Does Balkanization Beckon Anew?
When the Great War comes, said old Bismarck, it will come out of "some damn fool thing in the Balkans."
On June 28, 1914, Gavrilo Princip shot the archduke and heir to the Austrian throne Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, setting in motion the train of events that led to the First World War.
In the spring of 1999, the United States bombed Serbia for 78 days to force its army out of that nation's cradle province of Kosovo. The Serbs were fighting Albanian separatists of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). And we had no more right to bomb Belgrade than the Royal Navy would have had to bombard New York in our Civil War.
We bombed Serbia, we were told, to stop the genocide in Kosovo. But there was no genocide. This was propaganda. The United Nations' final casualty count of Serbs and Albanians in Slobodan Milosevic's war did not add up to 1 percent of the dead in Mr. Lincoln's war.
Albanians did flee in the tens of thousands during the war. But since that war's end, the Serbs of Kosovo have seen their churches and monasteries smashed and vandalized and have been ethnically cleansed in the scores of thousands from their ancestral province. In the exodus they have lost everything. The remaining Serb population of 120,000 is largely confined to enclaves guarded by NATO troops.
"At a Serb monastery in Pec," writes the Washington Post, "Italian troops protect the holy site, which is surrounded by a massive new wall to shield elderly nuns from stone-throwing and other abuse by passing ethnic Albanians."
On Sunday, Kosovo declared independence and was recognized by the European Union and President Bush. But this is not the end of the story. It is only the preface to a new history of the Balkans, a region that has known too much history.
By intervening in a civil war to aid the secession of an ancient province, to create a new nation that has never before existed and, to erect it along ethnic, religious and tribal lines, we have established a dangerous precedent. Muslim and Albanian extremists are already talking of a Greater Albania, consisting of Albania, Kosovo and the Albanian-Muslim sectors of Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia.
If these Albanian minorities should demand the right to secede and join their kinsmen in Kosovo, on what grounds would we oppose them? The inviolability of borders? What if the Serb majority in the Mitrovica region of northern Kosovo, who reject Albanian rule, secede and call on their kinsmen in Serbia to protect them?
Would we go to war against Serbia, once again, to maintain the territorial integrity of Kosovo, after we played the lead role in destroying the territorial integrity of Serbia?
Inside the U.S.-sponsored Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the autonomous Serb Republic of Srpska is already talking secession and unification with Serbia. On what grounds would we deny them?
The U.S. war on Serbia was unconstitutional, unjust and unwise. Congress never authorized it. Serbia, an ally in two world wars, had never attacked us. We made an enemy of the Serbs, and alienated Russia, to create a second Muslim state in the Balkans.
By intervening in a civil war where no vital interest was at risk, the United States, which is being denounced as loudly in Belgrade today as we are being cheered in Pristina, has acquired another dependency. And our new allies, the KLA, have been credibly charged with human trafficking, drug dealing, atrocities and terrorism.
And the clamor for ethnic self-rule has only begun to be heard.
Rumania has refused to recognize the new Republic of Kosovo, for the best of reasons. Bucharest rules a large Hungarian minority in Transylvania, acquired at the same Paris Peace Conference of 1919 where Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina were detached from Vienna and united with Serbia.
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, two provinces that have broken away from Georgia, are invoking the Kosovo precedent to demand recognition as independent nations. As our NATO expansionists are anxious to bring Georgia into NATO, here is yet another occasion for a potential Washington-Moscow clash.
Spain, too, opposed the severing of Kosovo from Serbia, as Madrid faces similar demands from Basque and Catalan separatists.
The Muslim world will enthusiastically endorse the creation of a new Muslim state in Europe at the expense of Orthodox Christian Serbs. But Turkey is also likely to re-raise the issue as to why the EU and United States do not formally recognize the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Like Kosovo, it, too, is an ethnically homogeneous community that declared independence 25 years ago.
Breakaway Transneistria is seeking independence from Moldova, the nation wedged between Rumania and Ukraine, and President Putin of Russia has threatened to recognize it, Abkhazia and South Ossetia in retaliation for the West's recognition of Kosovo.
If Putin pauses, it will be because he recognizes that of all the nations of Europe, Russia is high among those most threatened by the serial Balkanization we may have just reignited in the Balkans.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
69 Responses »
Trackbacks
- More on Kosovo « Capital Area Crunchy Con
- News | Serbian Unity Congress » Day of Infamy: Kosovo Separatists Declare Independence, antiwar.com/Nebojsa Malic
Entries(RSS)
I was most certainly NOT endorsing the piece by neocon slimeball 'Suleiman' Schwartz; I'm appalled by it! I was merely suggesting that pro-Serbs here might wish to give the Pajamas crowd a piece of your minds. That's all.
Today's attack on the US Embassy was trivial compared to the crimes the USA has committed against Serbs. I'm glad to see the Serbs displaying a bit of emotion about the situation. Finally the US press is talking about it.
@43Dave Kamka
Actually Bush is the only leader to have sense and have a mutual friendly relationship with Putin despite Jewish Neocons and brethern in media in US and Europe essentially declaring war on Russia.
Is there going to be any protests in Europe over Kosovos independence? The sad thing is is Serbs where Muslims and the KLA where christians there would be Iraq style protests across Europe.
mantra,michalewarning ,
is the same person...albanian muslim who likes to play'games'and have a conversation with himself as he feel 'stronger'when he has a 'company'for his silly'comments':(
by the way,he is a rare albanian who can read and write,specialy a foreign language,like english..:)
"Stephen Schwartz" certainly has a lot to say about the rioting that happened in Belgrade, Serbia. His venom for the youths that have been subjected to years of threats and actual ethnic cleansing in different parts of former Yugoslavia is really astonishing. I guess when you want to believe the certainly proven lies of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and their puppets in the European countries who would rather bomb than investigate the venom coming from western politician, than it's easy to perpetuate that same lie and kick the same people while stealing parts of their homeland.
What other province of former Yugoslavia is as ethnically diverse as Serbia. the answer is NONE.
Croatia and Slovenia still believe that the goodness and benevolence of Nazism will return to their regions and kill off the undesirables one day. Bosnian Muslims and now Kosovo's Muslim population have drunk the potion of fundamentalism and will be following the instructions from Mecca for a long time to come regardless of all the trappings of the western culture.
But, people like Mr. "Stephen Schwartz" are just lazy bloggers who want to think themselves as journalists.
I guess he is the product of this generation of 10 second attention span.
I am Serbian. I live in Canada. Some very good points have been made here. The only thing I want to say is that I hope and pray that no war results from recent events. Although I don't agree with the "independence" I also am against using military means as a form of retaliation. Too many people have died as a result of past and current conflicts in the Balkans. More death, suffering, and torture will do nothing but hinder both sides.
I hope this space is open to people who disagree. I agree with what has been said here about the dangers of setting a principle in disregarding other countries' sovereignty, and, as I usually agree with the views of Pat Buchanan, I am usually sympathetic to his arguments. However, we cannot dismiss so lightly the charge of genocide. Mr. Buchanan uses the term "ethnic cleansing" to describe what the Albanian Kosovars have done to the Serbs, but if memory serves this very term was used as a euphemism by the Serbs to describe what they were doing to the Albanian Kosovars before the international community finally stepped in. Is it not true, Mr. Buchanan, that approx. 144,000 Albanians were murdered by the Serbs, including over 16,000 children, in this ethnic cleansing? If these numbers are incorrect, I wish one of you would correct them with precise figures and provide the source of your figures. Otherwise, I must insist on the moral responsibility of the free world to step in and act when such crimes are committed. Whan a sovereign nation butchers its own citizens in this manner, it forfeits its rights to sovereignty.
Damon @ 56
And Sir, how did you arrive at your figures? If one is to throw the gauntlet, should not he be virtuous enough to play by the same standards?
It seems to me genocide inflation was an ailment common to the late 20th century.
damon,
after incinsion i belive are decimal numbres:(
You did not live so good even in Albania like you did on Serbian land and all those nonsence you are talking and writing about is the bigest garbidge which only serve:
"Bondsteel"
Why do not you write how many of you cross illigal bordars since western man tito was godfather to albanians just to get u to multiply like virus.
u totaly distroy albania and after that u start distroying Serbia:(
Kosovo is Serbia,by the way and u will go back where u came from,very soon!
Damon,
I don't think Buchanan reads these responses, but I'll chime in and say that I'm pretty sure your numbers are off. I recall reading that the entire ethnic cleansing claim was a hoax, as phony as WMD in Iraq.
Charlemagne, Frank,
Thank you for your responses. I have heard from other Serb-supporters that the figures we normally hear are exaggerated, but I don't know what this claim of exaggeration is based on. The numbers I used come from the International Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights Annual Report 1996 and the US State Dept, Bosnia & Herzegovina Country report on Human Rights Practices for 1996. Is there a reputable source that provides lower figures?
... Some good news:
"...
*** Russia could use force in Kosovo ***
Russia's ambassador to Nato, Dmitry Rogozin, has warned that Russia could use military force if the Kosovo independence dispute escalates.
"If the EU develops a unified position or if Nato exceeds its mandate set by the UN, then these organisations will be in conflict with the UN," he said.
In that case Russia would "proceed on the basis that in order to be respected we need to use brute force", he said.
... ... ...
Russian media outcry
The EU will soon deploy 2,000 officials to strengthen law and order in Kosovo, which has a population of about two million. Russia argues that the mission has no legal basis.
There has been a furious reaction in some Russian media to Kosovo's declaration of independence.
A commentary in the Vesti Plus analytical programme, on state-run television, called the assassinated former Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic, a Western puppet who had "received a well-deserved bullet".
It said Djindjic had sold national heroes to the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague.
The programme concluded that Serbia - and not only Serbia - must now decide whether to acquiesce in what has happened, or resist.
..."
(2008/02/22 13:01:35 GMT, BBC http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7258801.stm )
Tadic could meet his friend Djindjic soon.
-------------------------------------------------------------
NB
Today's http://www.interfax.ru/?lang=e has several interesting items on Kosovo.
Damon, the 'free world' is not free, it commits mass murder in Iraq and Serbia, and those figures you cite were intentionally skewed. The claim that the allegedly 'free' world has some moral obligation to act to stop crimes, real or alleged, is ridiculous. If it means so much to you, then you go, yourself, as your own mercenery fighting in someone else's war, and you, yourself, fight this fight, yourself, and leave me and my kinsmen and neighbours out of it. We have no moral obligation to do anything even when mass murder happens. You have no right to sacrifice us for your silly notions of 'moral obligation' or whatever else anyone calls it. A father has a moral obligation to take care of his family, help his neighbours, and defend his own people and nation, but no one else's.
The organisations you cite were biased and cannot be considered reliable. As for accurate figures to refute them, how can one really get accurate figures when information is controlled all sides are not allowed fair voice?
@#56
Damon, it seems that the reason for your figures being heavily off is primarily because you are way off in terms of geography and timing. The source that you are quoting in #60 is a whole year earlier than the actual beginning of the (typically opportunistic) Albanian terrorist KLA uprising that re-started in the 1997 by indiscriminately attacking the Serbian police and government staff (murdering Serbian postal workers in those days accounted for some “points” in the ranks of KLA). However, organised Serbian government response to these provocations started only much later in the 1998. The figures that you are quoting are most likely the final tally of victims on ALL three sides in the Bosnian civil war, Muslims, Croats and Serbs, where Serb victims account for about 50% of the figures you mentioned. Now, assuming that you are not a member of the Congress or Senate, or directly responsible for seriously flawed US foreign policy, your errors would not be seen as catastrophic. The problem of this world is that the Western world (leaders, mostly) blinded by the day to day egoistic pursuits of the exploitative capitalism objectives make decision having global effects with about as much knowledge as you had a few posts earlier. In conclusion, and to answer your direct question on the 1998-1999 Kosovo victim count (not that it really matters how many people has to die in order for US to overturn the international law & order), currently “agreed” figures are around 2000 people (50% Serbian) in Kosovo during these two years, and another 2500 people on the territory of Serbia without Kosovo from the NATO bombing. Barely 400 of the 2500 were in some way related to military operations during the NATO bombing campaign. In the wake pf the occupation of Kosovo by US and their NATO and EU cronies under the cover of UN, at least another 2500 Kosovo Serbs has been killed to date. Some 1600 Serbs are still listed as “missing” since the “liberation” of Kosovo by NATO (also known as KLA’s Air-Force). Some 250000 non-Albanians (mostly Serbs) were permanently cleansed from Kosovo in this period. Objective life expectancy of the Serbs living in the ghettos in the Albanian dominated part of Kosovo is, as of recently, expressed in days.
The best non-Serbian reporting is done by the British Helsinki Human Rights group: http://www.bhhrg.org, which has documented the Albanians' cultural genocide against Serbs and the complicity of UN/US officials with Albanian narco-terrorism.
All things work for the good for those who love God.
I believe that what is happening to Serbia is a blessing. It will keep Serbia out of the Godless EU and it anti Christian policies.
God bless Serbia!
As far as I know (and that may not me a lot) Serbs were the only nation who delivered their sitting president (crook or not-crook) to the foreign prison, knowing full well that he'd be found guilty no matter what. Serbs were bombed into the stone age on account of albanian agitprop - nobody bats an eye. If Otto von Bismark was ever right, he's right about the source of future conflicts. The geopolitical quaigmaire is so cleverly disorganized that any party can resort to an armed struggle against any other party at any time. Was that the "the PEACE" NATO was trying to secure? Or was that the instability which, by definition secures only future conflicts, sales or arms and ammunition, finds willing recruits for future wars highly motivated and ready. When it smell like it, feels like, looks like it, you call it - what it is. In a famous dialogue between Henry II (partially French himself) the English monarch and his frequent opponent's (Louis) son the new French King Philip the dialogue went something like this although all eyewitnesses are dead:
Henry II: I came to offer you peace....
Phillip: Piss on your peace. You neither have the power to wage a war not maintain a steady peace....
Such was the youthful impertinence, but accurate and concise. Henry II's eldest son Richard the Lionheart (Coeur de Leon) was the next ruler of England with roots on both the continent and the islands.
I brought up the English and the French since their hostilities started rather early (about 9th century AD, if I am not mistaken) and only officially ended at Waterloo. To this day the French and the English can't see eye to eye. Why would the Serbs be forced to cohabitate with the terrorist Arnauts who were on a clear path usurp the Serbian government for over 50 years.
I absolutely agree that the time just about perfect for another military conflict in Europe - and this time in the Balkans.
Vitaly important to mention how naive Franz Ferdinand was to have chosen the holliest of Serbian holydays (June 28th - the Day of the Kosovo battle) to rub in the annexation of Serbian Bosnia to the Austro-hungarian empire. It's like celebrating Osama's successes on the Fourth of July. On the other hand ever since The Crimean War (1853–1856), Britain was able to make friends with all enemies (past, present and future) to protect its merchant marine and their dominance of the sea routes. It fosters Russophobia to prevent them from entering the Mediterranian basin (through the Black sea) and allow them the use of only the Baltic Sea ports (most frozen and useless during the Winter months). So we see that for over 200 years the Brits are consistent to themselves.