The Kosovo Drama Escalates
A deeply divided UN Security Council failed to break the deadlock over Kosovo on Wednesday. Russia and China remain adamant that there can be no imposed solution, and no valid proclamation of independence outside the Security Council framework. The United States, Britain and France—which support Kosovo's independence—say further talks between the parties are pointless. They appear intent on encouraging Pristina's unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) and its subsequent recognition through NATO and the European Union, thus bypassing the Russian veto at the UN.
The exact timing of Kosovo's UDI will depend on Serbia's domestic politics. Almost a year ago, the unveiling of the infamous Ahtisaari plan—the blueprint for the province's illegal secession from Serbia—was delayed by the United States and her West European allies from January 1, 2007, until after the parliamentary election in Serbia on January 21. The reason was frankly stated in Washington and Brussels: the need to help the "pro-Western, reformist" Democratic Party (DS) of President Boris Tadic in its bid to secure as many seats in the national legislature as possible by pushing its old agenda of "Euro-Atlantic [i.e., EU-NATO] integrations."
It was assumed, reasonably enough, that Tadic's starry-eyed Europhoric supporters may have second thoughts about continuing their support for Serbia's integration into those same institutions that underwrite and condone amputation of one-seventh of her sovereign territory for the benefit of a bunch of Albanian heroin kingpins.
We are witnessing the same ploy all over again. Tadic and his allies in the Assembly of Serbia have conspired with the European Union to gerrymander a "quickie" presidential election on January 20, in order to preempt the looming unilateral declaration of "independence" by Kosovo and the subsequent recognition by the United States and some of the EU countries.
Just one day after the election was announced—illegally and unconstitutionally, according to Prime Minister Kostunica's Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS), which is still DS's partner in the current coalition—a top EU official was quoted as saying that "it may take until the spring" before the status of Kosovo is finally determined.
The DS, the Bush Administration, and the EU bureaucratic machine have a common agenda in pushing ahead with the election now. If the presidential race is over before Kosovo declares its independence, Hashim Thaci's pending declaration, aided and abetted by Washington and Brussels, supposedly won't impact the outcome of the race. Tadic gets duly reelected, to provide a "reasonable" voice in the Serbian leadership that will not veer away from the cherished Euro-integrations come what may.
Cheat me once, shame on you; cheat me twice, shame on me. The latest public opinion surveys indicate that Serbia will not fall for the same ruse again. Most people reject "integration" into the European Union—let alone NATO—on the condition of self-mutilation. If the European Union persists in its transparent attempt to recognize Kosovo's pending illegal secession by default, it will be actively opposed by Serbia. As Kostunica declared at his UN Security Council address on Wednesday, any unilateral declaration of independence would be "null and void" and would never be recognized by Serbia.
All negotiations on Kosovo were doomed to fail because the U.S. Administration had declared from the outset that independence was the preordained outcome which would be reached "one way or another" (in the memorable phrase of Dr. Rice). The Kosovo Albanian leaders—a repellant crew of war criminals and dope peddlers with jihadist ties—could afford to sit back and dismiss out of hand any proposal that fell short of what the Americans had promised.
Serbia's Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, who will retain his post regardless of the outcome of the presidential contest, has a number of options if this happens. They range from the blockade of the secessionist province—which gets two-thirds of its food and consumer goods and essential electricity supplies from central and northern Serbia—to the declaration, supported by parliamentary vote, that Serbia is no longer seeking EU membership (let alone that of NATO) and would henceforth develop closer political, economic and military ties with the resurgent Russia. Breaking off or severely downgrading diplomatic relations will those countries that recognize Kosovo, and effecting the province's partition by Belgrade while continuing to claim sovereign rights over all of it, is also imminent.
Serbia's response will have a limited impact on the countries outside the region, but that will not be the end of the story. Russia, China and India, and dozens of Asian and African countries with secessionist problems—including South Africa and the most populous predominantly Muslim country, Indonesia—will deem the move illegal and invalid. The theory that outside powers can award part of a state's sovereign territory to a violent ethnic or religious minority, only if that minority is able to provoke a violent government response and secure a "humanitarian" intervention from abroad, would put in question the borders of at least two-dozen states.
Yes, pro-Albanian lobbyists will say, but the Serbs' mistreatment of their Albanian minority has disqualified Belgrade from running the province ever again. Well, first of all, there has never been any "genocide" in Kosovo by any definition. At it very peak in 1998 it was a medium-sized local conflict that killed some 2,000 people on all sides: as lethal, proportionate to the population, as the lethal crime in Washington, D.C., during that same period.
By accepting at face value the standard claim of "genocide" by, say, Tamils, Chechens, Palestinians, Kurds, Kashmiris, etc., etc., the "International Community" (i.e., the United States and a few pliant West Europeans) will create endless problems for itself. Furthermore, the theory that parts of a state�s sovereign territory should belong to a "discriminated against" ethnic or religious minority with a localized plurality would also be an argument for the extension of "Aztlan" or La Repubblica del Norte to the Bay Area, Denver and Dallas.
Several EU member-countries (Spain, Slovakia, Rumania, Greece, Cyprus, Malta . . . ) will not toe the line whatever Brussels says. Israel is understandably apprehensive of the precedent that a solution to an intractable political and territorial quarrel can and should be imposed by outside countries, even if one of the parties rejects the proposed solution as contrary to its vital national interests.
On balance, U.S.-sponsored Republic of "Kosova"—while apparently difficult to avoid at the moment—is likely to be as stillborn legally as it is already collapsed economically, socially and morally.
We are facing yet another Balkan drama of mainly American making that promises to be . . . well, interesting, which is to say highly destabilizing for the region, detrimental to European security and incomprehensible to at least half the world.
State Department bureaucrats still claim that Kosovo would not set a precedent, but their words cannot change reality: it will. The "frozen conflicts" in the former Soviet Union may be defrosted with a bang, and the best Kosovo could hope for is to become a frozen conflict itself.
90 Responses »
Trackbacks
- Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture | Your Home for Traditional Conservatism » Kosovo: A New Day of Infamy for a New Century
- Kosovo: A New Day of Infamy for a New Century : Novakeo.com
- News | Serbian Unity Congress » Kosovo: A New Day of Infamy for a New Century, The Chronicles Magazine
- Grotesque Charade Srdja Trifkovic on Kosovo « What Do You Believe?
Entries(RSS)
Dr. Trifkovic I admire the way you explained the whole problem of the Kosovo “game”.
Regarding a pro-western [Serbian] President Tadic [DS – Democratic Party] and his call for the election to be held in January, is it not time for DSS [PM Kostunica’s Democratic party of Serbia ] and Radicals in Serbia to join forces and defeat DS for ever?
In case of Tadic’s defeat what is West going to do to Serbia?
Perhaps Serbia, Russia and a host of other countries should recognize the Lakota Indians who today seceded from the United States. Unlike the Albanians of Kosovo, these Indians have been sovereign before and their status as U.S. citizens has been contingent on the U.S. having kept treaties which the U.S. has not. It would be interesting.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html
If Russia sends in a couple of brigades of its resurgent army and threatens to turn off the natural gas spigot, will Germany (and thus the EU) be so keen on a confrontation? Would Bush, up to his eyeballs in Iraq and Afghanistan, be inclined to take action.
Putin might relish a crisis in which he might well prevail, just to say "Russia is back."
Shades of Gavrilo Princip.
Dr. Trifkovic,
Excellent points you make regarding the hubris and hypocrisy of the United States' foreign policy. That Little Bush and the rest of the busy bodies in the US foreign policy establishment should see fit to stick their noses where they don't belong (as if Iraq weren't enough) is not all that shocking. The US "we know what's best for your country" attitude has been plaguing the world (and America's own citizenry) at least since Woodrow Wilson's presidency. If Kosovo comes down to a shooting war with the Serbs and Russians on one side and NATO on the other, how many of their own body bags coming home will the US and EU tolerate before they give up their arrogant and stupid plan to dismember Serbia?
(Re. comment #1)
Boba is more than right. With 81 seats out of some 249 in the parliament, Nikolic's Radicals (SRS) make the strongest single party in Serbia. Kostunica's DSS has 33 seats, CIA's DS has 60, Socialists have 14, etc. A SRS/DSS coalition could easily coalesce with smaller parties to form absolute majority. It is high time Serbia woke up.
(Re. comment #3)
"... If
Russia sends in a couple of brigades of its resurgent army and threatens to turn off the natural gas spigot, will Germany (and thus the EU) be so keen on a confrontation? ..."
Doubtful. (Dingoes are a menace only in a pack.)
"... Would Bush, up to his eyeballs in Iraq and Afghanistan, be inclined to take action ..."
Doubtful too. ("DoD" dares pick only on small and weak. Such as Iraq, Afghanistan (and even then loses).)
The real problem, however, is with that "If".
"[O]f mainly American making". Yes, that is the silver lining! The EU will inevitably blame the US, although I doubt if much will be said publicly. It will blame the US for causing trouble in Europe, dividing the Member States and disturbing the ever closer relationship with the huge Russian democracy, which, if Putin become Prime Minister, will ressemble the US all the less and the rest of Europe all the more. Needless to say there will also be the unspoken suspicion that this is not entirely a screw-up. In addition, all the little conflicts which it sets off will kill off "liberal interventionsim" for good, as there will just be too many "good causes"!
A point of information for Grumpy Old Man. Serbia is landlocked and does therefore have direct access either to the high seas or international airspace. Even if Russia was stupid enough to want to send troops, which it is not, and even if its army had any desire to fight, which it does not, there is no way that they could get to Serbia without invading half of Europe!
I don't think Russia wants a fight, and probably couldn't mount a major land offensive without a regional war, but she could fly in enough forces to establish a tripwire that ought to make NATO quite nervous.
Couple that with the gas pipeline spigot and things could get ugly.
We haven't seen brinksmanship lately, but a country with thousands of nukes that is brandishing long-range bombers again should not be taken lightly.
The other issue is precedent. What makes the Kosovo Albanians different from the Basques, the Catalans, the Corsicans, and the Turkish Kurds? Or the Italian Lega Nord, for that matter?
Grumpy Old Man (# 8) forgot to mention Nagorno-Karabakh. The violence here began following pogroms by Muslims against Christian Armenians in both Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan proper. The Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh have infinitely greater justification for an independent state than the Albanians of Kosovo (whose "state" would, of course, be a de facto province of "greater Albania"). Yet, Anglo-American policy is to officially deny that the Armenian genocide took place, to encourage a blockade of Armenia by Turkey, to freeze Armenia out of energy policy, and to strengthen Azeri forces so that they can eventually seize control of Nagorno-Karabakh, with the by now de rigueur ethnic cleansing of Christians.
By the way, have you noticed that a key story of the 1990s Balkans is political cleansing? So extreme is Anglo-American/Western bias against Eastern Christians and in favor of Islam that almost every Western intellectual and bien-pensant who supported some form of communism in 1968 "redeemed" himself or herself--and joined the formerly despised "establishment," to usually excellent profit--by supporting Islamists in the Balkans. An excellent case in point is French Foreign Minister and self-promoter Bernard Kouchner, a former Stalinist. As Viceroy of Kosovo, he worked hand in hand with groups like the National Endowment for Democracy, with its heavy concentration of displaced Trotskyites and their spoiled offspring, to turn Kosovo into the ethnically and religiously cleansed narco-dependency that it is today, though worse is yet to come. It might as well have been Russia after the Revolution, as communists of all stripes gleefully destroyed every Orthodox Church that they would come upon. In reality, in the 1990s Balkans, the tradition of Western Communism was the big winner, and these people today dominate the Republican Party, through the singularly misnamed neo-conservatives, and the Democratic Party, through the Sorintern, the web of phony "human rights" and "social justice" organizations created or controlled by George Soros, the multibillionaire currency speculator and convicted insider trader. There is, therefore, scarcely a real right or a real left to be had in America today, and we Americans have become, effectively, political serfs.
I think most people don't get it.
This is going to be a long fight.
It will hopefully be us, the Easterners, who will set the timing.
just_a_serb
By "fight," do you mean a military struggle = war; or do you mean a political, diplomatic, economic "fight," or perhaps both.
Based on what I know - and it is frankly limited - I stand as an outsider with the Serbs in this instance, meaning with the Serbs who do not want to give up Kosovo.
My question to you is as follows: You have seen what war can do - modern war - to your country? Are the Serbian people, particularly the youth, really willing to endure? Do you really believe that Putin, when the chips are down, will, in whatever form, come to the aid of Serbia? I do not ask that question cynically against or toward Putin; I simply do not know.
Are you willing to run the risk of losing such an encounter, of having your country further splinted and of losing Kosovo anyway?
Hopefully, your seeming willingness to fight is a result of having fully reflected on the possible consequences and as a result you are approaching this moment with grave and sober resolve and not war bravado. Men, women, children and the aged die, are maimed, are tortured, a wounded, are psychologically twisted and are displaced, often for ever, in war. I am no pacifist; yet, as a Christian, I am compelled to apply the just war standard; and, as you know, the just war standard goes beyond merely having a moral and legal reason to fight.
I would like your feedback.
Well Kosovo should be Serb.. That much we agree. However letting the Radicals run the show would be pure madness, as these people are completely out of touch with the reality. And if they get to be in charge it won't be long before they get rid of Kostunica and completely screw everything up. This had always been the $64 question. How can Serbia ever develop into a viable society considering that the likes of Seselj always manage to stiffle the good and the decent people. The mentality and the desire to return the clock to 1946 is ever present and that is what the Kosovo controversy is really all about. As much as I would like to see Kosovo stay within Serbia it's gonna be very hard for Kostunica to pull this off. However, it is completely in his hands. If he does, he'll secure his place in history. Otherwise the things will turn more or less the way the West had planned it all along. It may get messy in which case NATO will invade Serbia, but the decisive support from Russia will not be there. This has been the history of the conflicts between the West and Russia dating back to the Berlin airlift.
Well Kosovo should be Serb.. That much we agree. However letting the Radicals run the show would be pure madness, as these people are completely out of touch with the reality. And if they get to be in charge it won't be long before they get rid of Kostunica and completely screw everything up. This had always been the $64 question. How can Serbia ever develop into a viable society considering that the likes of Seselj always manage to stiffle the good and the decent people. The mentality and the desire to return the clock to 1946 is ever present and that is what the Kosovo controversy is really all about. As much as I would like to see Kosovo stay within Serbia it's gonna be very hard for Kostunica to pull this off. However, it is completely in his hands. If he does, he'll secure his place in history. Otherwise the things will turn more or less the way the West had planned it all along. It may get messy in which case NATO will invade Serbia, but the decisive support from Russia will not be there. This has been the history of the conflicts between the West and Russia dation to the Berlin airlift.
# 11 robert m. peters
It was a criminal, merciless and bloody NATO endeavour, which demonstrated that might was right. Serbs did not provoke any NATO intervention nor are Serbs to be accountable for any further confrontation among major powers (Russia vs. USA and the rest).
In spite your “standing with the Serbs” let me remind you that Kosovo Albanians are the one who have threatened the Serbs and the UNS/EU in Kosovo with violence. In fact they have applied it so many times in a most gruesome manner (March pogrom 2004 for instance). America says that it defends its vital interest and American values in Kosovo (by bombing Serbs) and by supporting jihadists and Albanian mafia in Kosovo. Can it be true?
Why do you think that despite US bombing, killing and maiming of Serbs and destroying Serbian land, Serbs should not resist in every possible way?
Concerning post 11
" ... "
"Questions" of the kind is what earns this particular indigenous archetype a bad name. The blissful lack of historical perspective and capacity to comprehend beyond surface can hardly be remedied by showily invoking supposed Christianity. No wonder that in Dante's Hell hypocrites wear leaden robes.
Re: Serb Radical Party
A liberal foreign policy analysis (as well as some others) could say that Western policies are helping the above referenced party.
Membership in a problematically centralized and over-extended EU in return for giving up Kosovo and full cooperation with a flawed kangaroo court is understandably not desired by many Serbs.
Meantime, Russia's star is rising albeit with some problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: "The other issue is precedent. What makes the Kosovo Albanians different from the Basques, the Catalans, the Corsicans, and the Turkish Kurds? Or the Italian Lega Nord, for that matter?"
****
The arrogance of the official US stance, saying there can be negotiations, but Kosovo will be independent. In comparison, Russia doesn't take that position with any of the disputed former Communist bloc territories. Instead, choosing a neutral route of negotiations, without stating what the outcome should be.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: "It may get messy in which case NATO will invade Serbia, but the decisive support from Russia will not be there. This has been the history of the conflicts between the West and Russia dating back to the Berlin airlift."
****
NATO (US) is over-extended enough as is. In the past, the West, Russia and Serbia have been geo-strategic partners. The political faults within the Kosovo Albanian community linger on. Russia and Serbia aren't alone in opposing a diktat supporting Kosovo's independence.
Boba at #14
I did not support and was quite outspoken against Nato's war against Serbia. I oppose Nato's occupation of Serbian territory. It the Serbs are willing to fight, then fine. I simply hope that it is not mere war bravado and that you have soberly and gravely thought through the consequences. I do not see Serbia being able to win a confrontation with NATO without some form of Russian support. Are you sure that it will come? If not, no matter how moral and even legal your cause is, a military confrontation with NATO would be a fools errand and you'll wind up losing more than Kosovo. I know "these people" from the historical encounters that my ancestors had with them; if they defeat you, Serbia will be partitioned almost out of existence.
Jeffery at 15
Jeffery, you are most likely intellectually superior to me; and you are, given the tone of your post, morally superior to me. Therefore, with all of the respect which a lesser is to pay to one quite superior, I humbly ask you to translate into simple English what in Dante's Hell you are trying to convey in Post 15.
By the way, I never apologize for my Christianity even when it is "seen" (seeing is not perceiving) to mask a blissful lack of historical perspective and capacity to comprehend beyond surface.
Your ad hominem does not lend itself to a fruitful discussion, naively assuming as I do that having a fruitful discussion is your intent since it is mine.
Your response would be appreciated.
Talk about spin:
http://greatersurbiton.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/rejecting-false-parallels-why-kosovo-is-not-south-ossetia-or-abkhazia-or-transnistria-or-northern-cyprus/
In comparison, Dr. T does a much better job at directly addressing those views in disagreement with his own.
replay to 17
Win is a relative term. You have to consider time frame. As my uncle says, "We waited for 500 years, so we wait for another 500".
I think US, NATO and EU will blink ( They have not gotten their way so far) . If they don't than we are really in for it.
@ Robert
posts 11 & 17
You don't ask right questions
It's not:
QUOTE
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do you really believe that Putin, when the chips are down, will, in whatever form, come to the aid of Serbia?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It should be that I do believe that Russia will help Serbia any time to the extent:
a) it is possible to Russia to do so
b) Serbs co-ordinated with Russia and are not doing it on their own
So, it's not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I do not see Serbia being able to win a confrontation with NATO without some form of Russian support.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It should be:
I do not see NATO being able to win a confrontation with Serbia without the complete absence of Russia's help to Serbia.
Or, more precisely:
I do not see NATO being able to win a confrontation with Russia without conquoring the Balkans first, as Brzezinsky pointed in his "Great Chessboard", but the things don't go smoothly in case of some form of Russian support to Serbia, which is understandable given the circumstances.
Moreover
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hopefully, your seeming willingness to fight is a result of having fully reflected on the possible consequences and as a result you are approaching this moment with grave and sober resolve and not war bravado.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'm absolutely sober. As I said, it is us who should set the timing this time, unlike the previous seven wars.
BTW, I saw "what it could be done to my country", and it's not impressive. And it's amazing none of you actually see the scope of weakness your military and your leadership demonstrated in the Balkans and in Iraq.
We should be prepared and should be waiting. Perhaps the time when trading in oil will be conducted in more than one currency.
Finally
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
f not, no matter how moral and even legal your cause is, a military confrontation with NATO would be a fools errand and you’ll wind up losing more than Kosovo. I know “these people” from the historical encounters that my ancestors had with them; if they defeat you, Serbia will be partitioned almost out of existence.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Why are you offering the advice nobody asked you about the issues you, yourself, said you didn't know about?
If they had the ability, Serbia would have been partitioned out of the existence - not almost - long ago.
just_a_serb:
Ditto.
just_a_serb,
Semantic games with questions change nothing.
You are willing to fight over Kosovo. Fine.
You will not retain Kosovo in such a fight unless the Russians, in whatever way assist you.
If you lose, you will lose more than Kosovo.
Will the West, NATO, the EU, the United States be willing to fight you? Who knows?
Will they be able to manipulate an "independence" of Kosovo without a fight? Most likely, but perhaps not.
I do not want to see "those people" prevail against you as they prevailed against my ancestors over 140 years ago; however, what I want has nothing to do with the realities of our times. If you want to hold out for victory in five hundred years, then fine. While I embrace eternity, I do not put my faith in counterfeit futures which may never come.
Jeffery at 22
Ditto!
Mr. Peters,
I, for one, appreciate your words of caution. But as many others have said, NATO is neither willing nor able to fight at this point. And even when it was, it could not defeat Serbia - only destroy infrastructure. Things can be rebuilt. Once defeated, a nation cannot.
That is one major difference between 1389 and 1865 (if I understand your analogy correctly): Serbs did not "integrate" and definitely did not "reconstruct" well, choosing instead to fight the Turk at any opportunity. It took 400 years, but in the end, Serbia was free. Serbs may have been subjugated, occupied, tormented, murdered and abused, but never defeated. That's made all the difference.
Why would any Serb in their right mind want to be a part of the EU or NATO who violated their own treaty? The EU and NATO needs Serbia, the Serbs do not need them.
Think about it. Prior to bombing the hell out of the Serbs and doing over $40 billion in infrastructure damage, the Danube River represented 62% of the trade entering Europe. (The majority of the damage in Serbia remains in rubble with little to no assistance in rebuilding by the EU or most NATO countries). This is a disgraceful example of the U.S. "carrot and sticks" form of foreign policy.
NATO destroyed dozens of bridges over the Danube River stopping all trade for nearly 8 years. This reveals an ugly truth about the EU and NATO who proved willing to destroy their own economies in order to spite the Serbs who did not do a single thing to these countries. Why would any Serb want to be a part of such stupid and immoral Europeans?
If Mladic or Karadizic were turned over to The Hague tomorrow the goal post would be moved again and new demands would be made of the Serbian people. This is just a ruse to further destroy Serbia.
The dismemberment of Yugoslavia began
the day the U.S. decided to no longer recognize the Dinar when the exchange rate was 90 to one American dollar. The following week the Dinar fell to less than 10% of its value. I wonder how Americans would react if suddenly the dollar fell to 5 cents? At one point during the war, Peter Brock, author of Media Cleansing: Dirty Reporting, brought me a 500,000,000 Dinar note that was not worth the paper it was printed on at the time. Where were the Europeans who managed to the look the other way as a small nation was being starved to death?
During the oppressive sanctions on Serbia you could not find an Aspirin in Belgrade. Dozens of babies died from a simple lack of antibiotics and dead Serbs were being dug up to retrieve pacemakers. Are the Serbs supposed to forget with these Europeans did to them?
I recall that a loaf of bread in Belgrade costing 5,000 Dinar. I wonder how Americans would react if a gallon of milk suddenly cost $70 or a dozen eggs cost $25? That is what Clinton and Albright did to the Serbian people in this illegal war perpetrated without an Act of Congress, or any vote by the United Nations.
Senator Dole and his ilk destroyed Yugoslavia from within, much like B92 is betraying their own Serbian people, funded by the CIA.
Let us not forget that Germany invaded Yugoslavia in WWII on Palm Sunday killing 17,000 Serbs in one day. Their Croat and Muslim Nazi collaborators went on to liquidate 1.2 million Serbs. Germany was up to its eyeballs in dismembering Yugoslavia in 1991, just like they are up to their old tricks again in Kosovo. "There is none so blind as those who refuse to see."
I hope the readers of Srdja's article are not so naive as to believe that the U.S. spent billions of dollars to build Camp Bondsteel to defend 1.7 million Albanians from 100,000, mostly old Serbs? The media is quite good at criticizing the Russians but have nothing to say about the U.S. building the largest American military base in Europe in Kosovo?
And let us not forget that 40% of those Albanians are illegal aliens who cross the border from Albania into Kosovo as easily as illegal Mexicans cross our border each night in San Diego. Granting them independence because their invasion is a success makes Clinton, Bush, Rice, Albright and Holbrooke accessories to a crime against humanity.
I predict that Kosovo will be made ethnic and religiously pure, just like Slovenia and Croatia and half of Bosnia... meanwhile we Americans pretend to believe in "Equal Justice Under the Law" as etched over the doorway of the U.S. Supreme Court. We are such hypocrites!
Mr. Dorich you said it very accurately.
I would like to believe that majority Americans; Canadians et al. do not support their governments’ despicable cruelty against the Serbs. It is high time for every peace-loving American and Canadian to speak up against the independence of Kosovo and against any kind of Serbophobic rhetoric.
The land of James Bissett, Lewis MacKenzie and Scott Taylor is showing apprehension to toady along:
http://www.serbianna.com/news/2007/03103.shtml
There're other nations as well.
BTW, I understand that Ashleigh Banfield is Canadian. Some might recall that Banfield was a rising star on NBC cable. This was just before she had the gall to second guess the start of the second war in Iraq; during the initial flag waving period at the start of that mistake.
Mr. Malic at #24
I appreciate your understanding my caution. Based on what I know at this point, which is what I said when this particular phase of the discussion on this thread began, I side with Serbia in its attempts to maintain its sovereignty. My hope is, which I have apparently failed to adequately articulate, that those willing to fight to maintain this sovereignty are not just giving cheap war bravado but fully understand the consequences of fighting. If they do, then fine. As to our problem, we are still under our "Turks." We have yet to reassert our sovereignty which Serbia has and struggles to maintain.
Deo Vindice!
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=3yUSx1o-QdY&feature=PlayList&p=12F2C6F7C0D51DAC&index=0
The Lord Byron Foundation for Balkan Studies held a press conference and a public briefing on "Kosovo: A preventable disaster" in Ottawa, Canada on December 5, 2007. The press conference has been posted on YouTube .
This is supposed to be an open discussion. Yet I can not help notice that every contributor is pro Serb. How come there are no other opinions which fall outside of this tiny self centered universe?
The main debate seems to be only on whether Russia will help Serbia, as if this were a repeat of 1914. In fact, Putin is very happy about the whole Kosovo issue. As soon as Kosovo becomes officially independent, albeit under strong official Russian "protest", Moscow will compensate herself by recognising the independence of Abkhazia, and of South Ossetia , perhaps eventually absorbing them, thereby consolidating her hegemony in the Caucasus. So Russia's role in the Kosovo crisis reminds me more of the Russian empress, Catherine II, during the 18th century partitions of Poland. It is always pleasant to weep for the chicken as you dine on its tender white meat.
Perhaps Serbia should graciously and realistically accept its defeat, forget about her dreams of past nationalist glory and in exchange accept the bribe of being allowed more quickly to enter the prosperous European Union . Serbs should be less obsessed with their past and look to the future, devoting themselves to making more money and drinking less from their romantic nationalist past. Enough is enough! Adolescence is charming but it can not last forever!
For her part, the European Community should drop its self- righteous and unrealistic demands for the surrender of former Serb extreme nationalist leaders such as Radovan Karadjic. Former political and military leaders, even if defeated, should not be treated as criminals, no matter how controversial their behavior. Milosevic, himself should not have been brought to trial. An apology by the EU to Serbia for such hypocrisy could well be offered. To treat leaders such as Milosevic and Karadjic as common criminals is in fact an insult to the Serbian nation they represented at the time.
Whatever it should by your views do Phil, it most likely won't in both Serbia and the EU's case.
Russia will do what you suggest if you assume it does not want to hold on to Chechnya, which it does.
A more interesting Scenario is the concept that Russia is trying to bleed America by forcing it to commit to more and more Battle Fronts. If you look at WW1 and 2 it took only a 2 front war to make Germany run out of Steam.
With Iran (or Darfur Depending on who claims the White house, excluding Ron Paul) and Serbia enroute to Conflict with the US that'll be four Fronts for America, couple that with the falling Dollar and a floundering US economy it'll be a Grand ol' time for the US of A.
Add onto that The Republika Srpska part of Bosnia that will cry Foul when Kosovo is amputated and they are denied the same right, Flanders and Wallonia in Belgium, the Basque Regions in France and Spain. Etc Etc Etc
Whatever your point of view its going to be an interesting Match pitting International Law (Russia and Serbia's Stance also the UN's Very Exsistence) vs Might Makes Right ( The US, EU and Nato)
My Personal Opinion is as Follows:
Serbia will fight and it is within its Right to do so, it has all the appropriate Laws and Acts in its Favor. Even if it loses, the act of Dismembering a UN member state will Jeopardize the Sovereignty of every nation on Earth and if they choose that path by fighting Serbia or being Idle in that conflict they deserve to be torn appart and scattered across the four winds like they will do to Serbia and ultimately share its fate (of course not for a long time after in the case of some states).
Now if Serbia wins with Russia's help it will at the very least break another Empires' Teeth on that peninsula which has thus far been too big a bite to chew. Resulting most likely in a Multi Polar World which is for the best, it'll keep all the Heads' of States eyeing each other nervously and not making conquest of the rest of the world as easily.
Ofcourse those in power right now and their citizenship will likely think the latter scenario is bad, but they lack the ability to see things from more than their own perspective which is an all too common weakness of most people, Especially those situated in the West since they have had it far easier than in the East in the last Half of the 20th Century at least.
@ Robert Peters:
You are asking valid questions. Don't bother that people who haven't internalized them fully are getting ticked off.
@ just_a-serb:
Robert's questions are simple and straightforward, they are therefore "right" (contrary to your post #21). He's asked you to clarify some things you've said because he's genuinely interested. No need to treat him like an enemy. Your post #21 doesn't explain anything. And please no bravado like "I saw 'what it could be done to my country', and it’s not impressive"--what, are you going to write a personal check to cover the damage?
@ Jeffrey:
English, please...
@ Phil #30:
Why should Serbia accept defeat? There is no "past nationalist glory"; what are you referring to? Entering "prosperous EU"--c'mon, this is a joke, right? EU is not exactly healthy even without all the moslems it has foolishly imported. I agree that Serbs should look to the future, but I don't see that future in EU. As for your last paragraph--would have, should have, could have, but things happened the way the did, so we're dealing with consequences of what was, not what should have been.
@ D. Popovich
No, I'm definitely not going to cover the damages somebody else incurred, but since you are asking such a question, should I assume you are willing to do the same you are asking me to?
While my reply to robert m. peters should have been phrased more carefully, I have certainly not treated him like an enemy. I'm puzzled why no tolerance to my lack of patience should be granted - why my perception of his "genuine interest" as annoying has been treated more harshly than his or your perception of me treating him "like an enemy"?
You know, the years of mental and intellectual resistance do make the impact on personality. Of course I would have been more socially acceptable and more "successful" if I had renounced the Kosovo plea and opted for an earthly kingdom, which I was expected to do long ago. I didn't and have no tolerance to such offers coming on an hourly basis in the media these days.
While Russian veto on the matter has always been anticipated, the Russian foreign minister's statement is the first official confirmation that Russia would indeed use it.
***
21 December 2007
Sergei Lavrov: We shall veto a one-sided solution of the Kosovo problem
http://www.vremya.ru/print/194702.html (in Russian)
[Сергей Лавров: Мы наложим вето на одностороннее решение проблемы Косово]
"As Kostunica declared at his UN Security Council address on Wednesday, any unilateral declaration of independence would be “null and void” and would never be recognized by Serbia."
"blockade of the secessionist province—which gets two-thirds of its food and consumer goods and essential electricity supplies from central and northern Serbia"
"a repellant crew of war criminals and dope peddlers with jihadist ties"
Really doctor, a nation made up of nothing but war criminals & dope peddlers? No women & children? So I guess your desired blockade of cutting off food, water & essential electricity is ok then? But don't war criminals and dope peddlers live well anyway. So how can your desired blockade hurt these criminals? Or is your eastern menatlity so clouded that your forget about the effects of a blockade on women & children?
Sorry Doctor I don't understand why you hate the west so much and yet why you pretend that you are winning western harts and minds here on this site to your serb nationalist agenda. The articles are informative but I as a faithful & devote Roman Catholic would certainly never support your serb nationalists land grab.
"Grab" as in grabbing something that's already theirs. Are you a sguatter's rights advocate?
"Sorry Doctor I don’t understand why you hate the west so much and yet why you pretend that you are winning western harts and minds here on this site to your serb nationalist agenda. "
Actually, some non-Serbs (including Catholics like Pat Buchanan), seem to believe that the West has taken a self hatred of itself. Likewise: among themselves, Serbs have positive attributes in addition to their own version of self haters.
@ just_a_serb:
You're the one who said (post #21) that you weren't impressed with the damage done to Serbia during the 1999 bombing. That's why I asked 'if the damage was so small, are you going to cover it personally?' Rhetorical question. I don't think it was small, and I sure can't cover it personally.
Re: your last paragraph--nobody is asking you to renounce Kosovo. Robert was simply asking you: if you say you want to do something, have you thought about all the requirements and consequences? You still haven't answered him. And if you don't think such questions should be asked, please read Luke 14:28-32.
@ Michael Warning, #35:
Serbian land grab--what are you talking about? Do you mean something like Manifest Destiny, or Drang nach Osten? Or do you mean colonization of Latin America, Africa, and Asia? Oh wait, those weren't Serbian land grabs... my bad. Those land grabs were OK, because there weren't done by the Serbs.
Mr. Michael Averko you wrote:
“ “Grab” as in grabbing something that’s already theirs. Are you a squatter’s rights advocate?"
Not at all, I just find the current situation with the Serb land garb as a fantastic example of political hypocrisy. Again, let’s go back to 1914. The Serbs refused to be governed by the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. (The doctor does not like to be reminded of this period of Serb history so I will not go into details.) Needless to say, if the Serbs refused to be governed by the Austrian-Hungarian Empire claiming their own indepence from this Austrian-Hungarian Empire and demand that the West acknowledge the sovereignty of the Serbian nation, what makes anyone think that the Serbs have any rights to force lordship over Kosovo?
Honestly. By right or reason the Serbs have no claims on Kosovo.
However the Serbs have the means to take Kosovo by force of Arms. And this is allowed to do in today’s political climate. Take things by force. The USA & Russia are no different in this regard. The Serbs will side with Russia and take Kosovo by force of arms. That is all Serbs understand. Force.
Serbs stop appealing to “reason” or “rights” because it shows your hypocrisy. You have no argument based on reason or right.
Serbs just take what you think belongs to you, enough with the duplicity. It’s sickening.
Mr. D. Popovich
"Serbian land grab–what are you talking about? Do you mean something like Manifest Destiny, or Drang nach Osten? Or do you mean colonization of Latin America, Africa, and Asia? Oh wait, those weren’t Serbian land grabs… my bad. Those land grabs were OK, because there weren’t done by the Serbs."
Land grab: as in what is about to take place with Kosovo. Look, you Serbs lost the argument in Europe and the US. Serbia will now ignore the West and side with Russia and take Kosovo.
What is so hard to understand.
Honestly. Just take the land. Stop posing as if rights and reason mattered in this land grab. Enough of this eastern duplicity.
@ Michael Warning:
Your ignorance (or misunderstanding) of history of the Balkans is appaling. Perhaps you should spend 15 minutes reading on Wikipedia--that would expand your knowledge immensely. Until then, no point debating with you--no soup for you!
@ robert m. peters
Sorry Robert, I'm definitely too tense in such kind of conversation. I assumed you are one of those like that person whom made the comment 35.
I was not speaking about the semantics, it's the entirely different perspectives and the approaches to life between you and me. And the people you were referring to do have much longer record of mercilessness over the weak than 140 years - that's why they will loose eventually.
Here is a bit of my perspective from yet another excellent English speaking author of Serbian origin http://antiwar.com/malic/?articleid=12086 whom already replied to you above.
Long fight assume both diplomacy and arms.
The defeat is not a death in the battle - that's something desirable compared to the pain of a life that's been assigned to us Serbs - the life of a non-free, the life of a servant whom is expected to express the approval of perverted cause and means that's been intensively used to torture us for almost two decades.
The root to that relation to death lies in the religion, of course, but is not exclusive to us, Orthodox Christians - some Balkanese Muslims do have the same approach - I recollect the writings of an excellent writer Mehmed "Mesa" Selimovic and his novel "Dervis and Death".
The defeat would be the acceptance of lies about the causes and events that destroyed not only the country we used to live for about 80 years, fracture of ethnic Serbs into five states and pleading guilty for our resistance to deprivation of rights that's been gratuitously granted by powers that be to every other nation of former Yugoslavia. So they expect us to claim our inequality gladly.
There is also the issue about Kosovo I'm not sure you are able to understand, since I know no foreigner whom has ever able to get it. But here it is:
Kosovo is our heavenly covenant with God's Grace. That's our collective baptism in blood (you should check about "baptism in blood" in some theology books), that's the Cross each and every one of us is supposed to carry. That's our Golghota and our Resurrection. By asking us to renounce Kosovo, powers that be (actually the servants of antichrist) are actually asking us to renounce our baptism, our identity and to bow to their master. That's why they are offering us "speedy" membership into the Whore of Babylon - EU.
It's understandable. They want us to become deamon possessed like they are. We are not expected to remain the images of God, we are expected to become the images of antichrist and his servants. That's what the chew about "european values" we are supposed to adopt is all about.
They were strong enough to punch some heavy punches against us - we are a small nation by numbers and are consisted of weak humans. So Serbian nation was raped, not for the first time in history.
But now they want us, the victim of a rape, to accept the bribe, to accept prize embodied in membership to EU, where we should loose our sovereignity, so they rightfully claim from us to renounce our identity first. So we would not remain raped, but become whores, while the rapist would become a fine gentleman who paid for his pleasure. And there would be no victim, just a prostitute who agreed, although subsequently.
Resistance always makes sense, no matter how weak one is. At least it shows the attitude of a resistent, the attitude of a free. It also make a need of a power to make an effort, no matter how small and insignificant such an effort might look in the first place. A lots of necessary small efforts can destroy even the strongest.
Of course the resistant should be ready to pay the price for it. But we have the example of immortal Kosovo Knights - they are very much alive in our minds now, even more than six centuries later. That's why our politicians, having been captured in the cangaroo court in the Hague, have the strength to write the glorious pages of our history and their personal victory by their resistance to lies and sticking with the truth - so they redeemed some errors and mistakes they did make.
That was all about the principles, even if we were faced with an irresistible power, as Ghenghis Khan used to be, as Ottoman Turks used to be, as Wilhelm Hoenzellern's Germany used to be, as Hitler used to be.
And we are not.
But that's another story and I recommend you to read some news about economy at http://www.atimes.com and some articles about geopolitics from the guy erenghdal (do a google search, he does have website) and about the history - the relations between us and Russ predate both Berlin crisis and American civil war - they are much, much longer and much deeper.
So you might realize I'm right expecting a victory. And, even if I'm wrong - heck, I'd make at least a small pain to the wrotten empire.
@ D. Popovich
I have the feeling we started in misunderstanding and we will remain in misunderstanding.
Nowhere I denied they did a lots of damages. But that's all they could do - to destroy infrastructure, to kill civilians, to bring misery. We saw that in Iraq, too.
No bravery. No resolve. No power.
Simply, they are not knights, they are armed thieves. And such an army would crumble in front of a first serious effort.
Would they be able to walk from Asia to the gates of Vienna, like Suleiman the Magnificant's army did? Would they be able to walk from Africa to the gates of Rome, like Hanibal's army did? Would they be able to walk from the Far East to Baghdad and Jerusalem, like Mongols did? Would they be able to walk from Arabia to Spain like Abu Bekr's army did? Would they be able to walk from the depths of Russia to Berlin and Cyprus, like Russ did?
Would their population be able to endure what we have endured for the last 17 years?
Michael Warning
Regarding some comments you addressed to me:
- The hypocrisy is with a certain coterie of folks thinking like yourself.
- Austria-Hungary was an outside power which occupied. Historically, the Serb presence in Kosovo isn't like that.
- If anything, it's much more the Albanian side which is threatening to use force in Kosovo.
- Replying to terrorism isn't the same as instigating it.
- The resident doctor here is as good as it gets when it comes to directly replying to different views. A far cry from some other sources. Like a certain anonymous Serb basher, who at a site posts misrepesentative comments about others, while censoring posted replies.
@just_a_serb:
I searched several variations of "guy erenghdal" spelling and found nothing; can you please check the spelling and repost? I also like Asia Times.
Btw, I'm not disagreeing with your posting... I just wish Serbia had leaders that were as capable in dealing with outside powers as Milos Obrenovic.
@ just_a_serb, # 44 and 45
The essence of your – Serbian – credo moves me no less than "Prkosna pesma". I found an English translation of that poem on a YU government website in the first weeks of NATO humanitarian bombing.
The poem was so impressive that I tried to read the original. Even though I'm not a Serbian speaker, the original made an even greater impact on me. So great in fact, that I translated the poem into Polish. My friend Mietek said about the Polish translation, "It does more to move the reader than all the truth about the Balkan conflict that might eventually be published."
You may as well post "Kosovo" by Matija Beckovic along with Eric's poem.
You ask "Would their population be able to endure what we have endured for the last 17 years?" I would add seven centuries to your number. A nation's history is coded into an individual's psyche. To understand one needs to have a soul. And a soul does not grow without suffering.
Excerpts from English translation of Dobrica Eric's "Prkosna pesma":
[…]
the entire world will charge at my Land;
bunches of ex-people,
thieves and sanquillots,
herds of robots and the likely monsters,
will be pouncing at my orchards and fields,
and my white cottages along the road,
around which, like the most beautiful goddesses
cherries, apples and plums bloom.
[…]
Why are the Jihad warriors
Crusaders
and Yanks
quartering My sons and daughters?
Must be that the worldly gangs have heard
that ours are golden Hearts,
so they rip them out
and implant into their own chests,
hoping to become humans themselves.
Here is the link, directly to one of excellent articles.
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Russian_Giant/russian_giant.html
Asiatimes - Spengler, an Brudanbakhar (sp? - something like that, a retired Indian diplomat and several good econimists with Asian names)
@Piotr Bein
Basically yes. I'm not surprised Poles are able to see it.
"You may as well post 'Kosovo' by Matija Beckovic along with Eric’s poem.
You ask 'Would their population be able to endure what we have endured for the last 17 years?' I would add seven centuries to your number. A nation’s history is coded into an individual’s psyche. To understand one needs to have a soul. And a soul does not grow without suffering."
***
In general terms: when compared to some others, Americans tend to think short term when engaged in armed conflicts.
I'm reminded of a recent History Channel rebroadcast of what I believe is Stanley Karnow's PBS documentary on the Vietnam War. In one episode, a historian contrasts the mentioned American short term mentality to that of the Vietnamese. For the latter, going against bigger powers has been an ongoing ocurrence for much of its history. This includes fighting on their turf under harsh circumstances.
These views shouldn't be seen as an endorsement of many of the domestic policies of the Hanoi based government. Rather, it relates to how one can respectfully support the mainstream Serb position, while not supporting the overall political legacy of Milosevic.
Putting aside his shortcomings, The NYTs' Tom Friedman has a IMO somewhat valid point about how modernity ("globalization") contributed to ending the 1999 NATO attack. In contrast to perhaps another era, many Serbs didn't welcome a continued war that was obliterating their nation's civilian infrastructure. Still, other Serbs felt that Milosevic's government could've hunkered down a bit more. A view shared by Democratic Party oriented foreign policy politico Charles Kupchan, who added that NATO got lucky.
Re: # 39Michael Warning
...."Serbs stop appealing to “reason” or “rights” because it shows your hypocrisy. You have no argument based on reason or right."
Warning, provide evidence for your statement!
The Serbs proved in the air war with NATO back in 1999 that they can handle NATO. NATO's aircraft, while they were able to fly over all of Serbia, had to do so at very high altitudes to avoid being shot down. The Serbs had equipment to shoot down even the high flying aircraft, but did not use that equipment.
They wanted to portray themselves as victims in order to get the rest of the world to pressure NATO to stop the bombing. Of course, this propaganda technique failed and failed miserably. Milosevic paid for this stupidity with his life.
Portraying yourself as a victim in today's world will only work if you have broad access to the Western media. The Serbs did not have such access.
If the Serbs were to acquire the Russian air defense systems such as the S300 or the more advanced S400, let's say 15 to 20 of these systems scattered over the country, they will be able to handle the NATO aircraft. If NATO loses at least half of its aircraft on its first bombing run, which it would, there would not be a second bombing run. It is fairly well known that NATO's military, especially its American component, cannot fight without air cover. In that regard the Serbs proved in the last war that they can protect their ground forces from NATO aircraft. They would not even need an air force to deal with NATO. However, some MIG 31 interceptors and Su30 ground attack aircraft would be icing on the cake.
America's military is in terrible shape, especially its army and marines corps. They are being eaten up in losing wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan. A third war in the Balkans would compound this disastrous situation. The only effective weapon the Americans have is their air power, and as stated above, they would suffer crippling losses.
I really believe, with the proper military equipment, the Serbs can retake Kosovo and humble both NATO and America.