed study. No one can deny the dirty facts, especially when the source is Muslim Jurists, in their own words.
The Muslims are happy to make us slaves.
Wake up people.
To post better and realistic comments and learn more about Kosova and the Balkans, read: Madeleine Albright “Madam Secretary”, Miramax Books: WHY DID THE WEST START THE AIR WAR AGAINST SERBIA, pp.379-381)
Reply to Mr. Iliya Pavlovich (Comment 33 above).
I guess it is not difficult for you to guess whether I am a Mr. or a Mrs. as you apparently have been visiting Albania time and again in your UDB (acronym for the Yugoslav Security Service) missions since the early 80s. Thus, probably we could even converse in Albanian together. Now retired probably you have enought ime in your hands to spill hatred and hurl insults about Albanians on internet.
You beg to differ with me on the following phrase: “Albanians drama was being unfolded and was covered by all media on those difficult days of 1998-1999.” Please go back and watch the footages broadcasted during that time from all tv channels. Lies and fabrications as the ones you bring forward in every posting you write can stick only in a Milosevician/Seselj world (although I might be doing too much honour to Seselj to compare him with the Master). So whatever point of reference you take it is difficult to cover or tone down the horrible consequences of that campaign of 'ethnic cleansing'.
It's a pity to hear your complaining about the Albanian lobby being stronger than the Serb one. It's not a mater of lobbying. Your government pays good money to fill the world with anti-Albanian propaganda. Thus, hurry up and make sure you can tap in it also as many others amongst whom probably also your beloved Mr. Trifkovic.
Facts spoke for the grim fate befalling the Kosovar Albanians in 1998-1999. Lobbying was hardly necessary. The forced biblical exodus of Kosovar Albanians from Kosova under the threat of Serb police, military and para-military troops was obvious to all. Thanks God we live in a different era where information travels with light speed so the world could see on time what the Milosevic's regime was doing to Kosovar Albanians.
You ask me the question: "Could there have been crimes from the Albanian part?" Probably there have been. And some have already been punished for that in the post-war Kosova. However, those small-scale incidents at most would be uncomparable to what a military machine trained in the killing, maiming, torturing and raping civilians all over former Yugoslavia was busy with in 1998-1999. What is Serbia doing to prosecute those persons who were killing innocent Albanians? Less than nothing. Your beloved Mr. Trifkovic, once an accomplice to war crimes criminals, now turned academic, could tell you more about the skills of the boys of Karadzic and Mladic. Or maybe you could go and ask them in person. If you don't know how to contact them then ask Mr. Trifkovic, he might tell you their whereabouts.
BBC: Russia 'won't bargain on Kosovo'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6975724.stm
2007/09/03 08:33:04 GMT
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has warned that Moscow will not give in to pressure over "red line" issues such as missile defence and Kosovo.
Mr Lavrov said Russia could not remain passive in the face of any threat to its national security.
"Such issues include for example the US plans to set up bases in Eastern Europe for a global missile defence system, and a settlement for Kosovo", he said.
Russia opposes a UN blueprint to give Serbia's Kosovo province independence.
Russia does not engage in bargaining, and its international partners should realise this, Mr Lavrov said in a speech at Moscow's prestigious Institute of Foreign Relations (MGIMO) on Monday.
Russia says the planned US missile defence shield is a threat to its own security.
The US argues that it needs to install anti-missile systems in the Czech Republic and Poland to counter possible threats from "rogue" states, such as Iran and North Korea.
Mrs. Zyban Albangqrxep, No UDBA didn't exist in 1980s it was abolished in the mid 1950s, I am glad that you are following my writings here if you remember how I visited Albania many times (as I did, but mainly the northern half) and it was during the 1970 and 1980s (both decades) and never ever saw one Christian chruch in spite of your claims to have some elements of Christianity. However after you (Albanians) have implemented the act of state capture (as defined above) I would remind you that most dictionaries printed prior to 2005 list the word ARNAUT to mean exactly Stable boy in Turkish Army, the one who cares for horses, inhabitants of today's Albania so no need to keep trying to invent some "iliryan past and berber connections" berbers are people of Norhtern Africa or the type of carpets defintely not Albanians. By the way my vote still stands on reversing the mistakes of 1912 London and getting Albania off European soil - Turkey is your natural mother and would welcome you back - right? Ms. Zigquixcep?
Peculiar how you found a convenient system of weights and measures according to which Albanian crimes are "minor incursions" violations, while Serbian crimes are all major felonies. Are you kidding or are you deranged? How can there be such a vast difference? Have there not been Serbians KILLED by Albanians or do you want me to publish the names of Serbians KILLED by Albanians? That is the essence of your Gestapo workings you began to belive your own lies.
I.P (73) says: "I visited Albania many times (as I did, but mainly the northern half) and it was during the 1970 and 1980s (both decades)"
I don't believe it. He makes it up. In what capacity did he visit Albania's northern part? As a businessmam, I very much doubt it or, may be, he must have been participating in some cloak-and-dagger operation there. But why should we question what he says. It is most likely that he must have visited Kosova or I'd better say that part of it which lies to the north of Albania.
Unable to reply to an insult to my address by Boba Borojevic (42) posted on article THE DISHARMONIOUS "TROIKA" because my comments have been denied access there, I would only say to him: "Civility please, Mr. Borojevic! Personal abuse is indication of a weak mind."
Couple words about my background - I lived (legally
for 12 years in the US, and moved back to Moscow (Russia) 4 years ago. War in Iraq was a strong factor. So, I hope I understand US cultural context enough to be able to communicate here.
This is a very nice article, but I can't agree with the point that Kosovo's independence would be a huge loss for Russia.
Putin is great player (I admit that for one I moved to Russia due to a simple reason that I wanted to cast my vote for him and enjoy the show). So - Russia may be indicating that Kosovo's independance is completely unaccaptable because in fact Russia would only win from this and secretly wants that to happen.
One thing to understand here - Serbia is not in alliance with Russia, not a close friend, not a darling - none of a kind. Yes, indeed languages are very close due to some quirk.
In general people have been indoctrinated in Russia that Serbia is not our friend. Stalin and Tito were not friends. So, we had known very well that the reason for the 1st World War was - Serbia, that Russia got drugged into the war - because of Serbia. That resulted in communists coming to power etc. etc. So people say here - "we really don't want to get into a 3rd world war bacause of Serbs AGAIN".
Back during soviet time there were two kinds of international travel passports - one for "friends" (Poland, East Germany, Bolgaria, Chechoslovakia etc.), it was relatively easy to travel there as a tourist. To travel to the West there was a differenct kind of a passport. In order to get such one had to go through a lot of approvals and it was possible to obtain the "capitalist" passport only after "socialist". So the point of this excursion into history .... guess which kind of passport was required to travel to Yugoslavia? "Capitalist", it was technically treated as the Western country.
Now, what Russia stands to gain from Kosovo's independance:
1) EU is not Russia's friend. Another muslim state in EU is bad for EU.
2) conflict with Serbia and EU - more brownie points
3) PRECEDENT - There are 3 de-facto independent states around Russia that Russia would gladly recognize - Osetia, Abhasia and Pridnestrovie. These are de-facto countries, and there is a potential in Crimea, Baltics, Eastern Ukraine. Russia was cut very unfavourably with lots and lots of Russian population left outside of Russia. The other way round... Chechnja is obedient now, and I don't see other serious claimers for independence now. Tatarstan is anclave inside the Russia territory and have been part of Russia for 600 years, and then initialy it was Russia that was occupied by Tatars, so I don't see them willing to leave in practical terms.
4) many nations all over the world would hate US for this precedent - more brownie points
Now, of course all that is not good for the US. I still do not understand and never understood the whole point about Kosovo - my theory is that neo-cons are really not educated at all about history and Serbi/Russian relations, so they THOUGH that with Kosovo they will cause a lot of pain to Russia. In fact it acted only as a trigger for Russia's understanding that is should protect it's own interests in the first place, since US would try to do any kind of harm and damage to Russia, even imaginary harm, or non-harm, but not for the lack of desire and trying.
My dearest Mr. Pavlovich,
I noticed that the time you wrote your coment was a bit early in the morning. Had you drank your coffee maybe you would have been more polite towards me. But anyhow...I don't mind. As a French proverb goes: "The spit of the frog cannot catch the white dove."
I'm not going to comment on your affiliations with the UDBA... Not necessary. Now there are two possibilities concerning your comment about you seeing no churches during the 70s and the 80s in Albania: either you're ILL-INFORMED...or you're a LIAR. I'll let you choose between the two.
For the benefit of the others who read OUR early mornings entries the communist regime that was established in Albania after WWII (with the help of the Yugoslav Communist Party) forbade religion in Albania in 1967. At that time many religious objects were destroyed. No wonder you did not see many of them (none, according to your claims). The communist regime had many of them razed to the ground. However, the ruins of old churches were still there during all times. I come from what is now Northern Albania Mr. Pavlovich and I can tell you one thing or two about the north of Albania. That's where religion was still practised even under the nose of one of the most dictatorial regimes in the world. In my village we celebrated Easter and other religious feasts even then..albeit not openly (my family of Muslim origin and other families of Roman Catholic belief). The church was always there...although it was not functional and people buried their dead in its yard all the time..even during communism. That information might help you a little bit to refresh the memory or awaken it to the Reality as IT IS and not as you want it to be.
Let me also give you a lesson of history. It's free of charge. You can better use your money for caviar and champagne.
Albanians have been stable boys and Grand Vezirs in the Ottoman empire...just like other people from other ethnicities! They have been soldiers and generals throughout history..they have been illiterate and scholars...they have been brick-layers and great architects that have designed objects that pertain now to the world heritage... The problem you have is not that you don't know or you don't understand..you just don't want to accept that Albanians can be good, or create good things, or that ultimately are a force to be reckoned with...But it's not only your problem...it's a general problem you seem to have on a national level...Too bad, how sad...
Because you're left with little to argue you resort to personal insults. I'll not deal with them. Spreading lies and being disrespectful to others will not earn you any admiration. I don't expect words of this kind as the ones used above to come from a learned person as yourself..but then being a good person and reasonable is not only a matter of education.
This analysis is a little bit naive. The world is not a big game of "Risk" ( a board game where Ukraine is weak-Seinfield episode). As said from Vassili, i think, Russia gains more from Kosovo independence and also by "firmly opossing" it they gain the right for first dips in the next big move after Kosovo is independent (or if, according to some), Putin is very smart after all he served in KGB and who knows what they are bargaining for maybe pipelines, Georgia, the Arctic. I also got the feeling that Mr (or Dr., sorry) Trifkovic is some what waiting for this mayheim of army interventions to occur. This is a sick scenario (and unlikely to my opinion) that serves well only the real jihadist wherever they are. A war between NATO and Russia is nonsense and serves no good to any of the two, so i don't see them making this huge tactical mistake over the tiny nation of Kosovo (or region according to others). Also it will be detrimental for Serbians and Albanians (ethnic or otherwise).
Another point is that Albania is not a muslim state, eventhough i don't know you definition of a muslim state. Many "muslims" or even "orthodox" from Albania are only so in name (like me i tell people i am orthodox because i have to tell them something but i only go to church for Christmas and Eastern), i have seen more covered women in my mid-size comunity here in US than in my home town in Albania. Albania has no laws that actually favor one religion versus another, what i like about it is that religion is significantly separated from the state (at least more than in US) and no one cares what religion you come from. The first time i was asked for my religion was in The States. I realise though that some of these facts might not resonate well with the conservative comunity in US. Anyway i also don't think that Kosovo will become a kaliphate once independent. Why do i think that kosovo should become independent? For the simple fact that they can not live in the same state with serbs anymore (or vice versa), history has shown it to be imposible and so does this thread. It is tragedy, it really is given the things we actually have in common.