http://newsblaze.com/story/20060429061438nnnn.nb/newsblaze/OPINIONS/Opinions.html
NewsBlaze
Op-Ed ContributorCrossfire War: Kosovo PM Expects State of Independence by June 2006By Willard PayneCrossfire War - TEHRAN WATCH -Southeast Europe Theatre: Pristina/- (Tehran) -/Belgrade; End of a Grand Illusion - Kosovo PM Expects State of Independence by June 2006 - War of the European Enlargement
Night Watch: PRISTINA - A Grand Illusion is about to end and in this case with more fighting than the conflict that ended the New World Order. Kosovo then Prime Minister Bajram Kosumi stated, earlier this year, that he expects Kosovo to become independent by June 2006. "For us it is important that in June 2006 we should make Kosovo a state. I am convinced we should do that." I don't think his expectations have changed any since the beginning of the year and I suspect every armed Albanian group also expects the same even without the EU/UN/NATO's approval. [EurActiv]Since then he seems to have been replaced by Agim Ceku, who likes to be photographed in uniform. Today Prime Minister Ceku told a Sofia television station that a UN Security Council resolution will declare Kosovo independent by the end of the year but Ceku may just be playing the diplomat. Ceku may know that fighting will resume in May to take advantage of the international arms support they have been receiving from Islamic governments.The position of Serbia President Boris Tadic is just as entrenched. He has always refused to accept or sign what he called an "imposed position" as if he anticipates the negotiations in Vienna going against Belgrade.In the meantime waiting in the wings is Tehran, who has armed Albanian units and in January signed a security agreement with Serbia. Iran knows that it will be mostly NATO and the EU caught in the crossfire of what I am calling the War of the European Enlargement. Perhaps the most ridiculous, most unbelievable decision I have ever witnessed was the agreement to divide Yugoslavia. It was a classic example of the evil with a clown face mentality. I actually thought Europe had gotten tired of map making. Societies obviously retain their character. And Washington allowed itself to be Yanked into it.These endless rounds of negotations and referendums was intended to lead to EU enlargment, incorporating the states that emerged out of the divided Yugoslavia into the European Community. The EU will have to incorporate the war instead and Iran's obvious involvement as Tehran continues to prepare its Avenue of Invasion. The Council of Guardians in Tehran are privately thanking the West for creating this other front.When the war finally ends whatever flags are left flying will withdraw into further darkness-militarism. The leading lights that established progressive European institutions, that broke down a lot of barriers after World War II, were extinguished quite some time ago. What they represented and accomplished died with them.
Night Watch Information Servicehttp://www.crossfirewar.com
Based in Flossmoor,IL 60422.ph:708-957-9651/fax:708-798-2929.
e-mail:III82100@aol.com
April 30, 2006
Thumbs-up for Independence
Latest news:http://news.google.be/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Kosovo
Kosovo's press get thumbs-up from OSCE commissionhttp://www.ijnet.org/Director.aspx?P=Article&ID=304911&LID=1
No troop cut before Kosovo status resolution-NATO
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L28676346.htm.................
UN to endorse Kosovo independence
http://www.makfax.com.mk/look/agencija/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=1&NrArticle=20697&NrIssue=452&NrSection=20............
http://www.dtt-net.com/en/index.php?page=view-article&article=1466
28/04/2006
Russia against Kosovo's independence(Sofia, DTT-NET.COM) - Russian government has voiced its opposal to Kosovo independence arguing that such a settlement is dangerous for the stability in Western Balkans region."We don't agree with those who try to convince us that there is no alternative to Kosovo independence. That's a dangerous path that could lead toward dangerous consequences for the region and create a precedent for other conflict situations," AFP quoted Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov saying to the reporters on Friday after NATO-Russia meeting in Bulgarian capital, Sofia.Lavrov's statement creates a new momentum on the position of major international powers on the future of UN administrated territory.Russia together with US, Germany, France, Italy and UK is member of Contact Group for Kosovo which have said in common statements that the status of Kosovo "should be acceptable to the people".Ethnic Albanians who represent around 90 percent of Kosovo population insist on independence but Serbia and Serbian minority in Kosovo are against.UK and US officials have said that independence is the likely solution for Kosovo.Western diplomats have said earlier that Moscow will not use its veto against Kosovo independence at UN Security Council, but Friday's statement of Russian foreign minister seem to create a new obstacle to the push of London and Washington to make Kosovo independent and split from Serbia and Montenegro state union......................
Kosovo's press get thumbs-up from OSCE commissionhttp://www.ijnet.org/Director.aspx?P=Article&ID=304911&LID=1
No troop cut before Kosovo status resolution-NATO
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L28676346.htm.................
UN to endorse Kosovo independence
http://www.makfax.com.mk/look/agencija/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=1&NrArticle=20697&NrIssue=452&NrSection=20............
http://www.dtt-net.com/en/index.php?page=view-article&article=1466
28/04/2006
Russia against Kosovo's independence(Sofia, DTT-NET.COM) - Russian government has voiced its opposal to Kosovo independence arguing that such a settlement is dangerous for the stability in Western Balkans region."We don't agree with those who try to convince us that there is no alternative to Kosovo independence. That's a dangerous path that could lead toward dangerous consequences for the region and create a precedent for other conflict situations," AFP quoted Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov saying to the reporters on Friday after NATO-Russia meeting in Bulgarian capital, Sofia.Lavrov's statement creates a new momentum on the position of major international powers on the future of UN administrated territory.Russia together with US, Germany, France, Italy and UK is member of Contact Group for Kosovo which have said in common statements that the status of Kosovo "should be acceptable to the people".Ethnic Albanians who represent around 90 percent of Kosovo population insist on independence but Serbia and Serbian minority in Kosovo are against.UK and US officials have said that independence is the likely solution for Kosovo.Western diplomats have said earlier that Moscow will not use its veto against Kosovo independence at UN Security Council, but Friday's statement of Russian foreign minister seem to create a new obstacle to the push of London and Washington to make Kosovo independent and split from Serbia and Montenegro state union......................
This is a universe of pain
http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2006/April_28/2.html
KiM Info Newsletter 28-04-06
Serbian, foreign writers and artists visit Metohija and Visoki Decani MonasteryBishop Teodosije sincerely thanked the participants in the "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love" campaign who came to encourage the faithful of Metohija during these paschal holidays. He especially thanked Austrian writer and dramatist Peter Handke for the solidarity he has shown for years toward the suffering Serbian people from Krajina and Bosnia to Kosovo and Metohija. The visit to Orahovac, Velika Hoca, Zociste, Visoki Decani Monastery and the Pec Patriarchate was organized on the occasion of the paschal holidays by the Coordinating Center for Kosovo and Metohija and the Association of Writers of Kosovo and MetohijaKIM Info ServiceApril 27, 2006On Tuesday, April 25, a group of Serbian and foreign writers and artists visited Visoki Decani Monastery together with several displaced Serbs from the Orahovac region. They have been visiting Metohija for the past two days as part of a campaign called "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love".Prior to stopping at Visoki Decani Monastery participants in this noble campaign visited the village of Retimlje near Orahovac where a number of Serbs were kidnapped and killed during the course of 1998. Together with members of the Kostic family, which lost 14 of its members during the war, the writers and artists lit candles at the Orthodox cemetery now completely overgrown with weeds. On that occasion the group of writers was exposed to verbal attacks by local Albanians. The members of the Kostic family visited their native villages of Opterusa and Retimlje for the first time in almost eight years. Protosingel Petar, the chief priest of Zociste Monastery, served a memorial service at the cemetery in Retimlje for all Orthodox Serbs buried there and those whose bodies have not yet been found.The visit to Orahovac, Velika Hoca, Zociste, Visoki Decani Monastery and the Pec Patriarchate was organized on the occasion of the paschal holidays by the Coordinating Center for Kosovo and Metohija and the Association of Writers of Kosovo and Metohija. In Visoki Decani Monastery the poets read poems dedicated to the Serbian holy shrines in Kosovo and Metohija and Svetlana Stevic sang an old song originating in the Metohija region. The guests were especially delighted by the brothers Marko (12) and Nikola Maksimovic (13), guests of the monastery from Kraljevo, who performed several traditional Serbian melodies on the flute together with Decani monk Jovan.Bishop Teodosije sincerely thanked the participants in the "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love" campaign who came to encourage the faithful of Metohija during these paschal holidays. He especially thanked Austrian writer and dramatist Peter Handke for the solidarity he has shown for years toward the suffering Serbian people from Krajina and Bosnia to Kosovo and Metohija.Upon entering the town of Decani as well as upon departing from it on their way to Pec, the bus transporting the writers was showered by stones by the local Albanians, whose whistled in disapproval when the bus carrying Serbs passed. According to poet Ranko Djinovic there was some damage to the vehicle but no one was injured. Despite the unpleasant experience, the writers and artists said that they would always respond to words of derision and rocks with songs and forgiveness, recalling the words of the Gospels: "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do."The delegation of foreign writers also included Kurt K�pruner, Thomas Diechmann and several of their colleagues from Austria, Germany and Russia. The delegation completed its visit to Metohija with a tour of the Pec Patriarchate...................http://www.blic.co.yu/danas/broj/E-Index.htm#9Blic (Serbia and Montenegro)April 28, 2006Austrian writer Peter Handke in KosovoThis is a universe of painStanding on the side of justice, as he said, and always with the victims, Austrian writer Peter Handke visited Kosovo several days ago.Standing at burnt homes of the Nikolices, Kostices, Bozanices and Bandices in the villages of Retimlje and Opterusa near Orahovac, Handke said: 'These are universes of pain. I do not have the right to speak. I shall keep silent, I have to keep silent. Thank you for making it possible for me to see this horror personally. This is not the 21st century'.Together with a group of domestic and foreign writers, Handke visited the most jeopardized locations in Kosovo under patronage of the Coordination Center.'He was speechless but he promised to tell in his way the horror that Kosovo Serbs are exposed to', organizer of the visit Ranko Djinovic said.'Feeling terrible that a mother cannot find her son's grave in a destroyed cemetery in Retimlje, Hendke defended a Serb woman who at that moment was verbally attacked by Albanians. He managed to get from Austrian KFOR commander a helicopter escort in continuation of the visit but was astonished to witness stoning of the convoy downtown Decani in spite of escort and a minute later while approaching the Monastery of Visoki Decani', Djinovic said.Handke left yesterday but promised to return soon with far larger number of writers having world reputation in spite of the threats he received 'in order to awake the world that has fallen asleep'.
KiM Info Newsletter 28-04-06
Serbian, foreign writers and artists visit Metohija and Visoki Decani MonasteryBishop Teodosije sincerely thanked the participants in the "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love" campaign who came to encourage the faithful of Metohija during these paschal holidays. He especially thanked Austrian writer and dramatist Peter Handke for the solidarity he has shown for years toward the suffering Serbian people from Krajina and Bosnia to Kosovo and Metohija. The visit to Orahovac, Velika Hoca, Zociste, Visoki Decani Monastery and the Pec Patriarchate was organized on the occasion of the paschal holidays by the Coordinating Center for Kosovo and Metohija and the Association of Writers of Kosovo and MetohijaKIM Info ServiceApril 27, 2006On Tuesday, April 25, a group of Serbian and foreign writers and artists visited Visoki Decani Monastery together with several displaced Serbs from the Orahovac region. They have been visiting Metohija for the past two days as part of a campaign called "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love".Prior to stopping at Visoki Decani Monastery participants in this noble campaign visited the village of Retimlje near Orahovac where a number of Serbs were kidnapped and killed during the course of 1998. Together with members of the Kostic family, which lost 14 of its members during the war, the writers and artists lit candles at the Orthodox cemetery now completely overgrown with weeds. On that occasion the group of writers was exposed to verbal attacks by local Albanians. The members of the Kostic family visited their native villages of Opterusa and Retimlje for the first time in almost eight years. Protosingel Petar, the chief priest of Zociste Monastery, served a memorial service at the cemetery in Retimlje for all Orthodox Serbs buried there and those whose bodies have not yet been found.The visit to Orahovac, Velika Hoca, Zociste, Visoki Decani Monastery and the Pec Patriarchate was organized on the occasion of the paschal holidays by the Coordinating Center for Kosovo and Metohija and the Association of Writers of Kosovo and Metohija. In Visoki Decani Monastery the poets read poems dedicated to the Serbian holy shrines in Kosovo and Metohija and Svetlana Stevic sang an old song originating in the Metohija region. The guests were especially delighted by the brothers Marko (12) and Nikola Maksimovic (13), guests of the monastery from Kraljevo, who performed several traditional Serbian melodies on the flute together with Decani monk Jovan.Bishop Teodosije sincerely thanked the participants in the "Pilgrimage and Brotherly Love" campaign who came to encourage the faithful of Metohija during these paschal holidays. He especially thanked Austrian writer and dramatist Peter Handke for the solidarity he has shown for years toward the suffering Serbian people from Krajina and Bosnia to Kosovo and Metohija.Upon entering the town of Decani as well as upon departing from it on their way to Pec, the bus transporting the writers was showered by stones by the local Albanians, whose whistled in disapproval when the bus carrying Serbs passed. According to poet Ranko Djinovic there was some damage to the vehicle but no one was injured. Despite the unpleasant experience, the writers and artists said that they would always respond to words of derision and rocks with songs and forgiveness, recalling the words of the Gospels: "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do."The delegation of foreign writers also included Kurt K�pruner, Thomas Diechmann and several of their colleagues from Austria, Germany and Russia. The delegation completed its visit to Metohija with a tour of the Pec Patriarchate...................http://www.blic.co.yu/danas/broj/E-Index.htm#9Blic (Serbia and Montenegro)April 28, 2006Austrian writer Peter Handke in KosovoThis is a universe of painStanding on the side of justice, as he said, and always with the victims, Austrian writer Peter Handke visited Kosovo several days ago.Standing at burnt homes of the Nikolices, Kostices, Bozanices and Bandices in the villages of Retimlje and Opterusa near Orahovac, Handke said: 'These are universes of pain. I do not have the right to speak. I shall keep silent, I have to keep silent. Thank you for making it possible for me to see this horror personally. This is not the 21st century'.Together with a group of domestic and foreign writers, Handke visited the most jeopardized locations in Kosovo under patronage of the Coordination Center.'He was speechless but he promised to tell in his way the horror that Kosovo Serbs are exposed to', organizer of the visit Ranko Djinovic said.'Feeling terrible that a mother cannot find her son's grave in a destroyed cemetery in Retimlje, Hendke defended a Serb woman who at that moment was verbally attacked by Albanians. He managed to get from Austrian KFOR commander a helicopter escort in continuation of the visit but was astonished to witness stoning of the convoy downtown Decani in spite of escort and a minute later while approaching the Monastery of Visoki Decani', Djinovic said.Handke left yesterday but promised to return soon with far larger number of writers having world reputation in spite of the threats he received 'in order to awake the world that has fallen asleep'.
April 27, 2006
US: Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia- the unfinished businesses in Balkans
http://www.dtt-net.com/en/index.php?page=view-article&article=1435&CMSSESSID=7686c2b28d97163f80934ae60a922c21
US: Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia- the unfinished businesses in Balkans
26/04/2006
(Athens, DTT-NET.COM)- US government top officials said that a lot of unfinished issues still remain in Western Balkan region related to Bosnia and Herzegovina future, democratisation of Serbia and especially the Kosovo status.
"There are important decisions that will have to be taken about how to move forward on the Balkans. We are watching the evolution of Bosnia-Herzegovina toward a more normal state and trying to support that at the same time that we try and encourage the continued democratization of Serbia and Montenegro and try to determine how to think about the future of Kosovo," US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters on Tuesday in Greek capital, Athens.
Rice said she is to discuss the three issues with EU and NATO colleagues this week.
"Of course, when you think about where the Balkans was 15 years ago, it's night and day. And now there is still a good deal of unfinished business in the Balkans. As I said, continuing the process of democratization is extremely important. The issue of a European horizon for the countries of the Balkans is also at issue" she added.
Bosnia and Herzegovina is currently undergoing the revision of its 1995 constitution and is being pushed by US and EU to make necessary changes of the key document in order as Washington and Brussels say, to strengthen its central institutions.
Serbia is faced with the fate of Montenegro as on 21 May Montenegrins are to decide whether the smaller republic to remain in state union with Serbia or become independent state. Belgrade is also facing the fate of Kosovo this year, with Ethnic Albanian majority of UN administrated territory insisting on independence.
Rice said that US is involved very closely at the current process of negotiations on Kosovo future under auspices of UN special envoy Martti Ahtissari.
"And I think what we need to do is to support Special Representative Ahtisaari in his work. I know that these are very delicate issues and we want both a democratic and a stable Balkans. That's the real goal before us. That is going to require a realistic assessment of what the final status can be. But I think it is appropriate to have discussions go on for a while to see what the parties can - the interested parties can- come to on their own," she said.
US has appointed its own envoy (Frank Wisner) working together with Ahtissari in order to achieve a solution which Rice said must contribute to the stability in the region.
"We have appointed to help with that work with American Special Envoy Frank Wiesner, a very dedicated and experienced diplomat who is working with Mr.Ahtissari and consulting the parties, discussing with the members of the - the states that have been active in the situation. I've talked with my Russian colleague (Sergey Lavrov) about this and I think we're going to have many other conversations, but the goal here has to be a final status outcome that is - that contributes to a democratic and stable Balkans. "
Current talks between Kosovo and Serbia politicians are focused on the self-rule powers for Serbian minority at municipal level. Ahtissari has said that at the second phase of the talks the issue of status will be tackled.
UK and US officials have indicated that independence is the likely settlement which both (London and Washington) are to support.
'''''''''''''''''''
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1761545,00.html
Barbed wire and bridges
The Balkans will continue to fragment unless the EU makes cooperation a condition of membership
Gyula Hegyi
Wednesday April 26, 2006
The Guardian
Dolce Vita is a small cafe in Kosovska Mitrovica, on the Serbian side of the city. It is on the river bank, in front of the bridge leading to the Albanian part. Sometimes the bridge is opened to traffic, other times it is barricaded with barbed wire and tanks of the French gendarmerie. After decades of the cold war, Berlin is now united, but those with nostalgia for its wall have only to travel to Kosovska Mitrovica. It is a city divided into two hostile parts.
The former Yugoslavia is split into ever smaller units. Where once there was one country, now there are five states, plus smaller entities clamouring for independence or at least complete autonomy. This chain of mini-states and enclaves lacks economic viability, but is rich in well-paid "ministers" and "parliamentarians". Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo were oppressed by Milosevic, so the US and its European allies bombed the so-called smaller Yugoslavia.
Now Milosevic is dead, the name of Yugoslavia exists only in history books, and the Serbs have been expelled from the larger part of Kosovo. Pristina, freed from Serbian rule by the Americans, became a 100% Albanian and Muslim city. The twin symbols of the city are the wondrous new mosque, built with Saudi money, and a local replica of New York's Statue of Liberty, painted pink. The veil and huge American billboards go hand in hand in this part of the world, where Muslims still admire the United States.
Albanians in Kosovo want an independent state, while its Serbs are afraid of the Albanians and prefer to remain part of Serbia. Under international law Kosovo still belongs to Serbia. The aim of the 1999 war was, at least officially, to establish the rule of law and democracy. Serbia is a democratic country now, and it would be wrong to break international law by taking away its province against its will. If we accept that state frontiers can be changed by wars, and new states created by bombing, then we risk opening a Pandora's box. On the other hand, the ethnic Albanians have good reasons for not wanting to live under Serbian rule. And Kosovo's ethnic Serbian community does not want to live under Albanian rule, also with reason. So is the answer to create one Kosovo for the Albanians and a smaller one for Serbs?
There is only one viable long-term solution. All states, regions and entities of the former Yugoslavia want to join the EU. And the EU can build upon that ambition. It should make cooperation between the small western Balkan countries the most important criterion of any enlargement in the Balkans. It would be silly to start talks with one or two small states that are not ready to have good relationships with their neighbours.
Croatia and Macedonia are on track for EU membership. Two other countries wish to join as well: Bosnia and Herzegovina, with its three ethnic communities - Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats - who don't want to live together in one state; and Serbia and Montenegro plus Kosovo, where some of the Montenegrins and most of the Albanians want an independent state. If all the separatist dreams were to be met, that would mean six new states instead of two.
Europe's response should be: "Look, we want you, but all together. If you can create two loose federations in which every entity has its own rights, if you can cooperate in a smaller union, then you are more than welcome in our bigger union as well. But do not think that one entity can join earlier than the others, just because of its war record."
We want to create real peace in the Balkans, not new frustrations by selecting the good guys against the bad ones. As far as the economy and infrastructure go, there are no real differences between these two federations. The EU should, therefore, start the pre-accession process on the principle of equal chances for all.
A loose federation should include Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo and an autonomous Vojvodina inside Serbia. Respect for the rights of all nations and religions, autonomy in internal affairs, and a common strategy for EU accession and foreign affairs would be necessary. The Vienna talks on the future of Kosovo, which began earlier this year, should lay the basis for a new, creative structure for the future. An independent Kosovo or Montenegro with hostile minorities would regenerate the old conflict, while a new EU-backed form of coexistence could stabilise the region.
· Gyula Hegyi is a Hungarian Socialist MEP
ghegyi@europarl.eu.int
April 26, 2006
Spring in the Balkans
AntiWar.com
April 26, 2006
Interesting Times
by Nebojsa Malic
Spring in the Balkans
News from the Balkans over the past week almost created the impression that this was just another ordinary region in the Empire's periphery, where local rustics practice entertaining eccentricities and cope with natural disaster. The greatest flood in 100 years along the Danube has attracted a lot of attention, as has the discovery of a "pyramid" in central Bosnia by amateur archaeologists.
The publication of a 250-page report, compiled by Croat and U.S. intelligence and warning that al-Qaeda is recruiting in the Balkans, almost came in under the radar. After all, this wasn't news; numerous sources have alleged and documented this activity for years, only to be ignored or dismissed as "pro-Serb." There's Islamic terrorism in the Balkans? Quick, outlaw the term "Islamic terrorism"!
Yes, the region may seem quiet, but the calm is relative and deceiving. Albanians are determined to achieve control of Kosovo, and perhaps beyond. Montenegro's ruling clique is desperately pushing for secession, with less than a month left before a referendum decides its political future. And in Bosnia, seemingly unimpressive constitutional reforms may open doors to omnipotent government the likes of which even that country has not seen before.
Easter in Kosovo
As beleaguered and besieged Kosovo Serbs gathered in their enclaves to celebrate Easter this Sunday, they could not escape the occupied province's politics, even on this holiest of Christian holidays. The head of the provisional Albanian government, former KLA leader and Croatian officer Agim Ceku, had asked to attend the service in Gracanica � a request politely but categorically denied by Bishop Artemije.
With the KLA responsible for the fact that the bishop and so many Serbs have become refugees in their own homeland, letting Ceku use Easter as proof of political correctness and "tolerance" toward Serbs would have been grossly inappropriate. But where Ceku failed, the Albanian "president" of Kosovo, Fatmir Sejdiu, succeeded; Bishop Teodosije allowed Sejdiu to attend the service in Visoki Decani, and one Kosovo Serb leader praised the precedent.
The diametrically opposite decisions of the two bishops mirror the division in Serbia when it comes to Kosovo. Even the leaders of Kosovo Serbs are divided; while Oliver Ivanovic praised Sejdiu's visit, his colleagues Rada Trajkovic, Marko Jaksic, and Milan Ivanovic claimed that the UN and WHO have been planning to evacuate some 40,000 Serbs from the occupied province once it became independent (and Albanian).
Their claim was denied by both the UN and WHO. However, even the province's international occupiers agree that Serbs won't survive long in an independent, Albanian Kosovo:
"The more vulnerable and isolated [Serb] enclaves will be emptied within one to two years. � I give [North] Mitrovica and the other entirely Serbian-populated areas to the north 10 years at the most."
Albanians insist the independence is inevitable, and a chorus of voices in the West backs up that assertion. There are murmurs that Albanians in southeastern Serbia (Presevo, Bujanovac), eager to win special status � or even annexation to the expected independent "Kosova" � are considering resorting to violence again. The game is afoot, and the plot thickens by the day�
Toil and Trouble
Meanwhile, the Western editorial propaganda apparatus has already begun lining up behind the Montenegrin separatist cause. Marcus Tanner, a journalist for The Independent and IWPR and Croat hagiographer, recently offered a sympathetic account of how the poor Montenegrins are "hostages" to Serbia, just like "everyone in the Balkans," and how they are determined to win their "freedom" despite the opposition from Brussels.
In truth, the separatists could not have stayed in power for eight years without generous financial backing from the outside � primarily from Washington. And Brussels may have declared a preference for a joint state of Serbia and Montenegro, but has treated the two as separate nations in practice.
Tanner says the Montenegrin authorities are acting as if the secession were a done deal. However, at least part of it is bravado in face of somewhat different reality. The New York Times' Nicholas Wood finds Montenegrins divided on the issue, sometimes down to husbands and wives. And the Italian AKI news service reports that, with the separatists 10 percentage points short of the majority they need, yet another film showing them trying to buy votes has surfaced. Furthermore, the government was outraged when a delegation of pro-union politicians who visited Washington last week was actually received by U.S. officials. Until now, only the separatists enjoyed access in Washington's circles of power.
With the referendum scheduled for May 21, the next 25 days will be anything but calm.
A Trojan Constitution
On Tuesday afternoon, the joint parliament of Bosnia-Herzegovina was supposed to adopt a set of constitutional reforms that, though relatively innocuous, could have major repercussions for the country's future.
Paradoxically, even as they seek to streamline government for greater efficiency, the reforms actually increase the size of the government and the number of bureaucrats, supposedly only temporarily. And while most changes are minor, they contain the equivalent of the U.S. "commerce clause" that could unleash centralization � "a legislative Trojan horse if ever there was one," as even the pro-reform, pro-Empire Transitions Online described it.
Another irony is that the reforms brought out sharp divisions among the Bosnian Muslims ("Bosniaks"). Wartime Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic emerged from his hideaway in Turkey to organize opposition to the reforms. His "patriotic bloc" consists of demagogues, rejects, and has-beens of Muslim politics over the past decade, and while condemned by the Muslim establishment (including the Islamic clergy), commands great attention in the media.
Silajdzic's criticism of the reforms plays the crudest nationalist card, claiming that only he and his are defending "Bosnia," and everyone else is plotting to destroy it. To counter it, Muslim politicians have had to trumpet their "patriotic" credentials; that has inevitably meant denouncing the Serbs and Croats. According to Transitions Online:
"For years, the Bosniak leadership has pretended that the issue � how to bring the Serbs and Croats who are alienated from Bosnia back into the political fabric of their country � didn't exist, or that it was the fault of Serbs and Croats to begin with."
Desperately in need of a "reality check," the Muslims are now reverting to this fiction instead, thanks to Silajdzic's demagoguery. If the constitutional reforms really result in a bigger, stronger central government, this will not bring peace to Bosnia's feuding communities. Quite the contrary: it will provide a massive bone of contention and promote more fighting.
The "Chinese" Curse
Robert F. Kennedy once mentioned what he said was a Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times." With the political winds in the Balkans gathering into a storm, this will certainly be an interesting spring.
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/?articleid=8901
April 25, 2006
Southern Serbia, or the Albanian "Motive-Hunting"
http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=809
Axis
24.04.2006
Southern Serbia, or the Albanian "Motive-Hunting"
Can Karpat, AIA Balkan Section
Their reasons are numerous: they are Albanians and the majority, the region is deliberately left undeveloped and poor by Serbia, their history and fate should be linked to Kosovo�s, they have the right to take their destiny into their own hands. One thing is certain: They want to have a �special status� within Serbia and they need a �motive� for this. Do the Albanian politicians of southern Serbia try to turn the Kosovo issue into a wider Albanian question in the Balkans?A meaningful timing
Those, who are acquainted with Shakespeare, know how difficult it is to analyse Iago, the wonderful villain of �Othello�. The puzzling question about Iago is the question �why�. Famous Shakespeare scholar, Samuel Taylor Coleridge uses the expression of �motive-hunting� for Iago, who seems not to know his main motive even himself, and who, with numerous soliloquies, tries to justify his deed.Nowadays the Albanian politicians of southern Serbia (the three towns of Presevo, Bujanovac, and Medvedja) seem to be in a similar �motive-hunting� process. They want to be granted a �special status� within Serbia and for this they need a convincing motive, so that the international community could commit themselves on their behalf as they did on behalf of Kosovo in the past. However the international community prefers to consider the Kosovo case as a sui generis. As it is known, the US administration convinced Moscow not to oppose to Kosovo�s independence with the guarantee that this will not set a precedent for Chechnya or elsewhere. Western powers do not wish a further ethnic-based atomisation in the Balkans. Yet, the Presevo Valley Albanians continue to look across the mountains at Kosovo, where they see the prospect of an independent Albanian state. And this is a great hope for the Albanians of southern Serbia, who have never been really happy to be just a minority in a Slavic majority state. The platform, which was adopted on 14th January by council members from Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja, �respecting the will of the citizens to define the Presevo Valley as a constitutional and territorial region�, demands for a �special status�, which definitely goes beyond standard autonomy. According to this platform, the Presevo Valley must have special relations with Kosovo, including the possibility of joining Kosovo. As the negotiations for the final status of Kosovo go on, a great opportunity offers itself to theAlbanian politicians of Serbia. The acting mayor of the Presevo Valley and the president of Democratic Albanian Party (DPA) Ragmi Mustafa stated: �Since Rambouillet, the parleys should have been attributed an Albanian-Serbian character, for the Albanian question concerns the whole ex-Yugoslavian territory. Since 1999, problems of those Albanians in Montenegro, the Presevo Valley and Macedonia should have been discussed�. As to the moderate president of Albanian Party forDemocratic Action (PDD), the most influential Albanian party of southern Serbia, Riza Halimi assured the international community that their demand to join the Kosovo negotiations does not mean that they demand the unification of these three municipalities with Kosovo. Yet, since the appearance of the Albanian National Army (ANA) in 2001, the Albanian political scene in southern Serbia has been radicalised. As a result, local parties have become more nationalistic. Politicians such Riza Halimi, who favours cooperation with Serbia and moderation are not popular any more. In November 2005, Ragmi Mustafa tried to oust Riza Halimi, who has been the mayor of Presevo since 1992. Along with Mustafa, Skender Destani, president of Democratic Union of the Presevo Valley and Orhan Rexhepi, president of Party of Democratic Progress pointed out that Halimi was an obstacle to their cherished goal, which is to unite to Kosovo the three municipalities in Serbia with large Albanian communities. That is why, today, the statement of Halimi does not gain much support among the southern Serbia�s Albanian politicians.This month, thousands of Albanians gathered in Bujanovac and Presevo in order to display their general dissatisfaction against the Serbian authority. Some shouted out �Presevo Valley is Kosovo�. According to rumours, southern Serbia�s Albanians expect an exchange of territory between northern Kosovo and southern Serbia. Northern Serbia, being a de facto Serbian enclave, is one of the main bones of contention between Belgrade and Pristina. Although every party involved refute these rumours, even the existence of such rumours is per se very interesting. This is a risky bluff. Pristina is careful not to unveil its position about the demand of the Presevo Valley to participate in the negotiations. This demand, which is disapproved by the international community, may harm Kosovo�s cause. Even Hashim Thaci, ex-chief of Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK), now - the president of Democratic Party of Kosovo, emphasised that their aim is to have an independent Kosovo, not a �Greater Albania� nor a �Greater Kosovo�. Will the new Kosovo Prime Minister, Agim Cheku, ex-UCK�s chief of staff, behave differently? Probably he will not. Kosovo politicians will avoid any radical attitude in order to obtain what they have ever wanted: full independence. However it is probable that the Kosovo politicians hold this card as a trump against the Serbs during the negotiations. If Belgrade insists on the partition of Kosovo, Pristina will not hesitate to demand about the status of the Albanians in the Presevo Valley. Whether the establishment of such a direct link between the Serbs of Kosovo and the Albanians of southern Serbia will be blessed by Western powers, which are determined to conclude the Kosovo question by the end of 2006 at any price is another interesting question. All the more as there is already a great pressure upon Belgrade. The signals coming from the politicians from Pristina and Presevo would be an ultimate �stick� to Serbia: �Our demands will be more radical if only Kosovo is divided�. Maybe not physically, but spiritually the Presevo Valley seems to weigh on the negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina. An artificial problem?The Albanians of southern Serbia are culturally and economically identical to those of Kosovo. Until 1946, when a decision by the Yugoslav government to separate these three municipalities from Kosovo and place them under direct Serbian Republic jurisdiction was taken, southern Serbia was a part of Kosovo. With the beginning of the unrest in Kosovo during the 1990s, the Albanians of southern Serbia organised an unofficial referendum in which they voted nearly unanimously to re-attach the Presevo Valley to Kosovo. In 2000, the unrest began, this time in southern
UCPMB patch
Serbia, with the terrorist attacks of the Liberation Army of Presevo-Medvedja-Bujanovac (UCPMB). Between March and May 2001, following intense NATO and US-led diplomacy, the international community brokered a peace agreement between the Albanians and Serbs that led to the disbanding of the UCPMB (Konculj Agreement) and to the famous Covic Plan. The Covic Plan foresaw economic, social and political amelioration of the region. Five years have been passed since the creation of this plan and the region, with an unemployment rate of about 33 percent, is still one of the poorest in Serbia. Presevo is the most undeveloped municipality, with a GDP per capita that is a sixth that of Serbia's average. Many Albanians are persuaded that Serbia deliberately condemns the region to chronic poverty. However the Serbian government has already invested 300 million Dinars (around 3.5 million Euros) this year in the three south Serbian municipalities and around 3.435 billion Dinars (about 40 million Euros) in the past four years. An additional 1.55 billion Dinars (18 million Euros) has come in foreign grants and donations, which makes a total of more than 5 billion Dinars (60 million Euros). Yet, it is true that most of the funds were spent on infrastructure, with little direct investment in the economy. No new jobs have been created in southern Serbia as a result of the investment. And although privatisation plays a key role in Serbia�s economic policy, not a single local public company has been privatised yet. These are the facts, though there is no clue that Serbia has any deliberate purpose in delaying the privatisation process. That the Albanians of southern Kosovo have serious problems is a fact. Yet, their case is definitely not comparable to that of Kosovo during the 1990s. Serbia is not the Serbia of Slobodan Milosevic any more. On the contrary, Serbia today wants to be a part of Europe as it never wanted before. And whereas there was once an open war in Kosovo, there is only a general dissatisfaction in southern Serbia. And this is not enough for the international community to multiply the Kosovo example. According to the EU officials, the Albanian youth would prefer to stay in Serbia, which will be a member of the EU and enjoy some visa facilities in the future. According to the same officials, only the elderly Albanians wish the annexation of the Presevo Valley to Kosovo. And after all, as they already dominate the town council, ethnic Albanians have little to gain from further divisions of the resources of an already impoverished community. And finally, the Albanians of southern Serbia, who did not support the UCPMB as a whole as the Kosovo Albanians supported the UCK, certainly will not approve of the use of violence to resolve their problems. The international community emphasised more than once that the Kosovo negotiations will only handle the Kosovo question and nothing else. The problems of southern Serbia will probably be dealt with in the framework of the democratisation and decentralisation process within Serbia. If the standards of minority rights are harmonised and generalised during the Kosovo negotiations, this will be a positive and productive evolution for the stability of the whole region. If these standards are the same in Serbia as well as in Macedonia and Montenegro, this will sure prevent further probable ethnic-based conflicts. So it seems that the international community will not let the Kosovo question be degenerated into a wider Albanian question in the Balkans. However the upcoming local elections in southern Serbia and the improbability in the Kosovo negotiations may prepare some unpleasant surprises for Serbia. �The situation in the south of Serbia is dramatic and I am afraid that serious incidents might affect security situation�, stated Riza Halimi this month. Local elections for Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja municipalities have not been scheduled yet, and they should, according to the law, take place in July. So this summer will be a turning point for Serbia as well as for the international community. One will see if the Albanian voters share the radical views of some of their politicians.
Axis
24.04.2006
Southern Serbia, or the Albanian "Motive-Hunting"
Can Karpat, AIA Balkan Section
Their reasons are numerous: they are Albanians and the majority, the region is deliberately left undeveloped and poor by Serbia, their history and fate should be linked to Kosovo�s, they have the right to take their destiny into their own hands. One thing is certain: They want to have a �special status� within Serbia and they need a �motive� for this. Do the Albanian politicians of southern Serbia try to turn the Kosovo issue into a wider Albanian question in the Balkans?A meaningful timing
Those, who are acquainted with Shakespeare, know how difficult it is to analyse Iago, the wonderful villain of �Othello�. The puzzling question about Iago is the question �why�. Famous Shakespeare scholar, Samuel Taylor Coleridge uses the expression of �motive-hunting� for Iago, who seems not to know his main motive even himself, and who, with numerous soliloquies, tries to justify his deed.Nowadays the Albanian politicians of southern Serbia (the three towns of Presevo, Bujanovac, and Medvedja) seem to be in a similar �motive-hunting� process. They want to be granted a �special status� within Serbia and for this they need a convincing motive, so that the international community could commit themselves on their behalf as they did on behalf of Kosovo in the past. However the international community prefers to consider the Kosovo case as a sui generis. As it is known, the US administration convinced Moscow not to oppose to Kosovo�s independence with the guarantee that this will not set a precedent for Chechnya or elsewhere. Western powers do not wish a further ethnic-based atomisation in the Balkans. Yet, the Presevo Valley Albanians continue to look across the mountains at Kosovo, where they see the prospect of an independent Albanian state. And this is a great hope for the Albanians of southern Serbia, who have never been really happy to be just a minority in a Slavic majority state. The platform, which was adopted on 14th January by council members from Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja, �respecting the will of the citizens to define the Presevo Valley as a constitutional and territorial region�, demands for a �special status�, which definitely goes beyond standard autonomy. According to this platform, the Presevo Valley must have special relations with Kosovo, including the possibility of joining Kosovo. As the negotiations for the final status of Kosovo go on, a great opportunity offers itself to theAlbanian politicians of Serbia. The acting mayor of the Presevo Valley and the president of Democratic Albanian Party (DPA) Ragmi Mustafa stated: �Since Rambouillet, the parleys should have been attributed an Albanian-Serbian character, for the Albanian question concerns the whole ex-Yugoslavian territory. Since 1999, problems of those Albanians in Montenegro, the Presevo Valley and Macedonia should have been discussed�. As to the moderate president of Albanian Party forDemocratic Action (PDD), the most influential Albanian party of southern Serbia, Riza Halimi assured the international community that their demand to join the Kosovo negotiations does not mean that they demand the unification of these three municipalities with Kosovo. Yet, since the appearance of the Albanian National Army (ANA) in 2001, the Albanian political scene in southern Serbia has been radicalised. As a result, local parties have become more nationalistic. Politicians such Riza Halimi, who favours cooperation with Serbia and moderation are not popular any more. In November 2005, Ragmi Mustafa tried to oust Riza Halimi, who has been the mayor of Presevo since 1992. Along with Mustafa, Skender Destani, president of Democratic Union of the Presevo Valley and Orhan Rexhepi, president of Party of Democratic Progress pointed out that Halimi was an obstacle to their cherished goal, which is to unite to Kosovo the three municipalities in Serbia with large Albanian communities. That is why, today, the statement of Halimi does not gain much support among the southern Serbia�s Albanian politicians.This month, thousands of Albanians gathered in Bujanovac and Presevo in order to display their general dissatisfaction against the Serbian authority. Some shouted out �Presevo Valley is Kosovo�. According to rumours, southern Serbia�s Albanians expect an exchange of territory between northern Kosovo and southern Serbia. Northern Serbia, being a de facto Serbian enclave, is one of the main bones of contention between Belgrade and Pristina. Although every party involved refute these rumours, even the existence of such rumours is per se very interesting. This is a risky bluff. Pristina is careful not to unveil its position about the demand of the Presevo Valley to participate in the negotiations. This demand, which is disapproved by the international community, may harm Kosovo�s cause. Even Hashim Thaci, ex-chief of Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK), now - the president of Democratic Party of Kosovo, emphasised that their aim is to have an independent Kosovo, not a �Greater Albania� nor a �Greater Kosovo�. Will the new Kosovo Prime Minister, Agim Cheku, ex-UCK�s chief of staff, behave differently? Probably he will not. Kosovo politicians will avoid any radical attitude in order to obtain what they have ever wanted: full independence. However it is probable that the Kosovo politicians hold this card as a trump against the Serbs during the negotiations. If Belgrade insists on the partition of Kosovo, Pristina will not hesitate to demand about the status of the Albanians in the Presevo Valley. Whether the establishment of such a direct link between the Serbs of Kosovo and the Albanians of southern Serbia will be blessed by Western powers, which are determined to conclude the Kosovo question by the end of 2006 at any price is another interesting question. All the more as there is already a great pressure upon Belgrade. The signals coming from the politicians from Pristina and Presevo would be an ultimate �stick� to Serbia: �Our demands will be more radical if only Kosovo is divided�. Maybe not physically, but spiritually the Presevo Valley seems to weigh on the negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina. An artificial problem?The Albanians of southern Serbia are culturally and economically identical to those of Kosovo. Until 1946, when a decision by the Yugoslav government to separate these three municipalities from Kosovo and place them under direct Serbian Republic jurisdiction was taken, southern Serbia was a part of Kosovo. With the beginning of the unrest in Kosovo during the 1990s, the Albanians of southern Serbia organised an unofficial referendum in which they voted nearly unanimously to re-attach the Presevo Valley to Kosovo. In 2000, the unrest began, this time in southern
UCPMB patch
Serbia, with the terrorist attacks of the Liberation Army of Presevo-Medvedja-Bujanovac (UCPMB). Between March and May 2001, following intense NATO and US-led diplomacy, the international community brokered a peace agreement between the Albanians and Serbs that led to the disbanding of the UCPMB (Konculj Agreement) and to the famous Covic Plan. The Covic Plan foresaw economic, social and political amelioration of the region. Five years have been passed since the creation of this plan and the region, with an unemployment rate of about 33 percent, is still one of the poorest in Serbia. Presevo is the most undeveloped municipality, with a GDP per capita that is a sixth that of Serbia's average. Many Albanians are persuaded that Serbia deliberately condemns the region to chronic poverty. However the Serbian government has already invested 300 million Dinars (around 3.5 million Euros) this year in the three south Serbian municipalities and around 3.435 billion Dinars (about 40 million Euros) in the past four years. An additional 1.55 billion Dinars (18 million Euros) has come in foreign grants and donations, which makes a total of more than 5 billion Dinars (60 million Euros). Yet, it is true that most of the funds were spent on infrastructure, with little direct investment in the economy. No new jobs have been created in southern Serbia as a result of the investment. And although privatisation plays a key role in Serbia�s economic policy, not a single local public company has been privatised yet. These are the facts, though there is no clue that Serbia has any deliberate purpose in delaying the privatisation process. That the Albanians of southern Kosovo have serious problems is a fact. Yet, their case is definitely not comparable to that of Kosovo during the 1990s. Serbia is not the Serbia of Slobodan Milosevic any more. On the contrary, Serbia today wants to be a part of Europe as it never wanted before. And whereas there was once an open war in Kosovo, there is only a general dissatisfaction in southern Serbia. And this is not enough for the international community to multiply the Kosovo example. According to the EU officials, the Albanian youth would prefer to stay in Serbia, which will be a member of the EU and enjoy some visa facilities in the future. According to the same officials, only the elderly Albanians wish the annexation of the Presevo Valley to Kosovo. And after all, as they already dominate the town council, ethnic Albanians have little to gain from further divisions of the resources of an already impoverished community. And finally, the Albanians of southern Serbia, who did not support the UCPMB as a whole as the Kosovo Albanians supported the UCK, certainly will not approve of the use of violence to resolve their problems. The international community emphasised more than once that the Kosovo negotiations will only handle the Kosovo question and nothing else. The problems of southern Serbia will probably be dealt with in the framework of the democratisation and decentralisation process within Serbia. If the standards of minority rights are harmonised and generalised during the Kosovo negotiations, this will be a positive and productive evolution for the stability of the whole region. If these standards are the same in Serbia as well as in Macedonia and Montenegro, this will sure prevent further probable ethnic-based conflicts. So it seems that the international community will not let the Kosovo question be degenerated into a wider Albanian question in the Balkans. However the upcoming local elections in southern Serbia and the improbability in the Kosovo negotiations may prepare some unpleasant surprises for Serbia. �The situation in the south of Serbia is dramatic and I am afraid that serious incidents might affect security situation�, stated Riza Halimi this month. Local elections for Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja municipalities have not been scheduled yet, and they should, according to the law, take place in July. So this summer will be a turning point for Serbia as well as for the international community. One will see if the Albanian voters share the radical views of some of their politicians.
NATO�s Invasion of Kosovo & Apologetics for State Violence
http://blog.zmag.org/node/2562
Home � ZBlogs � Noam Chomsky
NATO�s Invasion of Kosovo & Apologetics for State Violence
Z Sustainer: In an interview on Irish television (RTS News �On the Iraq War and Rendition Flights�, January 19, 2006) you were asked some questions about NATO�s �humanitarian intervention� in Kosovo. The interviewer quoted the executive summary of the OSCE report KOSOVO � As Seen, As Told concluding that the Serbian forces� �intent to apply mass killing as an instrument of terror, coercion or punishment against Kosovo Albanians was already in evidence in 1998�. You responded �They didn't say that. What they said is that they had contingency plans to carry out atrocities if they were under attack�. I haven't been able to find any mention of �contingency plans� in this report.
Noam Chomsky: Hard for me to remember exactly what was said in an interview 3 months ago, particularly one like this, which was mostly a tirade in which I was barely able to get a word in edgewise. However, what you cite -- "intent to apply mass killing" -- is a contingency plan, in that context: intent under certain circumstances, if they arise. That wasn't in question. It would have been unnecessary to add, redundantly, that the intent if those circumstances arise was formalized in a contingency plan. That's taken for granted. If the US and UK "intended" to invade Iraq, they had "contingency plans" to do so. That seems elementary. And note that after the period you are referring to, there was a tentative settlement, which more or less held until it was broken by the KLA guerrillas, and was maintained, in fact, until NATO announced the intention to bomb and withdrew the monitors and the KLA escalated its attacks (the OSCE reported)
When I wrote about this at the time and since, I mentioned that obviously the Serbs had contingency plans, as every sane person knew. The US has contingency plans to invade Canada. Israel has contingency plans to expel Palestinians, and few sane people doubt that they would carry them out if under attack. That&undefined;s what military planners do for a living.
The OSCE (and other Western) records are reviewed in some detail in my book A New Generation Draws the Line. I don&undefined;t know of any other detailed review. Later, I also reviewed the British Parliamentary Inquiry, which reached the remarkable conclusion that up to January 1999, most of the atrocities -- ugly, but at a low level, by international standards -- were committed by KLA guerrillas attacking Serb targets in the hope of eliciting a harsh response, and we know from OSCE and other sources that nothing substantial changed from then until the announcement of the bombing. The OSCE records describe an upsurge in KLA attacks when the monitors withdrawn were withdrawn in preparation for bombing (March 20). In that book I reviewed the kind of material selected from the OSCE report by the Irish TV announcer, but also reviewed the material that would have been selected by his exact counterpart in Belgrade, and the full conclusions. You can check and see.
There are a few serious scholarly studies by supporters of the bombing, which I&undefined;ve cited, in particular Nicholas Wheeler&undefined;s. Unlike almost everyone, he reports the timing of atrocities accurately. He draws the astonishing conclusion that of the 2000 killed in the year up to the bombing, 500 were killed by Serbs. That&undefined;s even more extreme than the British Parliamentary Inquiry. You can find citations in my Hegemony or Survival.
Z Sustainer: In the interview you also talk about �the entire Western documentation�. Is there any mention of �contingency plans� or any suggestion that the atrocities committed against the Kosovo Albanians were the product of the Serbs� implementation of �contingency plans� that were only set in motion because the Serbs �were under attack� in these documents? Or anything that amounts to same thing (in other words)? Your interpretation seems reasonable, but is there anything that suggests that the documentation (or NATO or the political leadership) interpreted the events the same way?
Noam Chomsky: That's constant, throughout, including the phrase you quote from the interview. Throughout, the record reviews possible "intent" -- that is, contingency plans. After the bombing, with the anticipated atrocities, it was commonly argued that the Serbs were going to carry them out anyway, so that the US and its allies are not responsible for the atrocities which, they anticipated, would result from the bombing. There was one explicit discussion of contingency plans (instead of just "intent," which is about the same thing, under the assumption of sanity). After the bombing elicited the anticipated atrocities, there was a leak of an alleged contingency plan -- Operation Horseshoe -- which was brought forth to show that the atrocities would have taken place anyway. Nato commander General Clark was asked about this, and said he had never heard of it. Even if true, it's irrelevant anyway, since it was not "known" before the bombing was undertaken, and therefore couldn&undefined;t have been a motive. The "Operation" was soon exposed as a probable intelligence fabrication. You can find details in my book. However, after exposure, and despite the transparent irrelevancy even if true, it continues to be evoked as a justification for the atrocities that were the anticipated consequence of the bombing.
As to NATO interpretation, in the same book I reviewed the official story. Once the standard inversion of the historical record is corrected (the timing of the bombing and the anticipated atrocities), the US official justification reduces to preserving "the credibility of NATO," which of course means "credibility of the US." For the meaning of "credibility," ask your favourite Mafia Don.
We know have a more authoritative source, however. From the highest level of the Clinton administration: Strobe Talbott, now director of the Brookings Institution, who was the lead American negotiator and director of a joint National Security Council-Pentagon-State Department task force on diplomacy during the bombing. Talbott wrote the foreword to a recent book on the war by his director of communications, John Norris. In it, Talbott writes that thanks to Norris�s book, anyone interested in the war in Kosovo �will know...how events looked and felt at the time to those of us who were involved� in the war. That sounds fairly authoritative. Presenting the position of the Clinton administration, Norris writes that �it was Yugoslavia�s resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform � not the plight of Kosovar Albanians � that best explains NATO�s war.� That had been surmised, but is now confirmed from a very high level.
Z Sustainer: Another Kosovo question. In a review of your book The New Military Humanism: Lessons from Kosovo Adrian Hastings writes the following: �Doubtless without intervention there would not have been hundreds of thousands of Kosovars fleeing the country within weeks, but there were already - as Chomsky admits - several hundred thousand internal refugees and an extensive policy of torching Albanian homes. There is no reason to think that this would not have continued and grown worse. The refugees were bound to abandon the country in ever-increasing numbers with no likelihood of return and the permanent destabilisation of neighbouring states. A Kosovo left in the hands of Milo�evic would have continued in a state of bitter conflict unless it became one in which over a number of months the majority of Albanians were ethnically cleansed. The growing flow of Albanian refugees all across Europe would have been as big a problem as that of Bosnians had been a few years earlier. Chomsky repeatedly claims that the bombing �failed� in that it greatly escalated the refugee flow; but its failure in that regard was only temporary. It in fact ensured the rapid return of the refugees, undoubtedly to miserable conditions but not to worse conditions than they had experienced in the months before the bombing, and essentially to a situation which would improve rather than indefinitely deteriorate.�Noam Chomsky: The word "admit" gives the game away. There's no "admission," any more than there is an "admission" that the KLA committed atrocities. Rather, I reviewed the record prior to the bombing. The book that infuriated him said virtually nothing about the decision to bomb; it was about a different topic, as the title indicates. But in my next book, when the record was available from impeccable Western sources, I did review it, infuriating the Hastings of the world even more.
Z Sustainer: 1. How would you respond to this kind of �it had to get bad before it could get better� argument? 2. Is the argument sensible if we make the assumption that diplomacy was not � and could not ever be � an option (just like our leaders)?
Noam Chomsky: I rarely bother to respond to vulgar apologetics for state violence. We can put aside Hasting's surmises, which have no interest or credibility. What we do know is that there had been a steady low level of violence, with some surges and declines, and that nothing special happening up to the bombing, apart from the KLA escalation right before the bombing, reported by the OSCE. We also know that according to the British parliamentary inquiry, most of the violence (as noted) was provoked by the KLA guerrillas seeking (as they openly said) to provoke a harsh response that they could use to elicit Western intervention, and that the bombing was undertaken with the clear anticipation that it would lead to an escalation of atrocities, as it did. This much was already clear from the Milosevic indictment, relying on US-British intelligence: with one exception, the charges were after the bombing -- which also elicited the first refugee flow out of the country sufficient for the UNHCR to begin issuing reports. Hasting also knows -- but would never say -- that there were two diplomatic options on the table at the time when NATO bombed, a NATO proposal and a Serb proposal, and that after 78 days of bombing, a compromise was formally reached between them, ending the war (I add "formally" because NATO instantly violated it, as he also knows). That at least suggests that peaceful means were still available, had NATO (meaning the US and UK) not been intent on military action -- for reasons that are now conceded publicly. Of course, if we adopt the North Korean stand and worship our Dear Leaders without question, then there were no diplomatic options.
To see how depraved such arguments are, consider a comparable one. Suppose that the relative military strength of Iran and Israel were the same as that of NATO and Serbia. Suppose that an Iranian Hastings were to advocate bombing of Israel, knowing that it would lead to an escalation of atrocities against Palestinians and probably expulsion of Palestinians, but saying that it doesn't matter because after Israel was forced to capitulate after heavy bombing the Palestinians could return. How would we react? How is this different?
It is also worth adding that the hypocrisy of the pretense of concern for the fate of the Kosovar Albanians is so colossal that it takes a really well indoctrinated educated class to suppress it. To mention only the obvious (discussed in New Military Humanism, but scrupulously ignored by outraged reviewers), at the very same time, the US and UK were not only tolerating comparable or worse atrocities, but were actively participating in escalating them -- including a major case that was not "at the borders of NATO," as the Hastings and others like him lamented, but right within NATO. To "overlook" all this and shed tears for the victims of the crimes of others takes a really impressive level of vulgarity and disciplined subordination to power.
� Noam Chomsky's blog login or register to post comments
About Noam Chomsky
Biography
Linguistics Professor at MIT, critic of US foreign policy, anti-capitalist, and long time advocate of liberation and justice, Noam Chomsky lives in Lexington, Massachusetts. Author of dozens of books and hundreds of essays, the content of this blog is drawn largely from the ZNet Sustainer Forum where he answers queries from members of the ZNet Sustainer Program.
Home � ZBlogs � Noam Chomsky
NATO�s Invasion of Kosovo & Apologetics for State Violence
Z Sustainer: In an interview on Irish television (RTS News �On the Iraq War and Rendition Flights�, January 19, 2006) you were asked some questions about NATO�s �humanitarian intervention� in Kosovo. The interviewer quoted the executive summary of the OSCE report KOSOVO � As Seen, As Told concluding that the Serbian forces� �intent to apply mass killing as an instrument of terror, coercion or punishment against Kosovo Albanians was already in evidence in 1998�. You responded �They didn't say that. What they said is that they had contingency plans to carry out atrocities if they were under attack�. I haven't been able to find any mention of �contingency plans� in this report.
Noam Chomsky: Hard for me to remember exactly what was said in an interview 3 months ago, particularly one like this, which was mostly a tirade in which I was barely able to get a word in edgewise. However, what you cite -- "intent to apply mass killing" -- is a contingency plan, in that context: intent under certain circumstances, if they arise. That wasn't in question. It would have been unnecessary to add, redundantly, that the intent if those circumstances arise was formalized in a contingency plan. That's taken for granted. If the US and UK "intended" to invade Iraq, they had "contingency plans" to do so. That seems elementary. And note that after the period you are referring to, there was a tentative settlement, which more or less held until it was broken by the KLA guerrillas, and was maintained, in fact, until NATO announced the intention to bomb and withdrew the monitors and the KLA escalated its attacks (the OSCE reported)
When I wrote about this at the time and since, I mentioned that obviously the Serbs had contingency plans, as every sane person knew. The US has contingency plans to invade Canada. Israel has contingency plans to expel Palestinians, and few sane people doubt that they would carry them out if under attack. That&undefined;s what military planners do for a living.
The OSCE (and other Western) records are reviewed in some detail in my book A New Generation Draws the Line. I don&undefined;t know of any other detailed review. Later, I also reviewed the British Parliamentary Inquiry, which reached the remarkable conclusion that up to January 1999, most of the atrocities -- ugly, but at a low level, by international standards -- were committed by KLA guerrillas attacking Serb targets in the hope of eliciting a harsh response, and we know from OSCE and other sources that nothing substantial changed from then until the announcement of the bombing. The OSCE records describe an upsurge in KLA attacks when the monitors withdrawn were withdrawn in preparation for bombing (March 20). In that book I reviewed the kind of material selected from the OSCE report by the Irish TV announcer, but also reviewed the material that would have been selected by his exact counterpart in Belgrade, and the full conclusions. You can check and see.
There are a few serious scholarly studies by supporters of the bombing, which I&undefined;ve cited, in particular Nicholas Wheeler&undefined;s. Unlike almost everyone, he reports the timing of atrocities accurately. He draws the astonishing conclusion that of the 2000 killed in the year up to the bombing, 500 were killed by Serbs. That&undefined;s even more extreme than the British Parliamentary Inquiry. You can find citations in my Hegemony or Survival.
Z Sustainer: In the interview you also talk about �the entire Western documentation�. Is there any mention of �contingency plans� or any suggestion that the atrocities committed against the Kosovo Albanians were the product of the Serbs� implementation of �contingency plans� that were only set in motion because the Serbs �were under attack� in these documents? Or anything that amounts to same thing (in other words)? Your interpretation seems reasonable, but is there anything that suggests that the documentation (or NATO or the political leadership) interpreted the events the same way?
Noam Chomsky: That's constant, throughout, including the phrase you quote from the interview. Throughout, the record reviews possible "intent" -- that is, contingency plans. After the bombing, with the anticipated atrocities, it was commonly argued that the Serbs were going to carry them out anyway, so that the US and its allies are not responsible for the atrocities which, they anticipated, would result from the bombing. There was one explicit discussion of contingency plans (instead of just "intent," which is about the same thing, under the assumption of sanity). After the bombing elicited the anticipated atrocities, there was a leak of an alleged contingency plan -- Operation Horseshoe -- which was brought forth to show that the atrocities would have taken place anyway. Nato commander General Clark was asked about this, and said he had never heard of it. Even if true, it's irrelevant anyway, since it was not "known" before the bombing was undertaken, and therefore couldn&undefined;t have been a motive. The "Operation" was soon exposed as a probable intelligence fabrication. You can find details in my book. However, after exposure, and despite the transparent irrelevancy even if true, it continues to be evoked as a justification for the atrocities that were the anticipated consequence of the bombing.
As to NATO interpretation, in the same book I reviewed the official story. Once the standard inversion of the historical record is corrected (the timing of the bombing and the anticipated atrocities), the US official justification reduces to preserving "the credibility of NATO," which of course means "credibility of the US." For the meaning of "credibility," ask your favourite Mafia Don.
We know have a more authoritative source, however. From the highest level of the Clinton administration: Strobe Talbott, now director of the Brookings Institution, who was the lead American negotiator and director of a joint National Security Council-Pentagon-State Department task force on diplomacy during the bombing. Talbott wrote the foreword to a recent book on the war by his director of communications, John Norris. In it, Talbott writes that thanks to Norris�s book, anyone interested in the war in Kosovo �will know...how events looked and felt at the time to those of us who were involved� in the war. That sounds fairly authoritative. Presenting the position of the Clinton administration, Norris writes that �it was Yugoslavia�s resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform � not the plight of Kosovar Albanians � that best explains NATO�s war.� That had been surmised, but is now confirmed from a very high level.
Z Sustainer: Another Kosovo question. In a review of your book The New Military Humanism: Lessons from Kosovo Adrian Hastings writes the following: �Doubtless without intervention there would not have been hundreds of thousands of Kosovars fleeing the country within weeks, but there were already - as Chomsky admits - several hundred thousand internal refugees and an extensive policy of torching Albanian homes. There is no reason to think that this would not have continued and grown worse. The refugees were bound to abandon the country in ever-increasing numbers with no likelihood of return and the permanent destabilisation of neighbouring states. A Kosovo left in the hands of Milo�evic would have continued in a state of bitter conflict unless it became one in which over a number of months the majority of Albanians were ethnically cleansed. The growing flow of Albanian refugees all across Europe would have been as big a problem as that of Bosnians had been a few years earlier. Chomsky repeatedly claims that the bombing �failed� in that it greatly escalated the refugee flow; but its failure in that regard was only temporary. It in fact ensured the rapid return of the refugees, undoubtedly to miserable conditions but not to worse conditions than they had experienced in the months before the bombing, and essentially to a situation which would improve rather than indefinitely deteriorate.�Noam Chomsky: The word "admit" gives the game away. There's no "admission," any more than there is an "admission" that the KLA committed atrocities. Rather, I reviewed the record prior to the bombing. The book that infuriated him said virtually nothing about the decision to bomb; it was about a different topic, as the title indicates. But in my next book, when the record was available from impeccable Western sources, I did review it, infuriating the Hastings of the world even more.
Z Sustainer: 1. How would you respond to this kind of �it had to get bad before it could get better� argument? 2. Is the argument sensible if we make the assumption that diplomacy was not � and could not ever be � an option (just like our leaders)?
Noam Chomsky: I rarely bother to respond to vulgar apologetics for state violence. We can put aside Hasting's surmises, which have no interest or credibility. What we do know is that there had been a steady low level of violence, with some surges and declines, and that nothing special happening up to the bombing, apart from the KLA escalation right before the bombing, reported by the OSCE. We also know that according to the British parliamentary inquiry, most of the violence (as noted) was provoked by the KLA guerrillas seeking (as they openly said) to provoke a harsh response that they could use to elicit Western intervention, and that the bombing was undertaken with the clear anticipation that it would lead to an escalation of atrocities, as it did. This much was already clear from the Milosevic indictment, relying on US-British intelligence: with one exception, the charges were after the bombing -- which also elicited the first refugee flow out of the country sufficient for the UNHCR to begin issuing reports. Hasting also knows -- but would never say -- that there were two diplomatic options on the table at the time when NATO bombed, a NATO proposal and a Serb proposal, and that after 78 days of bombing, a compromise was formally reached between them, ending the war (I add "formally" because NATO instantly violated it, as he also knows). That at least suggests that peaceful means were still available, had NATO (meaning the US and UK) not been intent on military action -- for reasons that are now conceded publicly. Of course, if we adopt the North Korean stand and worship our Dear Leaders without question, then there were no diplomatic options.
To see how depraved such arguments are, consider a comparable one. Suppose that the relative military strength of Iran and Israel were the same as that of NATO and Serbia. Suppose that an Iranian Hastings were to advocate bombing of Israel, knowing that it would lead to an escalation of atrocities against Palestinians and probably expulsion of Palestinians, but saying that it doesn't matter because after Israel was forced to capitulate after heavy bombing the Palestinians could return. How would we react? How is this different?
It is also worth adding that the hypocrisy of the pretense of concern for the fate of the Kosovar Albanians is so colossal that it takes a really well indoctrinated educated class to suppress it. To mention only the obvious (discussed in New Military Humanism, but scrupulously ignored by outraged reviewers), at the very same time, the US and UK were not only tolerating comparable or worse atrocities, but were actively participating in escalating them -- including a major case that was not "at the borders of NATO," as the Hastings and others like him lamented, but right within NATO. To "overlook" all this and shed tears for the victims of the crimes of others takes a really impressive level of vulgarity and disciplined subordination to power.
� Noam Chomsky's blog login or register to post comments
About Noam Chomsky
Biography
Linguistics Professor at MIT, critic of US foreign policy, anti-capitalist, and long time advocate of liberation and justice, Noam Chomsky lives in Lexington, Massachusetts. Author of dozens of books and hundreds of essays, the content of this blog is drawn largely from the ZNet Sustainer Forum where he answers queries from members of the ZNet Sustainer Program.
April 24, 2006
Tiny Montenegro Is Split on Cutting Ties to Serbia
NY Times
Europe
April 23, 2006
Tiny Montenegro Is Split on Cutting Ties to Serbia
HERCEG-NOVI, Montenegro � In May, Montenegrins will vote in a referendum to decide a question that has hung over them since four other former Yugoslav states � Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia � declared independence in the early 1990's: whether to retain ties with Serbia or go their own way.
Like much of Montenegro, this seaside resort on the Adriatic, a favorite of vacationers from Serbia, appears split down the middle.
"We all have friends or relatives on one side or the other," said Miroslav Milosev, 32, a waiter who came here five years ago to find a job.
He favors independence. "We are struggling together, and it's inevitable that we will go our own way eventually," he said. "Everyone else has."
But his wife, Ksenja, wants to keep ties with Serbia, where the economy and population of 9.7 million dwarf tiny Montenegro, which has slightly more than 600,000 people.
"I think it's silly to make new borders now," said Mrs. Milosev, whose parents are from Montenegro but live in Serbia. Not only does the town benefit from Serbian tourism, she said, but residents go to Serbia to attend a university or for medical care. "Education and health care is much better there," she said.
In reality, Serbia and Montenegro are quite separate already. Each has its own customs service, currency and government. They share little beyond the military forces and a foreign service.
But the debate over official independence is tense. And in this town, pollsters say, they have had to stop asking their questions on doorsteps.
"We give them the questions to fill out by hand," said Rasenko Cadenovic, of the Damar polling agency, based in Podgorica, the capital. "It's the only way to avoid a family row."
Montenegro, which shares a religion and a language with Serbia, supported the Serbian republic in the wars of 1991 to 1995. The two republics are all that remain of the former Yugoslavia. In 2003 they adopted the name Serbia and Montenegro, formally putting an end to the federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
But a small independence movement took root, and in 1998, when Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic embraced it when he was distancing his republic from Slobodan Milosevic.
Since then, the government has repeatedly noted that Montenegro was independent from 1878 to 1918, and became part of Yugoslavia only after World War I. Mr. Djukanovic describes the referendum as a chance to restore that independence.
But while his government argues that independence is needed to complete political and economic changes, Mr. Djukanovic's critics say it is a move initiated by him, the region's longest-serving leader, to entrench his control over Montenegro. And some, who want independence, resent his use of the issue.
Nebojsa Medojevic, a leading critic, predicted that nothing would change much for Montenegrins after a vote to break away, considering that Mr. Djukanovic has been in office for 17 years.
"Why would he start to reform things?" said Mr. Medojevic, who is the director of a group called the Center for Democratic Transition, which lobbies for Mr. Djukanovic's removal from office. "Any serious reform would endanger him and his friends. I am for independence, but I am absolutely against this regime."
Mr. Djukanovic's administration has been tainted by repeated accusations of corruption and links to organized crime. The prime minister is also wanted by a court in Bari, Italy, which investigated him on suspicion of links to cigarette trafficking.
For separation to occur 50 percent of those eligible must actually vote, and 55 percent must vote in favor. The terms were agreed on by the government and the European Union, which Montenegro hopes to eventually join.
Mr. Cadenovic says the elderly are more inclined to support the union with Serbia and younger people are more likely to favor independence.
There are geographic divisions too, with areas in the northeast, near Serbia, generally in favor of the federation, and areas on the coast wanting to break away. The pro-independence bloc is thought to have a majority, but perhaps not the 55 percent Mr. Djukanovic needs.
"With a 100 percent turnout, we estimate he has a 6 to 8 percent lead," Mr. Cadenovic said.
Should separation be approved, there is little Serbia could do. Montenegro has a constitutional right to independence, and diplomats say that Serbian retaliation could harm Serbia as much as Montenegro, which is Serbia's only route to the sea.
The prospect is tricky for Serbia. Negotiations are under way on Kosovo, the war-torn, Albanian-dominated province where Yugoslav forces withdrew only after NATO bombing in 1999. It has been run by the United Nations since, and it too could become independent.
There is little doubt the referendum will prompt high emotions, but few expect the kinds of conflict that followed declarations of independence in Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia.
"It won't be like that here," Mrs. Milosev said. "Everyone's roots here are so mixed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/23/world/europe/23montenegro.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Kosovo: The emerging terror state
.........................
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/mb/048.shtml
Serbianna
Views & Analysis Monday, April 24, 2006
Kosovo: The emerging terror state
By M. Bozinovich
Back in February, we spoke with Julia Gorin, a contributing commentator for the Jewish World Report and Front Page Magazine, about Kosovo and its links with the Islamic terror. The conversation eventually lended a front page cover for the Belgrade independent Weekly Telegraph, abut here we are transmitting it in its original, long format.
Why does the US have an ambiguous position on the Kosovo status: it publicly supports a negotiated solution, while privately numerous individuals involved in those negotiations support independence? What does that mean?
Bush does want a negotiated solution, but he also has to choose his battles carefully these days. In Congress, there are Democrats and Republicans who have been supporting an independent Kosovo, for whatever reasons, since 1999 and they aren't about to admit that they were/are wrong. The rest, including the old Clinton cronies pushing for independence, as well as the State Dept., would like to take the path of least resistance--namely, sweep Clinton's screw-up (Kosovo) under the rug and get it out of our hair. After all, it's a lot safer to screw over the Serbs than to anger the Muslims. So our policy is two-faced.
How much is the question of Kosovo's status the reflection of relations between the US and EU and the American desire to dominate the Balkans?
Despite how it may appear, the United States is not seeking to dominate the Balkans. The corrupt Clinton administration involved us in Kosovo mostly because they didn't want Monica Lewinsky to be the last thing people remembered about his presidency. If anyone lied to get us into a war, it was Clinton who claimed that the Serbs had killed 100,000 Albanians and expelled another million. (The American public is of course culpable for going along with it.) The Bush administration's interests in the Balkans have mostly to do with the war on terror. As for Europe-which usually creates its own problems-Clinton's America defecated in the middle of it and made it Europe's problem to clean up. Now, of course, the situation is so far gone that it's very difficult to straighten out or turn back. On top of that, the Balkans are a mystery to almost every American, including the intelligentsia, who stay away from the subject like a plague. Even conservatives, who support the war on terror and the war in Iraq, have a blind spot and an apathy when it comes to the Balkans, as well as to the fact that a lot of the terrorist attacks in Europe and elsewhere are connected to the Balkans. The lack of commentary, due to the culpable media's blackout on this topic, is largely responsible for the ambivalence you're observing.
Do you think US is supporting the policy of Greater Albania in the Balkans?
Before you can "support" a policy of a Greater Albania, you'd have to first understand that the Albanians' goal is a Greater Albania. But most in the United States don't understand it and they don't care enough to try. The Bush administration's acts of omission--coupled with the Clinton administration's aggressive acts of commission--tacitly support it. Members of the Clinton administration act with intent, knowing they are creating a Greater, Islamic Albania but hoping that voters here don't notice. And they won't.
Since 1999, we saw the departure of the last remaining Jewish family out of Kosovo. Why is Washington shy at actually doing something to protect the minorities in Kosovo?
Washington knows that setting standards for Albanians before independence is unrealistic for this bunch, so if you say to them-as we did to the Palestinians-"You have to first stop the terror, and then we can talk independence," it's the same as saying, "No independence for you." While I believe that's exactly what we should do, the administration can't suddenly reverse course and say, "We are not supporting an independent Kosovo." There would be an uproar in Europe, since they're the ones who would have to deal with angry Albanians in addition to the problem Muslims they already have, and this could also mess up the coalition in Iraq. The administration is being badgered even over obviously legitimate actions it's undertaking-from Iraq to Afghanistan to Lebanon to Iran--so Bush isn't going to overtly say Bosnia and Kosovo are Islamic terror states. We're just going to quietly put the Balkan Islamists on our watchlist. Bush is doing what he can, under the circumstances.
We've woven such a tangled web in the Balkans, the conflict is so misunderstood by most, there is so much inaccurate "common knowledge," that it would take too much political capital to explain and say we got it wrong from the start. It's the media's job to raise awareness, and the media failed--purposely. There are only a few in the media who understand, and they're not powerful or mainstream journalists. Don Feder and I are the closest to the "mainstream", and neither of us has been able to push this issue to the fore. It's just very hard to talk about when it's not on people's radars, and all they've heard from every media source is opposite of what you're telling them.
Even when people hear that there are Kosovo/Bosnia connections to the London and Madrid bombings, no one connects the dots and thinks that maybe what the Serbs were doing in their own backyard was the same thing that we've gone halfway around the globe to do. To be fair, the average thinking American has been suspecting this since 9/11, but his suspicions are not reinforced anywhere in the media or by politicians, because no one dares look back.
Is there a misperception in the Jewish-American community about the true state of affairs in Kosovo and Bosnia? How can this misperception be cleared up?
Yes, unlike our Israeli counterparts, American Jews are as confused as everyone else. What's interesting, and what gives me some hope, is that there are independent documentary filmmakers popping up, doing movies like "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West," and "Islam: What the West Needs to Know." The first one is a product of "Honest Reporting," which counters the international propaganda campaign against Israel, and the second one also has Jews involved. Both of these films touch on the fact that Bosnian Muslims fought for Hitler; the first shows Serbian churches being destroyed by Bosnian Muslims during the war in Bosnia, and the second (which you can read about at www.WhatTheWestNeedsToKnow.com) demonstrates with a map all the regions that have been falling to Islam-including how Greater Albania fits in (it mentions the bridging of Kosovo, Macedonia, Greece and Albania). Also, there is something called "Holocaust Museum Watch", which in at least one press release mentioned the Albanian SS Skanderbeg division and Bosnian Muslim SS Handzar division-and it faults the Holocaust Museum for not documenting or addressing the history of Islamic anti-Semitism.
With my article last year "A Jewish Albatross: The Serbs," I was trying to guilt my fellow American Jews into making some noise about this, before it's too late for Kosovo. I hope to write at least one follow-up article on this theme. I'm afraid that the only way to "clear up" the misperceptions is through a high-profile book. Because the pattern now is that even when it's widely reported that terrorist attacks originated in the Balkans, or that "we were suckers for the KLA", as one Washington Post article was titled (and there have been similar ones more recently), the press makes sure the subject has "no legs", as we say in journalism-meaning, that it won't go anywhere. So it's dropped like a hot potato to ensure that there will be no discussion and the subject never reaches a critical mass. In this way, the subject remains under the radar, and when we do hear anything at all about it, it's only when there is a good opportunity to support the view of Serbs as evil and everyone else in the Balkans as their victims.
Judea and Samaria, also called West Bank, are officially a non-sovereign Israeli territory. Kosovo is Serbian sovereignty. What impact will a decision to grant independence to Kosovo have on Israel?
What's interesting is that when Clinton attacked Belgrade on behalf of Albanians in Kosovo, the Saudi Prince Khaled Bin Sultan, commander of the allied Saudi troops during the first Gulf War, called on the US to do the same against Israel on behalf of Palestinians. Israel had a clear understanding of the situation in the Balkans. In fact, Axis Information and Analysis ( <http://www.axisglove.com/>; www.AxisGlove.com) mentioned in a December 2005 report that Israel secretly supported the Serbs during the Balkan wars (despite outwardly offering humanitarian aid to the Albanians, as they were pressured to do). In April 1999, Ariel Sharon visited the US and "called for an end to the fighting in Kosovo", stating that the KLA was being "supported by Iranian-backed terrorist organizations, and that an independent Kosovo would enable Islamic terrorism to spread throughout Europe." He also saw it as a dangerous precedent for the future possibility of Israel's Arab minority calling for autonomy. Aware of the parallels, Sharon asked American Jews to stop supporting the bombing of Yugoslavia.
As far as what impact a decision to sever Kosovo from Serbia will have on Israel, even though it does set a precedent, the Israeli conflict is old, with its own history, so not much can affect it. But many Islamic separatists who want to cut up other places into chunks are definitely emboldened by what they see in Bosnia and Kosovo.
How come Washington is not hawkish on eliminating al-Qaeda in Bosnia and Kosovo?
Everyone-the EU, U.S., NATO, the UN-is aware of the problem, and the terrorists are being hunted quietly, under the radar, so that the perception of Bosnians as victims remains. Publicly, politically and PR-wise, it's not going to help the current situation to suddenly accuse a country of fabricating a genocide. Especially with all the noise about Srebrenica, it would be almost impossible. How many people know that Srebrenica was not just a UN "Safe Haven"? The media won't tell you that Bosnian Muslims were using it as a base from which to launch attacks against Serbs. And when every Muslim is yelling about Srebrenica, it's hard to declare the "victims" a terrorist state and go all out on Bosnia. In general, with this war on terror, some battles are lower-key than others. But I don't have any inside information on the Bush administration; from what I can tell, however, it seems they are aware, things are being done, but a lot of it seems to be low key or covert.
But the truth of the matter is that the Muslim world has the West by the testicles. No one dares question what happened in Bosnia, for fear of worldwide rioting by Muslims. For the same reason, the Hague has to convict Milosevic regardless of the court's findings.
Nebojsa Malic put it very well in an August article: "Every time the Western powers clash with Muslims, whether at home or in Iraq, Afghanistan or another Muslim country, they crack the whip over Serbia. To show the world that their military interventions and intolerance are not driven by hatred of Islam and Muslims in general, they decide to help the Muslims of the Balkans."
Do you think Kosovo negotiations will precipitate tensions in the region and Albanian terrorism?
If the negotiations do not look to be heading toward the Albanian goal of an independent Kosovo, the Albanians will let the world know of their displeasure. They are committed to an all-out war to achieve their goal of an independent, Islamic Kosovo and they will be assisted by Islamic fighters from all over the globe, as they have been since the 1990's. What the Albanians did to Serbs, NATO and UNMIK in March of 2004 will pale in comparison.
This is why those who know that we screwed up--the State Dept., CIA, the old Clinton cronies still working behind the scenes through NGOs, and all the Congressmen who got Albanian money--are sweating to make sure that the terrorists just get what they want in the Balkans. This way, everything can get swept under the rug, and the American public won't find out the deadliness of that mistake and can continue to act like 1999 never happened. When the fighting does break out, the West will never be able to control it, but it will be interesting to watch how the press scrambles to keep a lid on it or twist the truth of the situation into even more of a pretzel.
Is there a hidden agenda behind the Islamic demand to mischaracterize Srebrenica as an Islamic genocide?
Absolutely. The Bosnians' mischaracterization (with journalists' help) of Srebrenica serves to deflect from the fact that the president of Bosnia during the wars, Alijah Izetbegovic, was a fundamentalist Muslim who had stated that "there can be no peace or coexistence between 'the Islamic Faith' and non-Islamic social and political institutions."
Izetbegovic was also a recruiter for the Nazi SS Handzar division which butchered Serbs and ethnic minorities in Yugoslavia during WWII. After he died in 2003, the ICTY revealed that he was being investigated for war crimes committed during the 1990s. Mischaracterizing Srebrenica also deflects from the Bosnian Muslims' actions during the 1990s wars which, as Balkans historian Carl Savich describes, included propaganda, staged massacres, and killing their own civilians to garner sympathy (e.g. the Markale Marketplace bombings in 1994 and '95).
On a more philosophical and humorous note, Muslims have always been jealous of the attention that Jews have gotten for their suffering (though, contrary to popular mythology, Jews are not thrilled that the Holocaust should be their defining historical event). The Muslims can't stand it that no one ever killed six million of them, when they have so many to spare--an event that would lend credence to their constant crusade promoting themselves as "victims". That's why they get so angry, for example, when Israelis kill only two or three Palestinians in the course of responding to suicide bombings. It's the agonizingly slow pace of this "genocide" that's killing them (which is why they're always padding the numbers of their dead, both in the Middle East and the Balkans). This also accounts for why they engineered the Bosnian "genocide" and the Albanian "genocide". They've since exported this successful strategy to the rest of the world, wherein they go about killing anything that moves, while claiming that Islam is under attack, which then "justifies" more killing.
If you were to change the American policy in the Balkans, what would you do?
The situation in the Balkans is currently so very in favor of the Bosnian and Albanian Muslims that only some major event could even begin to change world opinion on the region, and create an environment in which it is possible to change course. For example, the Palestinians have just blown their disguise completely by electing Hamas. The headlines read, "Hamas Election Victory Shocks World." Well, it didn't shock anyone who had a clear understanding of the region, and that the only Palestinian goal is the elimination of Israel. Hopefully, this major event "shocks" the world into a better understanding of the Palestinians. The Balkan Muslims would have to do something just as, or even more, "shocking" to get the world to start reevaluating the situation. Ultimately, the American policy in the Balkans should be the policy we established in our War on Terror after 9/11: You're either with us or you're with the terrorists. And the Bosnian and Albanian Islamists are not our allies in the War on Terror.
How do you see the outcome of Kosovo's status talks?
The Albanians will go to war if they do not receive an independent Kosovo. Understandably, the Serbs don't want to carve a chunk, especially the birth place of their national identity, out of their country and hand it over to Islamic terrorists. But the overwhelming international pressure is going to force them to do just that. Hopefully, between now and then, someone or something will prevent the official creation of another Islamic terrorist state in Europe.
Milosevic Lawyers Press for Unsealing of Records
Institute for War & Peace Reporting
Tribunal Update
Briefly Noted
Milosevic Lawyers Press for Unsealing of Records
TU No 449, 21-Apr-06
The lawyers responsible for assisting Slobodan Milosevic with his defence case prior to his death in March have written to the president of the Hague tribunal as part of their ongoing efforts to have records of the court's dealings with him made public.
In the latest submission, Steven Kay and Gillian Higgins urge Judge Fausto Pocar to assign a chamber of judges to the task of considering whether the material in question can be unsealed.The paperwork apparently consists of pleadings and medical records relating to the medical treatment the former Yugoslav president received in the court's detention unit and his efforts to secure a period of release to receive care in Moscow. Kay and Higgins say Milosevic told them before he died that he wanted the material made public.
The lawyers note that when they originally considered asking the chamber that had been hearing Milosevic's trial to release the material, they were informed by the court's registry that following his death, those judges no longer had anything to do with the case.
When they approached another set of judges – those responsible for deciding whether material from the proceedings could be made available for the purposes of an inquest and an internal inquiry – they were again told that they were speaking to the wrong people.
Kay and Higgins are currently in the process of appealing this decision.
In their simultaneous request for Judge Pocar to assign a chamber to resolve the issue, they argue that the matter is "particularly pertinent" given speculation regarding the circumstances of Milosevic's death.
Tests carried out on a blood sample taken from Milosevic earlier this year revealed the presence of a drug which was not prescribed to him by court doctors and which is known to counteract medicines he was taking for high blood pressure.
Following his death, it was revealed that Milosevic had written to the Russian authorities, expressing concern that he was being poisoned. The possibility has also been raised that Milosevic might have been taking the illicit medication in an effort to manipulate his own health and secure release from the tribunal's custody.
April 19, 2006
Borislav Milosevic blames tribunal for brother Slobodan's death
Borislav Milosevic blames tribunal for brother Slobodan's death
20:08 | 19/ 04/ 2006 MOSCOW, April 19 (RIA Novosti) - The brother of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic said Wednesday that The Hague tribunal should answer for his death.
"He was deprived of the right to treatment and subsequently the right to live," Borislav Milosevic said. "We must call a spade a spade - if a person is denied [medical] treatment than it is murder."
Milosevic, 64, was on trial in the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia on charges of war crimes and genocide when he was found dead in his prison cell March 11.
Borislav Milosevic said the future of The Hague tribunal should be called into question.
"It is high time to raise the issue of the future existence of the international tribunal for the former Yugoslavia," he said. "If an international body does not do what it was formed to do than it loses the legal basis for its existence."
The tribunal rejected Slobodan Milosevic's request to release him temporarily from detention in December 2005 to undergo treatment in Moscow, on the grounds that the former Serb leader would flee the trial.
MOSCOW, April 19 (RIA Novosti) - The brother of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic said Wednesday that The Hague tribunal should answer for his death.
Ethnic Hungarians in Serbia seek autonomy for Vojvodina
"This crossing is a part of Corridor 10 and is very important in international trade"
http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2006/04/18/feature-03
"This week, the Bosnian parliamentarians have the chance to send a positive signal to Europe that the country is ready and able to reform itself"
http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2006/04/18/feature-01
...............
http://www.dtt-net.com/en/index.php?page=view-article&article=1381&CMSSESSID=8b937fbb7fbe79f3320a97950edd1cda
Ethnic Hungarians in Serbia seek autonomy for Vojvodina
18/04/2006
(Novi Sad, DTT-NET.COM) - Ethnic Hungarian politicians in Serbia have called for Northern Province of Vojvodina to be granted autonomy, same as Belgrade is offering to Kosovo Albanians and is seeking for Serbs in UN administrated territory.
Andras Agoston from Democratic Party of Vojvodina Hungarians, Sandor Pal from the Democratic Community of Vojvodina Hungarians and Laslo Rac Szabo from the Hungarians' Civic Alliance have said in a letter sent to Serbia's President Boris Tadic that Hungarian and other minorities in the northern part of Serbia should be granted autonomy the same political rights that Serbia is offering to Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo and also seeking for Serbian minority there.
"We think that the principles of autonomies that are in the basis of the Serbian Government plan for resolving the position of Serbs in Kosovo are also valid in relation to the open and unresolved position of Hungarians and other minorities in Vojvodina," the three leaders wrote in the letter.
It's the second time in last four months that Hungarians raise the issue.
In December of last year the same three leaders in a letter addressed to Tadic and Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica called for talks for new upgraded status of Vojvodina to be held in parallel with already UN led launched process on the future of the breakaway Kosovo.
There was no response from Serbian leaders on the letters.
Serbia lately has been under pressure from international human rights groups and European Parliament for repeated acts of violence in the Northern Province which has a minority of more than 300,000 ethnic Ethnic Hungarians.
Last month two incidents against Hungarians were reported.
An Ethnic Hungarian was beaten by unknown attackers in Subotica town. According to Hungarian agency (MTI) the young victim, who has received cuts on his face has said that the assault was ethnically motivated as he was attacked when speaking in Hungarian language on the phone.
Another assault happened against a 28 year old Ethnic Hungarian in town of Kikinda. But this time the man was beaten at the police station.
The victim according the MTI has received serious injures that his spleen had to be removed. Twelve policemen have been sacked by Serbian authorities.
In the report by International Crisis group (ICG) Serbia has been criticised on its Hungarian minority human rights record. The ICG said that local politicians have recorded only in first five months of 2004, around 300 incidents orchestrated by members of Serbian radical party, including beatings, threats, the destruction of graveyards and national monuments, and anti-minority graffiti.
The European Parliament (EP) in a second resolution adopted in September last year warned Serbian government that respect of human rights is a strict condition Serbia must implement in order it can move closer toward EU and to conclude the talks on Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) with EU.
The resolution also called for increased competencies of Vojvodina's institutions, which were abolished in early '90s by Slobodan Milosevic.
The issue of Hungarians in Serbia is followed closely by Hungarian government and Hungarian members of European Parliament. Hungary joined the EU in May 2004.
....................
2006 a decisive year for the Balkans
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002936762_balkanyear18.html
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/?articleid=8869AntiWar.com
April 19, 2006 Birth of an Empire by Nebojsa Malic Review of Fools' Crusade
by Diana Johnstone
317 pages, Monthly Review Press, New York, 2002Books that have accompanied the 1990s Balkans wars have by and large been complete rubbish. There were, to be fair, some works worth reading. Yet the Balkans tragedy was missing a book that would explain things in layman's terms – yet accurately – and put the events that took place between 1990 and 2000 in a coherent context. Diana Johnstone, a respected commentator on the American Left, wrote a "well-documented and lively study" (cover) that accomplished just that.
From the very beginning to the last page of this book, Johnstone challenges the prevailing orthodoxies in the West about what happened in Yugoslavia. Conventional wisdom, constructed from layers of careful propaganda, has been that the West's intervention in Bosnia was too little, too late – and that the intervention in Kosovo was motivated by determination not to have "another Bosnia." Johnstone explodes this easily, offering facts instead of claims, arguments instead of assertions. She sets out to show that "the intervention of the NATO powers in Yugoslavia, far from being a last-minute rescue, was from the start a major driving factor in the tragic course of events." (p. 14) And she does.
The Yugoslav Guinea Pig
"The objective is not to recount the whole story … but to put the story in perspective." (p. 15)
Yet Johnstone does try to tell as much of the whole story as possible. Events in Yugoslavia had not taken place in a social, political, ethnic, religious, or diplomatic vacuum – yet the mainstream media and press have presented them precisely as such. Insofar as they've recognized any context at all, it was that of a villainous Slobodan Milosevic and "Greater Serbian nationalism." Johnstone explores the real Milosevic, deliberately ignored by the Western opinion-makers. She also spends time on the influence of IMF, and Yugoslavia's bad debt, which left it a hostage to foreign dictates.
Thus it was the Badinter Commission, an ad hoc advisory committee of European lawyers, who declared in 1991 that Yugoslavia had simply ceased to exist, and that its republics should be recognized as independent states. This decision, entirely in contradiction to the Yugoslav constitution, escalated the secession crisis into open warfare.
When, as a consequence of the Badinter ruling, Bosnia seceded – and immediately exploded into civil war – in 1992, Western journalists and activists who visited the region created a "Bosnia cult." Having condemned a multicultural Yugoslavia, they suddenly elevated an allegedly multicultural Bosnia into a paragon of modern virtue.
"A real aversion to war might have led journalists and writers to find in Bosnia merely the destructive chaos that can result when human beings fail to manage their collective affairs in a sensible way." (p. 48)
Instead, searching for the Great Cause of their generation, they created an idea of Bosnia as a multicultural paradise under threat:
"The notion that 'Bosnia' represented the model for Western Europe's integration of its Muslim immigrants helps explain the vehement hostility that arose against the Bosnian Serbs, accused of destroying this model society out of sheer racist nationalism." (p. 49)
In the end, Bosnia – and later Kosovo – were not at all about the people who suffered there, but about the Westerners who could cast themselves as their saviors and liberators.
Moral Dualism in a Multicultural World
But salvation required the threat of damnation first. In the second chapter, Johnstone explores how in the effort to present the conflict as a Manichaean struggle of good and evil, the Serbs were cast as demonic villains and their adversaries as angelic victims. The press and the public became obsessed with "war crimes," going so far as to claim they were the purpose of the war. And yet:
"The state of war is a state of crime. Killing people in peacetime, the worst of crimes, becomes a laudable act of civic courage. … Destruction of public and private property that would be considered vandalism and arson is encouraged and carried out systematically. On the sidelines of this massive and official criminal activity, war provides an opportunity for a multitude of more or less surreptitious private crimes, notably pillage and rape." (p. 75)
Faced with an onslaught of claims that genocide was taking place, the press had to decide: report it as true even if it might not be, or risk dismissing genocide that might later turn out to be real. They chose to err on the side of horror:
"A basic principle of caution, essential to justice, was rapidly abandoned. That is the principle that the more serious the accusation, the greater the need for proof. … Most in need of proof is the fact that the crime in question was actually committed. … The principle that has prevailed in Western media and public discussion has been quite the opposite, namely the more grave the accusation, the less the need for solid proof. Simply demanding evidence may be stigmatized as disrespect for the victims." (p. 75)
Johnstone spends the rest of the chapter exploring the devilish details: the origin of "genocide" imagery and words, the manufacture of "systematic rape," the numbers game, the uses of Srebrenica. She also dedicates several pages to the Hague Inquisition, showing how it was set up to validate the official story of genocide and war crimes.
Comparative Nationalisms and the Making of Empires
The next two chapters are pure context. "Comparative Nationalisms" deals with nationalist movements promoted by the West as a counter to the alleged "Greater Serbian" ideology supposedly championed by Milosevic. Here we get an overview of the role Slovenian, Croat, and Muslim nationalism played in the destruction of Yugoslavia.
One cannot discuss Slovenian or Croat nationalism without mentioning one of its principal sponsors, however. While the foremost champion of the Bosnian Muslims was the Clinton administration, Ljubljana and Zagreb were sponsored by Berlin. In chapter four, "The Making of Empires," Johnstone analyzes the role of Germany – an old Imperial power twice humiliated in the Balkans, who sought to settle old scores and assert its newfound political and military influence after reunification.
The New Imperial Model
Chapter 5 is dedicated to Kosovo. Three pages of Johnstone's background on the region are more informative and accurate than the 300 pages of Noel Malcolm's hack "short history." This is a story of the conflict in Kosovo, the Racak "massacre," the Rambouillet ultimatum, and the 78 days of terror from the skies NATO dubbed "humanitarian intervention."
Importantly, Johnstone does not end her account in June 1999, when Kosovo came under UN/NATO occupation. NATO continued the war through other means, eventually establishing in Serbia an acceptable client government through the "revolution" in October 2000. Since then, the cornerstone of NATO's policy towards Serbia has been straightforward:
"It was not enough to bomb Serbia and detach part of its territory. The Serbian people must be made to believe – or to pretend to believe – that they deserved it." (p. 258)
Perpetual War
The title of the postscript refers as much to the continuing story of Yugoslavia as to the ongoing intervention by the American Empire. Kosovo was the culmination of Balkans interventions that established the U.S. as the overlord of Europe, and created an "imperial condominium" between Washington and Brussels.
"The NATO war against Yugoslavia might be studied by ethnologists as a contemporary example of the familiar role of blood rituals in sealing the unity of groups. … Once the NATO governments had taken part in devastating a country that had done them no harm, they had to stick together…." (p. 261)
Interventions in Yugoslavia were subsequently used as a template for conquest: economic crisis (debt, blockade, "reforms") impoverishes the nation, aggravating ethnic and/or regional tensions. Ethnic conflicts are then dubbed a "human rights crisis," at which point the U.S. intervenes. The resulting destruction only deepens conflict and bitterness. The region is then placed under the protectorate of the "International Community," which crushes any local government with potentially independent ideas. (p. 262)
Johnstone's leftist politics come into play here, as she argues that Yugoslavia's mixed-property socialism was an unacceptable alternative to globalization (i.e., hegemony of American capitalism). To support her argument, she cites (p. 263) Thomas Friedman's notorious proclamation that "The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist. McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas" (New York Times, March 28, 1999). Friedman wrote this in one of his vitriolic tirades about bombing the Serbs into the Stone Age. Even though it is utter nonsense, on par with Friedman's extensive opus of idiocy, most people in power consider it true and act accordingly. How else explain the war in Iraq, or the desire to control the world in general?
And this is where Yugoslavia comes in. It was a case that established a precedent for a pattern of aggression that has since become the hallmark of American Empire:
"The bombing of Yugoslavia marked a turning point in the expansion of U.S. military hegemony. … International law was circumvented in the name of an alleged higher moral imperative. A precedent was set…. In a world with no more legal barriers to might proclaiming itself right, there was nothing to stop a U.S. president from using military force to crush every conceivable adversary." (p. 1-2)
The end result of "humanitarian" interventions in the Balkans is the current world of perpetual war: a global Balkans, if you will, where might makes right and truth is whatever the mighty want it to be.
More than just telling the story of Yugoslavia's dismemberment, Johnstone has told a story of American Empire's rise to power in the 1990s – something no one else has seriously attempted, much less accomplished, to date. Fools' Crusade is not the ultimate book about the Yugoslav 1990s, but it comes fairly close.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
