May 30, 2006

WT: Objections remain to independence

Objections remain to independence

By Bruce I. Konviser
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 30, 2006


PODGORICA, Serbia-Montenegro -- A declaration of independence making Montenegro the world's newest nation could come as early as Friday, but lingering objections to the results of a May 21 referendum have spoiled some of the fun for Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic.
    The ballot, in which pro-independence forces narrowly achieved a supermajority threshold demanded by the European Union, was the crowning glory of Mr. Djukanovic's career.
    But the pro-unionist bloc, which favors maintaining the Serbia-Montenegro federation, is refusing to accept the results even after international observers declaring the plebiscite to be free, fair and in accordance with international standards. The bloc claims thousands of ballots were cast illegally by registered voters from neighboring countries.
    "I'm not surprised by such a position," Mr. Djukanovic said in an interview. "This is part of their political tradition. Over the past 10 years or so, there have been only two outcomes for them. Either they will have won, or the vote has been stolen."
    Mr. Djukanovic charged that the pro-unionists, made up largely of ethnic Serbs, are encouraged in their intransigence by the Belgrade government of Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica.
    "What is happening now in Montenegro is directly inspired by, and from, Mr. Kostunica's office in Belgrade," Mr. Djukanovic said. "Mr. Kostunica, as a through-and-through nationalist, would like to leave to Serb nationalists an open issue that some [territorial issues] are open to dispute for Serbia beyond its border."
    Congratulations on the referendum result have already come in from Mr. Djukanovic's counterparts in neighboring Croatia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. But Mr. Kostunica has been silent.
    Still, the prime minister maintained that opposition challenges couldn't change the results, which he said are indisputable and represent the will of the Montenegrin people.
    Before the referendum, the European Union, skittish about reigniting the ethnic tensions that tore apart the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, mandated that the pro-independence bloc obtain at least a 55 percent majority in order for the EU to accept the desire for independence.
     The pro-independence bloc cleared that threshold by about half a percentage point. The election commission is expected to ratify the results this week and send them to parliament for confirmation. That should be followed by a parliamentary declaration of independence, which the prime minister said could come as soon as Friday.
     That would formally end the Serbia-Montenegro federation that was born three years ago out of the last remnants of the former Yugoslavia. Civil war tore Yugoslavia apart in the 1990s, as Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia all left the federation to form their own separate states.  

 

Objections remain to independence
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20060529-110959-6447r.htm

New Europe: "End Balkanization Now!" by Aleksandar Mitic

 

 

 

 

 

May 28- June 3, 2006. Issue Number 679

 

Page 2 – Opinion

 

 

End Balkanization Now!

 

By Aleksandar Mitic

 

An old saying in Montenegro used to say “Crna Gora i Srbija – to je jedna familija†(“Montenegro and Serbia – one familyâ€). Today, pro-independence graffiti in Montenegro read “Crna i Gora i Baskija – to je jedna familija†(“Montenegro and the Basque Country – one familyâ€).

 

Indeed, if the preliminary results of the Montenegrin referendum on independence are confirmed, the process of the balkanization of the Balkans will have scored one more point.

 

Some say it also paved a chance for many independence-hopefuls around Europe, be it in Catalonia, the Basque Country or Scotland, which have sent their observer missions to Podgorica to monitor the mechanics of intra-state divorce.


It might be contrary to the logic of European integration and the equation mark between the European Union and “borderless Europeâ€, but it is real and it is happening in 2006, just a few weeks before the June summit on  “the future of Europeâ€.

 

As far as enlargement is concerned, EU leaders should answer the question: “Does a European future imply further balkanization of the Balkans?†or “Do the Balkans have to choose a nationalistic past in order to pave their way to their European future?â€.

 

If the answer is yes, EU finance ministers should start planning a budget for more crisis management and Balkan nations should start digging out marching songs cds back from the basement.

 

If not, the “balkanization of the Balkans†must end. Now!

 

It must end now, because Montenegrin independence at least had a legal basis. Under the findings of the 1991-92 Badinter Commission on the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, all six Yugoslav republics – and only republics not provinces -- had the legal right to become independent.

 

After Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia, Montenegro is the last former Yugoslav republic to seize the opportunity.

 

It means that Kosovo, a province of Serbia, does not have the right to secession. Indeed, an independence of Kosovo – against the will of Serbia – can only be illegal, one-sided and imposed.

 

As such, an independent Kosovo would be the real, universal opener of the Pandora box of separatism.

 

According to the UNDP, there are some 5,000 different ethnic groups living in some 200 countries in the world. According to the figures of the study “Minorities at riskâ€, some 509 ethnic groups in the world consider themselves as politically discriminated and want autonomies or states.

 

All separatist or independence-seeking movements in the world already have their eyes set on the resolution of the Kosovo talks, especially since most of them have suffered much more tragic conflicts and have waited for the solution to their problems much longer than has the southern Serbian province, populated by an Albanian majority.

 

Indeed, a Kosovo precedent would have world ramifications.

 

It could impact on the tense relations between two nuclear powers – India and Pakistan – disputing Kashmir, a region very much like Kosovo in terms of ethnic proportions, violence or religious symbolism.

 

It could have an impact on the world’s largest country – Russia – with Transdniestria in Moldova, Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia seeking to integrate it and Chechnya seeking to separate.

 

The world’s most populous country – China – could face separatism in Xinjiang, not forgetting Taiwan and Tibet.

 

Eternal pragmatists should think about the impact of imposed independence on some of the world’s most important pipelines – winding their way through disputed territories around Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh or a Kurdistan.

 

Back to the Balkans, people still do not know whether they will be part of the next wave of EU enlargement due to its “absorption capacityâ€, but they surely are themselves still digesting the last wave of balkanization from the 1990s.

 

In the news today, the High representative in Bosnia-Herzegovina Christian Schwarz-Schilling expressed his worry about the slow progress of reintegration of the southern Bosnian town of Mostar, divided between Croats and Muslims since a conflict which ended 12 years ago.

 

Near Prizren, in Kosovo, an Albanian mob clashed with UN police after attacking and injuring Serb lawyers investigating a war crimes case for the Hague tribunal. A local Albanian leader later explained it was a mistake: they thought they were attacking Serb refugees trying to visit their homes seven years after being brutally expelled.

 

So, what kinds of signals would the pursuit of balkanization send to the Muslims in the Sandzak area, the Albanians in southern Serbia or in western FYROM, the Hungarians in northern Vojvodina, the Serbs in eastern Slavonia, eastern Montenegro or eastern Bosnia?

 

Indeed, if “yes†to an independent Kosovo, why not a “yes†to an independent Republika Srpska for example – which also has a 90-percent majority seeking to break away?

 

I can almost feel some eyebrows raising.

 

But can there be any more “taboos†if there are no more principles?

 

Aleksandar Mitic is the Brussels correspondent of the Tanjug news agency, a Lecturer at the University of Belgrade and analyst at the Institute 4S, Brussels.

 



Bosnian Serbs Call For Independence Referendum



http://news.scotsman.com/latest_international.cfm?id=795432006


Reuters
May 29, 2006


Calls for Bosnia Serb referendum
By Olga Lola Ninkovic


BANJA LUKA, Bosnia - Long-standing calls by Serb nationalists [sic] for the
Serb Republic to secede from Bosnia grew louder on Monday, following
Montenegro's vote in a referendum earlier this month to split from Serbia.

The Serb National Movement, made up mostly of Serbs forced out of Croatia in
1995, said it had collected nearly 50,000 signatures of Serbs across the
country for a petition to demand an independence referendum.

"The will of the citizens cannot be ignored. The Serb people do not want to
live in a Bosnia imposed on them. The Serb people want a free Republika
Srpska, separated from an imposed Bosnia and Herzegovina,"
said movement president Dane Cankovic.

An apparent endorsement of the referendum demand by Bosnian Serb Prime
Minister Milorad Dodik was sharply rebuked on Monday by the country's
international peace overseer, Christian Schwarz-Schilling, part of whose job
is to keep Bosnia together.

"The international community will not allow the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina to be endangered," his office said in a
statement on Monday.
....
The U.S.-sponsored Dayton accord ended Bosnia's war of secession from
Serb-dominated Yugoslavia in 1995, making Bosnia a single state comprising
two "entities"
- the Serb Republic and the Muslim-Croat federation.

Although its 18-month initiative for secession has been ignored officially,
the Serb National Movement gained popularity after Montenegro voted for
independence, dissolving its loose union with Serbia.
....
Montenegro was one of Yugoslavia's federal republics with a legal right to
secession which it retained in the looser Serbia-Montenegrin union.

Under Bosnia's peace accord Republika Srpska had no such right. Kosovo is
still nominally a province of Serbia but is under U.N. control.

Dodik proposed Bosnia be organized as a federal unit, giving each ethnic
group the right to self-determination through referendum....

Serb radicals urged Dodik on Monday to put the referendum issue on the
parliamentary agenda to prove he was serious, not simply fishing for votes
ahead of the October general election.

May 27, 2006

Belgrade Burndown

Newsweek
 

Belgrade Burndown
Was a bitter secret feud over an alleged intelligence lapse during the Clinton years behind Porter Goss's efforts to push out some top CIA officials?

WEB EXCLUSIVE
Column/Terror Watch
 
Updated: 5:21 p.m. ET May 24, 2006

May 24, 2006 - As controversial CIA Director Porter Goss exits the agency, NEWSWEEK has discovered new details about a purge of top agency operatives shortly after Goss's arrival in 2004. A bitter secret feud over a Clinton-era counterintelligence case was apparently a major motivation behind the loss of those seasoned intelligence veterans, sources say. Gen. Michael Hayden, President Bush's nominee to replace Goss as CIA chief, has signaled that when he is confirmed by the Senate, probably later this week, he intends to appoint one of the principal victims of the feud, former CIA operations chief Stephen Kappes, as deputy CIA director—a move that is regarded inside the intelligence world as a final insult to Goss and his inner circle.

The secret feud revolves around how CIA management, led by former director George Tenet, handled a 1999 counterintelligence problem that arose as a result of the Clinton administration's bombing of Belgrade to oust Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic. Though the counterintelligence investigation ended years ago, egos and reputations were so deeply bruised that participants on both sides of the dispute (who spoke to NEWSWEEK anonymously because the matter is still considered sensitive) still fume when discussing the case. The CIA declined to comment on the matter.

After President Clinton ordered the bombing of Belgrade to begin in the spring of 1999, the American Embassy in the Serbian capital was evacuated of all personnel, including the entire CIA station. Before leaving the building, allegedly in haste, CIA officers were supposed to destroy all secret documents. Current and former intelligence officials called this procedure a "burndown" or "burnout." When they believed they had burned everything, CIA officials left the Belgrade embassy, but not before locking the heavy vault door at the entrance to the office suite that housed the CIA station.

American diplomats and CIA officials didn't return to the embassy until around nine months later, after the U.S. bombing of Belgrade stopped. When they opened the vault door into their suite, however, CIA officials were alarmed to discover that some secret documents had not been destroyed. Instead, they were found left lying either behind desks and file cabinets or in open sight, depending upon which version of the story is being told. According to some accounts, the unburned material included papers or microfiche identifying undercover informants—the kind of information that is among the most sensitive of all secrets the CIA is supposed to protect.

The agency launched a big investigation to determine whether any of the secret papers had been compromised. The inquiry was led by Kappes, the man who headed the counterintelligence office of the CIA's operations directorate. This group—which Goss renamed the National Clandestine Service—is the CIA branch principally responsible for recruiting informants and stealing secrets from foreign governments and groups believed to pose a threat to U.S. interests.

Kappes's investigation, which former intelligence officials familiar with the matter describe as exhaustive, determined there was no evidence that any classified materials had been compromised. According to the sources, the investigation found no evidence the door to the vault sealing CIA offices from the rest of the embassy had been tampered with; "counters," which logged the number of times the vault had been opened and shut, showed no evidence that the door had been opened during the months the embassy was vacant.

CIA security experts could find no other evidence of intrusion. The only way a hostile power could have gotten into the CIA offices, said one official who worked on the case, was to have torn down the wall to the CIA station, entered the CIA offices, copied any unburned secret documents, put them back in place and reconstructed the office's outer wall—all without leaving any trace.

But when the House Intelligence Committee, chaired at the time by Goss, a Florida GOP congressman and one-time CIA spy, was informed about the investigation, senior staffers who ran the committee for Goss became highly suspicious. For a start, according to an official familiar with the Goss camp's views, Goss's aides believed the CIA had inordinately delayed informing Capitol Hill about the counterintelligence investigation. According to this account, the CIA did not inform the committee of the problem until weeks after it was first discovered.

Goss's aides pressed the CIA for more information, but the agency continued to insist there was no evidence that any secrets in Belgrade had been compromised, according to sources. Goss's aides were unsatisfied with the agency's responses, however, and came to believe, according to a source in the Goss camp, that the agency was "stonewalling."

As a result, Goss's House committee staff launched their own investigation into the incident, complete with field trips to Europe. According to a source familiar with the committee probe, the Goss team concluded that there were unspecified "anomalies" indicating that as many as three foreign intelligence services—including the Serbs and the Russians—had gotten inside the abandoned CIA station, copied the unburned CIA files, and then cleaned up any evidence of intrusion so brilliantly as to make their presence undetectable.

The CIA group, led by Kappes and his superiors, continued to maintain there was no evidence of any intrusion. The more the CIA argued this, however, the more Goss's aides began to suspect a cover-up. At the very least, said a source close to Goss's team, the House investigators wanted the CIA to acknowledge the possibility that secrets in Belgrade might have been compromised.

The CIA continued to insist there was no security breach; officials pointed out that it was virtually impossible to "prove a negative," namely to prove 100 percent that no sinister forces got into the Belgrade CIA station. Goss's aides pressed for the CIA to fire or discipline the CIA's station chief in Belgrade, but Kappes, heading the CIA's internal investigation, refused. Goss's team grew more and more irate at the agency's attitude. Eventually, Goss's aides persuaded him to sign a secret letter cutting the CIA's counterintelligence budget by $3 million; this was intended as a deliberate rebuke to the agency's handling of the Belgrade incident and its aftermath, according to former and current intelligence officials familiar with the matter. But CIA management, under Tenet, ignored the budget-cut order, and the agency eventually returned to business as usual, with no officials being fired over the Belgrade incident (or nonincident, depending on whom you believe).

Goss's aides continued to seethe at what they perceived to be Clintonite dissembling by Kappes and other permanent CIA officials. After the Senate in 2004 confirmed Goss as Tenet's permanent replacement as CIA director, Goss brought with him to the CIA at least two former congressional aides who had worked on the Belgrade investigation; one of them, Patrick Murray, became Goss's chief of staff. Almost immediately the Goss staffers, most of whom had worked years earlier at the agency but left after truncated careers, encountered friction with career agency officials, who derisively began referring to the Goss's aides as "Gosslings."

Within weeks of the Gosslings' arrival at CIA headquarters, Murray got into an argument with Kappes—who by then had been promoted to head the entire Operations Directorate—and his chief deputy, Michael Sulick (who also worked on the Belgrade investigation). The argument became so heated that Murray ordered Kappes to fire Sulick. When Kappes refused, both he and Sulick, regarded as two of the agency's most skilled field operatives and espionage managers, left the agency. "It was his decision to leave," Kappes's father, Bob Kappes, told NEWSWEEK.

But a source close to the Goss team said that because of the bitterness over Belgrade, a fierce clash between Kappes and the Gosslings was perhaps inevitable. Also driven from the agency soon after the Gosslings' arrival was the CIA's No. 3 official, Executive Director A.B. (Buzzy) Krongard, who had defended agency handling of the Belgrade investigation, and other senior CIA operatives connected to the case.

Two weeks ago, Goss suddenly announced he was stepping down as CIA director, amid only lukewarm praise from President Bush and other officials regarding how he managed the agency. By the end of this week, Goss and most of his coterie of Gosslings are expected to have left CIA headquarters for good.

Shortly after the White House announced the president's intention to nominate General Hayden to succeed Goss as CIA chief, John Negroponte, the national-intelligence czar whose office was set up by Congress after 9/11 to better coordinate the activities of the CIA and other spy agencies, announced that he wanted Kappes, who has been working in London for a private security firm, to come back to CIA headquarters as Hayden's deputy. Kappes's father told NEWSWEEK last weekend that his son would only take the job if he was not going to be treated like a "political pawn." So far, indications are that Kappes will get the assurances he wants and will be joining Hayden in the CIA director's seventh-floor executive suite in the relatively near future.

© 2006 MSNBC.com

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12957885/site/newsweek/

May 26, 2006

The lingering death of Yugoslavia

The lingering death of Yugoslavia

Montenegro this week became the latest Balkan region to vote for independence. But what have the trappings of statehood done for the rest of Tito's former empire?

Peter Popham reports

Published: 27 May 2006

Once upon a time there was a plausibly modern, enlightened Communist country called Yugoslavia which manufactured cars called Yugos and staged the Winter Olympics and which for many, including millions of Western holidaymakers, was the acceptable face of Eastern Europe, the bit that worked and that we could do business with - all dominated by the benign Mr Tito.
And today? With the decision for independence last week of tiny Montenegro, Yugoslavia is no more. Instead there is a multiplying proliferation of statelets that belong more to the world of Tintin than to what was once thought of as modern Europe.
Tintin would have felt perfectly at home in Podgorica, the Montenegrin capital. The Belgian boy detective, you will remember, arrived in the Balkan kingdom of Syldavia by aeroplane, dropped through a trap door in the fuselage by the dastardly twin brother of Professor Alembick, and landing in a bale of hay. Once there he encountered a world of revolutionaries, spies, moustachioed bandits and anarchists, all in the shade of the gigantic mountains.
Today the grandson of the last king of Montenegro travels regularly to the nation's tiny former capital, Cetinje, by motorcycle, from Paris. He denies he aims to revive the monarchy, but who could be sure? The leader of the country is a musclebound character in a chalk-stripe suit who has been a Communist and an apostle of Serbian expansionism and is now a Montenegrin nationalist. Today he mutters angrily about Serbian "meddling".
In reality (according to the testimony of an Italian gangster) he is a big-time cigarette smuggler. But he is not the only bad hat in town: the Russians are coming! They have bought the country's only factory and huge strips of the beautiful coastline.
It is a country out of comic opera or a period cartoon, with a population one-tenth the size of London. But in a year or two, if Montenegro's tall, sleek, handsome and wily Prime Minister, Milo Djukanovic, gets his way, his sovereign nation will sit alongside the UK, Germany, France and the rest in the councils of the European Union. And jostling behind him in the queue to join will be several other even more improbable specimens.
Yugoslavia ended, but what came into being? We have no handy term for what has replaced the Union of the South Slavs. We are back to the geographical term, the Balkans - from which derives the verb "to balkanise", which means "to break up into small, mutually hostile political units". We are back at the view of the Balkans immortalised by Herg�: a collection of tiny, exotic countries, racked by violence and intrigue, each with their own proud and ancient traditions but ultimately indistinguishable from one another.
And while the end of the Union of Serbia and Montenegro was inevitable, the Balkans have not achieved steady state. That churning, balkanising momentum is still at work. The break-up proceeds. Next up, heartened by the Montenegrins' example, is Kosovo, where the overwhelming Albanian majority favours independence. The Kosovars are expected to get their wish by the end of this year.
And this will set a precedent, because unlike all the bits of Yugoslavia that have broken off so far, Kosovo is not an autonomous republic within the Yugoslav federation but was merely a province within Serbia. When Kosovo breaks away, other disgruntled minorities in other corners of the Balkans will see their moment and hope that time is on their side.
The most universally execrated is Republika Srpska (aka Bosnian Serb Republic), the Serb mini-state that was fashioned by Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic during the Bosnian war as part of the Milosevic fantasy of a Greater Serbia. That mini-state, partially brought into existence by the massacre in Srebrenica, a town that today is firmly within Republika Srpska territory, may have no serious hope of international recognition, but it remains a thorn in the flesh of the High Representative in Sarajevo. And it remains a semi-spectral presence within the immensely complicated polity of Bosnia. It provides, for example, one of the republic's three presidents.
And there are others waiting in the wings. As Kosovo prepares to go independent, the Serbs who constitute the overwhelming majority of the population of the region of northern Kosovo called Mitrovica dream of getting their own state, too. Serbs clustered in the north of Montenegro who resent the decision to break away from Belgrade have separatist dreams of their own, as do Albanians in the south of that republic, and as do Albanians in Macedonia, where a civil war boiled up in 2001.
No one imagines the balkanisation of the Balkans will go that far. But then 15 years ago no one predicted the independence of Yugoslav republics such as Slovenia and Croatia, which are now on their way to joining the European Union. And what's wrong, after all, with states the size of Elephant and Castle or Maida Vale? Perhaps we should all live in countries that size.
From the cane chairs of the long pavement caf� of the Crna Gora Hotel in the centre of Podgorica, it's hard to disagree. On first blush Montenegro seems an excellent idea, and a very satisfactory little country.
Podgorica, the Montenegrin capital, formerly one of Yugoslavia's several Titograds, was bombed flat by the British during the war, though a small Ottoman old town survived. But although the architecture is not up to much (the Communists did their best to vandalise it with tower blocks), it is a bewitching town in the May sunshine, full of parks with mature trees, with two fast-flowing, azure rivers and a caf� life to rival anywhere else in the Mediterranean (and reinforcing the Montenegrins' reputation for idleness).
Rising behind the town are the mountains for which the country is named, and which account for the fact that this was the only corner of the Balkans that the Turks never conquered ("They were lazy, too," explained a Belgrade friend). Go up into the mountains and you find ski slopes, the deepest canyon in the world after the Grand Canyon, rivers that are fantastic for rafting; head for the coast and there is a fjord, bizarrely misplaced from Scandinavia, and picturesque islands and inlets reminiscent of Japan's Inland Sea. There is the huge Skadar lake, shared with Albania, that is home to hundreds of exotic varieties of birds.
All this and no Serbia: by severing the link with Big Brother, Montenegro at a stroke removes the taint of war crimes and expansionism (even though both Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic came from Montenegro). But Serbia has hospitals and colleges and universities far more advanced than those in Montenegro. Ambitious and clever Montenegrins head to Belgrade to study. Sick Montenegrins head to Belgrade to get better. Till now they have not paid a bean for the privilege. Negotiations on the future status of clever or sick Montenegrins in Serbia have not yet started, but everyone expects the Montenegrins will henceforth have to pay. Hence at least a proportion of the 45 per cent of votes against independence.
Which brings us to the key question: where is the money coming from? Montenegro has only one productive factory, a belching Soviet-style aluminium manufacturing complex outside Podgorica - recently bought by the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. The nation's tourism potential is obvious - but long stretches of the coast have been bought up by Russians. There is no guarantee that this bewitching corner of the Adriatic will not be destroyed by hideous hotels within a few years.
During the war, when the Yugoslav economy ground to a halt, Montenegro fell back on what has long been an important standby, smuggling. In particular the large-scale smuggling of cigarettes, very cheap here and expensive everywhere else in Western Europe, became rampant - and according to the testimony of an Italian mafia supergrass, Gerardo Cuomo, the trade involved Milo Djukanovic himself, the formerly Communist politician who has run Montenegro for 16 years.
Mr Djukanovic denied the allegations flatly, and cannot be questioned in court because of parliamentary immunity. But the claimed involvement of the most powerful man in the country in organised crime is only the most glaring irregularity. Of Montenegro's population of 650,000, only 120,000 are formally employed, the rest working in the black market or in smuggling. Hence the spectre of the new mini-states, even the pretty ones like Montenegro, becoming what one diplomat called "sovereign kleptocracies", states run by and for the benefit of wealthy criminals.
Kosovo presents a far starker example. Criminal gangs "operate with impunity," according to Marek Antoni Nowicki, who was the UN's international ombudsman in Kosovo until 2005. "You have a criminal state in real power. It needs underground illegal structures to survive. These networks can rely on the weakness of the public institutions to sanction their operations."
And while in Montenegro the smuggling is counter balanced by the new hotels and resorts, Kosovo has nothing else to fall back on. International aid is complemented by the profits from cigarette, cement and petrol smuggling.
Prostitution is the other core business, catering to the peacekeepers. What happens when they leave is anybody's guess.

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article620190.ece

Kosovo Serb convoy stoned; UN troops fire tear gas

 



Kosovo Serb convoy stoned; UN troops fire tear gas

PRISTINA (Reuters) - United Nations police in Kosovo fired tear gas to disperse a crowd of ethnic Albanians who stoned a convoy of Serbs in the west of the UN-run province yesterday, police said. A Kosovo Albanian police spokesman said two UN personnel were lightly wounded in the incident in the ethnic Albanian village of Mala Krusa, near Prizren. «A UN police convoy taking Serbs there was stopped and stoned. Police fired tear gas,» said spokesman Fatmir Gjurgjeala. Two UN vehicles were also damaged. Witnesses said the main Prizren-Djakovica road was closed and several villagers had been taken to hospital for treatment for the effects of tear gas. The stoning of Serb convoys in Kosovo is not uncommon.

                              "The stoning of Serb convoys in Kosovo is not uncommon" .

                   If the so called "oppression"of Albanians in the  nineties was  not "uncommon "and was punished by the NATO bombing of Serbia,

                               today for the stoning and the mistreatment of Serbs,which is not "uncommon", ,the reward is the independence .

                Like we say in France: "Les voies du Seigneur sont impĂ©nĂ©trables", but the question is who gives wh o the right to act like Allmighty.

 

                             Dragan RAKIC

                     F-Strasbourg      

          

                   

 

 

 

 

Balkan ghosts awakened

 

International Herald Tribune
Balkan ghosts awakened
 
THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2006
 
PARIS Milovan Djilas was one of Tito's closest associates in the Yugoslav partisan resistance to the Nazis in World War II. He became a major figure in the postwar Communist government and was considered the likely successor to Tito, but he actually became Yugoslavia's first and most important dissident.

He published a critique - essentially a moral critique - of what he called the "new class" of privilege and indulgence formed by the Communist officials ruling Yugoslavia and the Warsaw Pact countries during the early postwar period.

This was the most important early critical examination of Marxist rule from inside the system, which was to culminate four decades later in Mikhail Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika and the collapse of the Communist system from its "internal contradictions."

Djilas was a Montenegrin, which is why I am writing about him here. In another book ("Land Without Justice," 1958), he recounted his early life and the cruel historical burden of Montenegrin existence, saying that his family was "typical in one respect, the men of several generations have died at the hands of Montenegrins, men of the same faith and name.

"My father's grandfather, my own two grandfathers, my father, and my uncle, were killed as if a dread curse lay on them. ... It seems to me that I was born with blood on my eyes. Generation after generation, and the bloody chain was not broken. My first sight was of blood, my first words were blood and bathed in blood."

In the 14th century Montenegro was a semi-independent principality of Serbia, and it continued to resist the expansion of the Ottoman Turk empire after Serbia itself was conquered. Montenegro was never itself subdued, although parts of it were held by the Turks and others by Venice.

In modern times, Montenegro, incorporating part of Albania, was recognized as an independent state, and in 1918 its national assembly voted for union with Serbia. The two together became the core of a new Yugoslavia - reconstituted after World War II as a Communist people's republic.

Now the Montenegrins have voted for independence from Serbia. As always, their independence is entangled with history, which in the Balkans possesses an intensity and power that warrants William Faulkner's remark on the history of his own American South, that here the past is never past.

Last Sunday, more than 55 percent of the Montenegrin voters - including an estimated 16,000 Montenegrins living abroad, who returned for the election - chose independence. Since the terrible wars and ethnic cleansing that destroyed the old six-nation Yugoslavia in the 1990s, Serbia and Montenegro had survived in a union largely without substance. The Serbians today appear grudgingly willing to sacrifice their link to Montenegro.

Whether the Serbians inside Montenegro will agree is not entirely sure. They form the largest part of the Albanian-Serb national minority that together makes up nearly half the total Montenegrin population of less than 700,000. The Albanian minority consists of about 50,000 people.

The consequences of Montenegrin independence for the neighboring and largely ethnic Albanian province of Kosovo are also unclear. Kosovo is now under interim UN administration, but its majority wants independence, while Serbia, for powerful historical reasons, is resolved to keep Kosovo.

The Kosovo conflict has already seen much violence by both sides, leading up to the NATO intervention in 1999 that produced 78 days' bombing of Serbia.

The new Montenegro naturally wants early EU membership. It will not get it. The EU leadership does not rejoice in Montenegro's independence: It will encourage Serb separatism in Bosnia, and Hungarian autonomists in the Serbian province of Vojvodina, and it may exacerbate Slav-Albanian tensions in Macedonia.

History lives on in the Balkans, ready to break out in more bloodshed, given a provocation. The international effort to deal with the Balkan situation has involved enormous good will as well as material resources and human commitment. But there are no ultimate resolutions to problems so tortured, where memories are so long.

The Balkans slipped off the main Washington agenda more than a decade ago. The region is unlikely to reappear there at least until a new American administration is elected. This is too bad: Balkan historical and political reality teaches a lesson that Washington should heed as it deepens its commitments in another region, the Middle East.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel has been in Washington hoping for unspoken burial of the road map that was supposed to lead toward a negotiated two-state agreement with the Palestinians, with Jerusalem as capital for both. He did not get it, but may. He still seeks American support for an eventual unilateral declaration of Israel's borders. That would invite a Balkan-like future for the two countries, in which the past will never be put behind - by either.




The Yugoslav jigsaw

 


 
 
 
Cyprus Mail
 
The Yugoslav jigsaw is not quite over yet

LAST SUNDAY'S independence referendum in Montenegro passed with barely a whimper, a majority voting to break away from the union with Serbia in what has been widely described as the final act in the disintegration of Yugoslavia.

Few today dispute Montenegro's right to secession. Even in Belgrade, there is a relief that the will-they-won't-they charade of recent years is finally over. In recent years, Montenegro had in any case been independent in all but name, the remaining link a mere fig leaf to mask a de facto separation.

What's more, coming at the tail end of a 15-year disintegration that saw a decade of savage wars of succession, there is widespread congratulation that the last piece of the Yugoslav jigsaw has been plucked away without bloodshed.

And yet it isn't the last piece of the jigsaw, because in advocating the absolute right of self-determination when it first recognised the secession of Slovenia and Croatia all those year ago, the international community deployed reflecting mirrors of ethnic conflict that cannot be tidily sealed within tidy state borders.

While saying that multi-ethnic Yugoslavia was untenable, the international community created a mini-Yugoslavia in Bosnia. In freeing Bosnia's Muslims from the tutelage of Belgrade, it placed Bosnia's Serbs under the tutelage of Sarajevo.

Today, Bosnia-Hercegovina is a failed state, still run by a foreign governor appointed by the international community. As indeed is Kosovo, whose final status remains undecided. And why should Kosovo's Albanians – a majority in the province but a small minority in Serbia – be allowed self-determination, but not their ethnic brethren in the neighbouring Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia? Or the Serbs or Croats of Bosnia who want to unite with their motherlands? And so the list goes on…

Few today fear a resurgence of the wars that tore apart the Balkans in the 1990s. The region is simply worn out. What is important now is not to allow seeds of resentment to mature to a stage where they might give rise to future conflict. And the best guarantee for that is to ensure that the Western Balkans are integrated into the European Union as soon as realistically possible.

Just as the Greeks of Cyprus feel more comfortable belonging to the same club as Greece, so the Serbs now spread out over half a dozen micro states will feel more comfortable if those are all united in the greater European family.

More practically, the access to European funds and the improvement of people's living standards that has accompanied every European enlargement so far is the greatest promise of future stability in the region. Prosperous countries do not take rash decisions; they have too much to lose. But those that are poor, that feel isolated, unfairly treated, backed into a corner, they wind up with nothing to lose.

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2006


May 25, 2006

Factors in Serbia's future

 

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=10032

American Chronicle

The European and American factor in Serbia's future
Dr. George Voskopoulos



May 22, 2006


The recent referendum in Serbia-Montenegro and the marginal victory of those who support an independent Montenegro seems to be defining the future of the country. Yet, a number of parameters need to be clarified before evaluating today's signals as expressed by the Montenegrin people.

First, the referendum constitutes a part of a series of a policy clearly aiming at punishing Serbia for its policy vis-Å•-vis American policy in the Balkans. Serbia's international behaviour and more particularly its policy in Bosnia and Kosovo, did not constitute simply or just a deviation from democratic practices and the need to respect human rights. This goes without saying and may be considered the overt cause of its international isolation.

To those who scrutinize world politics through the spectrum of Political Realism and power politics the real motive for Serbia's territorial mutilation was the perceived arrogance of its senseless leadership (S. Milosevic) to challenge American policy in south-eastern Europe. Actually this led to Serbia's bombing in 1999 without the clear consent of the United Nations Security Council.

Serbia was the first European country bombed after the end of the Second World War, that is on the grounds of protecting human rights. Undeniably the reason was a noble and justified one but those who are aware of world politics realities and the perplexed ethnological map in the Balkans may realize why it may be regarded as an excuse to realize a particular strategic plan.

Serbia defied the macrostrategic plan of powerful intrusive actors to impose a new model of governance, a new local not just world order and had to be punished. The existence of S. Milosevic regime and its defiance of international law simply provided an ethical excuse to dissolve once again a country with inherent power in south-eastern Europe.


Moreover, the establishment of the International Criminal Court meant to realize one specific aim, that is to punish those responsible for the atrocities against individuals by the Serbian militia. Yet, Carla Del Ponte's (the prosecutor in charge) biased attitude and institutional arrogance turned the quest into witch hunting thus delegitimising the whole process.

The problem with Milosevic himself was that he was probably guilty of conceptualizing a plan to institutionally or/and physically eliminate what he saw as a threat to his country's territorial integrity but at the same time he operated as a legitimate leader defending the [mis]perceived interests of his country. Under this spectrum, his trial could also be seen as a blow to state sovereignty and a selective application of a human rights regime. The international community rightfully intervened to put an end to the atrocities against individuals, yet it did not do the same in other blatant cases such as Cyprus.

The Court became one of the political weapons in the hands of those who wished to terminally "deal with" Serbian arrogance. A second powerful weapon, this time devised by Europeans, used to punish the country through the negative conceptual model Serbia has been viewed all these years was the EU's "give-and-take" policy vis-Å•-vis the so wanted for war crimes Serbian leaders Karazic and Mladic.

Serbia's failure to deliver them to the International Criminal Court led to a European policy that eventually punished the average Serb not those considered guilty for genocide. European policy leveled with Washington's wishes to drastically weaken the country by rendering it a politically and economically problematic state in the most backward region of Europe.

To many in Europe this was part of the wider American strategy in the region and the establishment of weak neophyte states or protectorates operating as pockets of instability to remind Europeanists (those who challenge American dominant role in Europe) that European security could only be guaranteed through NATO.

As a result, Kosovo is on its way to independence, while Montenegro's referendum assists directly and indirectly this policy. The problem is that the process results in producing problematic states, epicenters of illegal activities in the region. In both Kosovo and Montenegro drug and weapons trafficking are transnational activities affecting the security of the whole region not to mention human slavery.

American and European policies have to this day failed to impose the rule of law and order allowing local leaders to operate unrestrained. Their initiatives focused exclusively on punishing Serbia, yet, in a way this practice turned certain Serbian leaders to national heroes. What is needed is a new plan for rehabilitating the country, without prejudice and above all without the application of double standards. For as long as the international community pretends to be upholding the law in one only direction south-eastern Europe will have black holes in its security structure.

George Voskopoulos holds a BA from Brock University (Canada), a BA from Ionian University (Greece). He received his MA from Lancaster University (UK) and his Ph.D from Exeter University (UK), Centre for European Studies. He is currently a Visiting Research Fellow at the Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies and Assistant Professor at the University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece. His latest publication is James Mitchell & G. Voskopoulos (eds.), American Government and Politics in Focus, Whittier publishers, NY, 2005.

seeiia@yahoo.gr






 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SERBIAN NEWS NETWORK" group.
To post to this group, send email to SENET@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SENET-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SENET
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

May 24, 2006

Balkanized, again


Balkanized, again

Mirjana Tomic International Herald Tribune

TUESDAY, MAY 23, 2006

MADRID I heard the news about Montenegro's independence in Spain, where I currently live. I felt neither joy nor sadness. My first thoughts, in fact, were of a purely practical nature: What will happen to my passport? Will it be recognized abroad?The cover of my passport still reads Yugoslavia. The country changed its name to Serbia and Montenegro several years ago, but the authorities had no money to change passports.A week ago, a policeman at the Madrid airport asked me: "Where is this passport from?" "It is from Yugoslavia," I said, "but the country changed its name to Serbia and Montenegro. In a few weeks it will have a different name." The policeman smiled. "In a few years Spain will be in the same situation," he said. "I shall be from Andalusia."The disintegration of a country implies many practical problems. The solution to these problems, those that people care about, depends on political negotiations. So far, Balkan politicians have not negotiated in good faith.What will happen to pensions, social security, properties and divided families? In my case, I do not even know who will inherit my country's (sorry, my former, former country's) embassy in Spain. Will I have to go to France or elsewhere to solve a simple issue or get a paper? Who knows if any of my Yugoslav/Serbian documents will be recognized abroad, anyway.Even the answers to some simple questions become complicated. When asked "Where are you from?" I have several answers. When speaking to Europeans, I usually say that I am from Belgrade, the city where I was born and got my education. When speaking to other people, I say that I come from the former Yugoslavia. It is too complicated to explain that the country no longer exists.In my country of birth, there were three official languages: Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian and Macedonian. Serbo-Croatian was spoken in four republics, each now an independent state (or about to be one): Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro. Now, each independent state has its own language, that is, Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin.Slovenian and Macedonian are, in fact, different languages, but most people in all the republics spoke or understood the language previously called Serbo- Croatian. Now, when I speak with my friends from different parts of former Yugoslavia, we still communicate in the same tongue, but we each call it, "our language." That way, all misunderstanding is avoided.Professional and business people from the former Yugoslavia still meet and keep in contact. Now, however, their meetings have an international character. The favorite meeting place is Vienna. The reason is pragmatic: The Austrian capital has direct flights to all the regional capitals. There are no plane connections between Zagreb and Belgrade, for example. In addition, one can buy newspapers and magazines from the entire region at Viennese newsstands. Not so in Skopje or Sarajevo.The organizers of international conferences, as well as the various multilateral and nongovernmental organizations active in the region, usually deal with all the countries in the area. But it is no longer acceptable to say the former Yugoslavia, so a new concept has been forged: Southeastern Europe.When organizing international forums, institutions play to local sensitivities (nobody wants to be associated with the extinct country) and usually include participants from neighboring countries: Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and even Greece. Thus a new problem emerges: language barriers. People from the former Yugoslavia do not understand Romanian, Bulgarian or Albanian. So, international dialogue is held in English.In early May, I participated in an international conference of media professionals from Southeastern Europe held in Vienna. The presence of Austrian, Italian, Greek, Bulgarian, Albanian and Moldovan journalists obliged everyone to speak English during the official sessions.During coffee breaks and official dinners, however, all the journalists from former Yugoslavia stuck together, speaking Serbo-Croatian, or, rather, "our language." Even the Albanians from Kosovo preferred the former Yugoslav crowd.Journalists talked about their respective countries, asked about mutual friends and compared whose economic situation was more favorable and which country was closer to joining the European Union. Nonetheless, the aspiration to join the EU did not translate into any interest in Europe. I tried, without success, to comment on the media situation in Spain. Nobody was interested. "I live in the Balkans, not in Europe," commented a colleague from Macedonia. Mirjana Tomic, a freelance media consultant, lives in Madrid.


Copyright � 2006 The International Herald Tribune www.iht.com
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/23/opinion/edtomic.phpThe independence of Montenegro- the further disintegration of a country- implies many practical problems.

Claiming the Black Mountain

http://www.antiwar.com/malic/?articleid=9026
May 24, 2006

Claiming the Black Mountain
by Nebojsa Malic

Montenegro's Separatists WinAfter seven years of frustrated attempts, the separatist regime inMontenegro celebrated victory Sunday night, as it managed to drum up 55.5percent of the votes necessary to win the independence referendum. Whatwould be a landslide in any Western election was actually the narrowest ofmargins in Montenegro, as the acceptable threshold set by the Brusselsbureaucrats was 55 percent. It took weeks of pro-independence propaganda in government-monopolized media, multi-million-euro public works timed for thereferendum, shady political deals with ethnic minorities, and votershenanigans to secure that .5 percent margin between victory and defeat. And though the unionist parties are demanding a recount and complaining aboutirregularities, Milo Djukanovic and his separatists have already declaredvictory ? and more importantly, just about everyone, including Belgrade, has accepted it as fact.The outcome caused outpourings of joy at the International Crisis Group,among the Kosovo Albanians, and in the ranks of Serbophobic media. Theireagerness to celebrate the "demise of Greater Serbia" suggests that external support for Montenegrin separatism was never about Montenegro at all. Whathappens to the rocky republic next will be of little interest to itserstwhile partisans, as they continue to redraw Balkans maps to match those of 1941.Democracy in ActionIt has been said that it doesn't matter who votes as much as who counts thevotes. In Montenegro this weekend, what mattered was who counted the voters.In the run-up to the referendum, tens of thousands of "Montenegrins" living abroad were registered to vote, while hundreds of thousands who lived inSerbia were denied that right. While separatists complained that because ofthe 55 percent rule, their vote was worth only 0.82 percent of "a Serb's" (meaning a unionist's), it was people like Began Cekic, "a demolition expertfrom Brooklyn," who decided the outcome of the plebiscite.Writes Nicholas Wood of the New York Times:"Figures from the border police suggest that Montenegro's diaspora had a decisive role in passing the referendum. Some 16,000 Montenegrins fromabroad returned in the three days before the election, a number equal to 3percent of the total voter turnout."While people like Cekic, "an ethnic Albanian," flew in to support the separatists, none of the 350,000-plus Montenegrins living in Serbia wereallowed to vote. Most of them consider themselves ethnic Serbs, much asthose in Montenegro who voted against secession. But the Djukanovic regime has systematically denied Montenegro's Serb identity, establishing aseparate "Academy of sciences," a separate church, a separate language, eveninventing a separate history.Alexis de Tocqueville once warned that a democracy can easily become a mere "tyranny of the majority." The great irony of Montenegro's May 21 plebisciteis that the "majority" that won was actually an alliance of minorities ? theideological and pragmatic separatists among the Montenegrin Serbs, ethnic Albanians, Croats, and Muslims, who together outnumbered the plurality ofSerb unionists.The Gloating BeginsWhile news of Montenegro's secession generally merited a short wire reportin most American papers, the media establishment with vested interests in the "Bank of Collective Serbian Guilt" (Deliso) reacted to the outcome withebullience and gloating.The staff correspondent of New York's Newsday told his readers how Sundaynight's referendum was a defeat for "every Serb who ever yearned to expand Serbia's territory" and "a dream of a land called Greater Serbia." Insistingthat the 1990s wars were motivated by this mythical conspiracy ? somethingeven the Hague Inquisition has abandoned, due to complete inability to fabricate even halfway credible evidence ? the Newsday correspondentexplains that:"The hope of the United States, the European Union, and the internationalcommunity at large is that Serbia will accept its modest new status as a landlocked country of under 10 million people, give up its expansionist,nationalist impulses, and embrace the West."This sort of rhetoric is parroted by The Guardian's Ian Traynor, who opinedthat the loss of Montenegro, and the likely loss of Kosovo to follow, "may be just the tonic Serbia needs to divest itself of a disastrous 15 years anda nationalism that has brought nothing but grief." Continues Traynor,"[C]ertainly, the cream of Belgrade's liberal and democratic class is happy that an independent Montenegro also means, finally, an independent Serbiathat can get on with rebuilding itself."The "cream" he is referring to are people like Sonja Biserko, who told theLA Times that Montenegro's secession "marked the end of Serbia's 'imperialambitions.'" There's something incongruous about Biserko, the leadingsupporter of the Empire, talking about some supposed Serbian imperialism. In her Serbophobic crusade, she has supported the NATO bombing and advocatedthe occupation and forced "reeducation" of Serbia. That's some "humanrights" record, indeed.One of Biserko's detractors once asked the rhetorical question: How small would Serbia have to be for them to no longer consider it "imperialist" and"aggressive"? The answer he postulated, based on the Jacobin language ofBiserko and the rest of the "liberal and democratic class," was, "Never small enough."Taking a CueAlbanian separatists in the occupied province of Kosovo have cheeredSunday's results the loudest.Alex Anderson of the International Crisis Group, which has championed Montenegrin and Albanian separatism, did not hide his pleasure at theoutcome of Sunday's plebiscite, commenting that "there's an expectation ofdomino-effect" in Kosovo now."Before the end of the year, Kosovo, too, will join Montenegro as a new state, and these new countries will be an important factor for stability ofthe whole region," said the Albanian "prime minister" of Kosovo, Agim Ceku.A commentator named Dukagjin Gorani distilled the Albanian argument thus: if 650,000 residents of Montenegro have the right to independence, why wouldn'tthe 2 million Albanians in Kosovo? One could respond that Montenegro was a"republic" in the old Yugoslavia, and that according to the EU's own ruling from 1991 only "republics" had the right to self-determination andsecession, not provinces or peoples. That was certainly the argument usedagainst the separatist movements of Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. But the Abramowitz Doctrine clearly rejects the application of principles tothe Balkans. Arguments rejected out of hand when they came from 2 millionSerbs are now widely recognized as valid when coming from 2 million Albanians. It's all in who does the rejecting and the recognizing, you see.AcceptanceReactions in Belgrade have been a mixture of shock, disbelief, sorrow, andsatisfaction. The expression most wire services used was "grudging acceptance." By Tuesday afternoon, Serbian President Boris Tadic ? now defacto a full head of state ? publicly announced Serbia's acceptance of theplebiscite results. It isn't quite clear whether he had the authority to do so, but the notoriously blurry lines of authority in Serbia have just becomeeven more fluid.To many in Serbia, Montenegro's separation comes as a relief, after almostnine years of incessant provocations and tension-building by the separatists. Admittedly, the sundering will abolish the costly and uselessunion government, for years almost entirely funded by Serbian taxpayers.According to the charter negotiated in 2002, Serbia will automatically succeed to all international memberships, treaties, and charters, whileMontenegro will have to start from scratch. Abolition of the Union will haveanother consequence ? the independence of Serbia from Javier Solana, the man who presided over Serbia's 1999 bombing, and who was instrumental increating the Union charter.And yet, Montenegro's departure comes as a body blow to the Serb nationalconscience. Quite the contrary from Imperial claims of "Greater Serbia," the prevailing view in Serbia itself has for decades been the Communist-inducedprovincialism, which regarded their close relatives in Croatia, Bosnia, andMacedonia as somehow different and alien. Montenegro, however, had always been regarded as more quintessentially Serb than Serbia itself. Throughoutthe 19th century, Austria-Hungary did its best to keep Serbia and Montenegroapart, finally failing in 1913. After the Great War, Montenegro was annexed by the Kingdom of Serbia, something the tactless Serbian monarch handledabout as gracefully as the creation of Yugoslavia.Even so, it was not until the Italian occupation of 1941-45 and thesubsequent Communist creation of the "People's Republic of Montenegro" that the idea emerged of a "Montenegrin" ethnic identity as distinctly separatefrom Serb. Djukanovic's brand of separatism did not appeal to freedom from"Milosevic's tyranny" or notions of regional autonomy ? it rooted itself firmly in this anti-Serb concept of Montenegrin nationality. When even theproudest Serbs go as far to deny their Serb heritage? what does it meananymore? This is the sort of question the foreign backers of Montenegrin independence wanted asked, for the explicit purpose of forcing Serbia to"accept its modest new status" and "embrace the West." (Newsday)The loss of compass in Belgrade is perhaps best described by Monday's call from Vuk Draskovic, soon-to-be-former foreign minister of the now defunctUnion, to reestablish monarchy in Serbia. While a great idea in principle,Draskovic chose to justify it as "a shortcut to full membership in EU and NATO." What's Next?The true consequences of Montenegro's separation remain to be seen. Serbiaobviously has a lot of soul-searching to do, even as it is facing enormouspressure to surrender Kosovo. In the rocky republic itself, life after secession does not look to be all milk and honey, as the separatistspromised their electorate. For years, Montenegro has lived on U.S. foreignaid, while Serbia subsidized its share of government expenses and foreign debt. Now that it can no longer be used as a leverage against Belgrade,Podgorica may find its American sugar daddy inexplicably AWOL. Moreover, itsrulers now owe favors to Croats, Albanians, and Muslims from the north ? favors they may have to repay with special privileges, maybe even territory.For years, Milo Djukanovic wanted to be president of an independent state.Now he has his wish, and may well live to regret it, as flags, marches, and hymns give way to grim realities he can no longer blame on Belgrade.

Montenegrin Independence

From: Dragan Rakic

Subject: RE: Montenegrin Independence
The, now, former member of the Serbian and Montenegrin Union, Montenegro became the newest European state two days ago, by expressing its will on the referendum for independence.

The international observers stated that the vote was regular and that some 83% of voters were present at the poles. But there is something that disturbs that "regularity", which seemed to be perfect. The Montenegrin Prime minister Mr. Milo Djukanovic who organized the vote, invited "all the Montenegrins
from all around the World to come to vote". That is what happened. People from USA, UK, Germany and other continents were interviewed at some European TV channels, and to those who understand the language it was quite strange to hear instead of Serbian, the Albanian language. One might come to conclusion that Albanians came to vote for the independence. It would not be that important if one knows that the Montenegrins living in Serbia were not allowed to vote at this referendum. Knowing that Montenegrins make some 30% of the Serbian population, one could ask what could have happened if they voted. In the other hand, Mr. Djukanovic, the Montenegrin Prime minister, expressed his worries about what would become 30 % of them after the independence is declared. With a little tour of " humanitarian problem", " The non respect of minorities" etc, he may easily create the situation we knew in Bosnia or in Kosovo. Nevertheless it should be noted that he did not allow the Montenegrins from Serbia to vote.

Is it regular or not � ?

Dragan RAKIC
Strasbourg
France

Question: After all, the Albanians outnumber Serbs in Kosovo (largely through illegal crossing of Albanians into Kosovo from Albania but only make up 19% of Serbia as a whole. When legal and illegal Mexicans -- while still a minority in the United states as a whole -- become the "majority in California, Arizona or Texas, which is fast approach if the President's non-admitted amnesty bill goes through, will their "majority" be able to vote for separation from the United States without the vote opened to all America?" This is what the Serbs are facing.

Stella

MONTENEGRO - ANOTHER GERMAN PUPPET STATE? Report by the German Journalists of www.german-foreign-policy.com 19/5/06Translated by Edward Spalton 20/5/06 forhttp://www.freenations.freeuk.com/gc-61.html
Germany calling

http://www.balkanpeace.org/rs/archive/july00/rs57.shtml

Decline of The West, Playing the Montenegro Card by George Szamuely Playing the Montenegro Card

"It looks like NATO will soon be renewing its war against Serbia. Montenegro will provide the justification. NATO is playing the same game in Montenegro that it played in Kosovo."

http://www.balkanpeace.org/rs/archive/apr01/rs141.shtml

Chronicles Online, April 25, 2001Montenegro Elections: Djukanovic�s crushing defeat Srdja Trifkovic

He [Milo Djukanovic] is Milosevic�s disciple, his creation. He may parade as a democrat now, but his instincts have always been authoritarian and remain so today." The leading daily newspaper, Pobjeda, is controlled by the government and accordingly looks and reads like a party organ from the pre-1989 Eastern Europe. The second-largest circulation daily, Vijesti, and the leading weekly, Monitor, while theoretically "independent," are both outspoken in their support of separatism and effectively pro-government. They enjoy lavish financial support from the National Endowment for Democracy and from George Soros , among others.

Jared Israel's Response to Shlomo Avineri's "Next - independence for Kosovo"

Jared Israel's (www.tenc.net) Letter to the Jerusalem Post Respondingto Shlomo Avineri's "Next - independence for Kosovo"Avineri Embraces Germany's Dream: A Splintered Balkans It is remarkable to see Prof. Avineri call for empathy for the Serbseven as he repeats every anti-Serb falsehood. Is this black humor?Examples:First, there is no "Bosnian" ethnic group. Bosnia includes: descendents of Serbs who survived Jasenovac, Croatia's Nazi deathcamp; Slavic Muslims; and Croats. The Slavic Muslims are mainly Serbswho converted to Islam under Ottoman rule/coercion. They areindistinguishable from Orthodox Slavs ('Bosnian Serbs') except by religion. The 'Bosnian ethnic group' is a propaganda creation, tohide reality: Alija Izetbegovic's drive for "Bosnian nationhood" wasreally a drive to create an Islamist-dominated outpost in thatterritory, which required defeating Serbian and pro-Yugoslav Muslimresistance.Second, Yugoslavia did not break up during World War II due to Serbianhegemony. That was the line of Hitler's favorites, the Croatian Ustashi, who created the Nazi-propped 'Independent State of Croatia.'Yugoslavia broke up due to a massive Nazi invasion after Serbianofficers overthrew the government, which had made a deal with Hitler.The subsequent resistance - overwhelmingly Serbs - fought the armies of Nazi Germany and its ally, the Ustashi-run Independent State ofCroatia. The Ustashi were motivated by fanatical Catholicism,antisemitism, and Serbophobia, and they mobilized Muslim fanatics, whosigned up for the Waffen SS organized by the Mufti of Jerusalem. In Kosovo, the predecessors of today's Kosovo Liberation Army warmlywelcomed the Italian Fascists, and helped deport almost all Kosovo'sJews to Nazi death camps.The Comintern's 'Serbian-nationalism-is-the-great-problem' line, embraced by Tito in part because it was a politically correct way ofappealing to Croatian anti-Serb racism, helped make possibleYugoslavia's post-war failure to campaign seriously against theanti-Serb racism that underlay Ustashi Croatia's mass slaughter of Serbs � they butchered about 750,000 Serbs alongside most Jews.Prior to the late-1980s launch of the US-German campaign to, onceagain, destroy Yugoslavia, the media widely reported that in Kosovo amass-based Albanian racist movement was conducting a war of terror against Serbs. Those racists, heir to the WWII Kosovo AlbanianFascists, wanted to resurrect the Fascists' Greater Albania. In 1999NATO went to war for these born-again Nazis, who would dominate any'independent' Kosovo. Such a statelet would be a springboard for attacks on Macedonia and Greece, aiming to annex parts of thosecountries to Kosovo and Albania, thus resurrecting Greater Albania.This violent splintering of the Balkans is the dream of German foreignpolicy which, for a hundred years, has advocated "Serbia must die," because Serbia, with its passionate opposition to foreign domination,has always been the driving force uniting Balkan peoples into a statecapable of resisting Germany. Thus "Serbia must die" has been the racist battle-cry of the German drive of preventing the creation ofand then destroying Yugoslavia. (The Comintern's old line that"Serbian hegemony is the problem" is in essence a polite rephrasing of the German slogan.) An independent Kosovo, acting as a base for anation-destroying campaign to create a Greater Albania, would be agiant step closer to realizing this German dream, grotesquely embracedby Mr. Avineri, of a Yugoslavia broken into increasingly tiny parts, helpless to resist German hegemony.
Jared Israel
Newton Mass
www.tenc.net

Never mind the Balkans

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1781039,00.html

The Guardian Tuesday May 23, 2006

Comment is free

Never mind the Balkans

Montenegro had more independence as part of Yugoslavia than it will as an
EU-Nato protectorate
Neil Clark

'Montenegro votes for independence", the headlines declared at the result of the
referendum in the Balkan republic. But is independence really what lies in
store? My dictionary has independence as: "completely self-governing; not
subject to or showing the influence of others". By this definition, independence
is not what they will be getting.
The most important political and economic decisions, which will affect the
everyday lives of citizens in the republic, will not be made in its capital,
Podgorica, but in Brussels, Geneva and Washington and the boardrooms of the
multinational companies which now dominate the country's economy.
It is ironic that EU and WTO membership has been most enthusiastically supported
by the prime minister, Milo Djukanovic, and the pro-independence faction - for
it's hard to think of an easier way for a small country to lose national
independence than by surrendering control of trade and economic policy to
unelected bureaucrats miles away.
Nato membership, which Montenegro is also expected to pursue enthusiastically,
has similar consequences: the commanders of Montenegro's new army and navy will
have to get used to taking orders from those who planned the 78-day bombing of
Yugoslavia in 1999.
Then there is the role of the IMF and the World Bank. These two unelected bodies
have, with the EU, sought to impose Thatcherite neo-liberal solutions on
Serbia-Montenegro, ever since the fall of Yugoslavia's Socialist-led government
in 2000. Thousands of socially owned enterprises have already been privatised,
but the west is still not satisfied - the IMF has made further economic help
dependent on Belgrade selling off the valuable NIS oil company.
Montenegro's tiny economy is even more dominated by foreign capital than
Serbia's, with the privatisation process having started much earlier. The
selling off of nationally owned assets will have serious implications for the
country's future economic viability and even with the tourist potential of its
attractive coastline, it is difficult to see how Montenegro can afford to pay
its way, without further surrender to western financial institutions. In doing
so, it will be following the path of its neighbours.
For all the novelties of statehood, the brutal truth is that today's
"independent" Balkan republics had, if anything, more independence when they
were autonomous republics inside the Yugoslav Federation. In place of one
militarily strong, internationally respected, non-aligned nation, there now
exists a number of weak, economically unviable EU/IMF/Nato protectorates.
The dismantling of Yugoslavia, with its alternative economic and social model,
has suited western capitalism fine. But for the people of the region, the
benefits have been harder to discern. Little wonder then that nostalgia for
Tito's Yugoslavia is on the rise. The website "Titoville" has received over 1m
visitors and in Rakovice, a suburb of Sarajevo, an anti-nationalist Serb named
Jezdimir Milosevic (no relation) has proclaimed "The Republic of Titoslavia", a
state "without territory, without international recognition, destined to live in
the hearts of its citizens". Passports are available for EUR10.
Over 65 years ago, on the eve of the attack on Yugoslavia by the Axis powers,
the Serbian jurist Slobodan Jovanovic argued that a single, south Slav state was
the best way the people of the Balkans could guarantee their independence and
protection. It still is - and that logic seems likely to make itself felt in the
years to come. When the victory parades are over, the only real difference
Sunday's narrow vote will make is that Montenegro will be able enter Eurovision.
www.neilclark66.blogspot.com
neilclark6@hotmail.com
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006.

May 17, 2006

Kosovo anti-Christian violence continues

SRNA: Albanians growing more nervous
http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2006/May_16/16.html

WND: Kosovo anti-Christian violence continues
http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2006/May_16/18.html

RTS: Raskovic-Ivic asks Petersen to rescind UNMIK decision
http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2006/May_16/14.html

EU envoy says necessary to continue technical talks on Kosovo
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-05/17/content_4555494.htm"

It is obvious that the process of Kosovo becoming independent has already gone very far"
http://www.b92.net/english/news/index.php?&nav_category=19&nav_id=34924&order=priority&style=headlines

Danke Deutschlandhttp://english.pravda.ru/news/world/16-05-2006/80385-Serbia-0

Kosovo status should be solved through essential autonomy and preservation of existing borders
http://www.srbija.sr.gov.yu/vesti/vest.php?id=23462

Interview - Scott Taylor on the Balkans





http://news.serbianunity.net/bydate/2006/May_16/4.html

Interview - Scott Taylor on the Balkans (pt. 2)
www.espritdecorps.ca


May 16, 2006

This article first appeared in the April 2006 issue of the "Canadian-Macedonian News" in Toronto


CMN: A number of events have transpired since our last interview and I believe there is a need to understand what is happening with regards to Balkan politics. Agim Cheku was elected Prime Minister in Kosovo, and we know who Agim Cheku is, Milosevic died a short time later which affected the political climate in Serbia and the Albanian foreign minister made comments regarding Kosovo becoming independent. What next: the creation of Illyrida in western Macedonia? What is your opinion on all this? Are the Balkans boiling over again?

Scott Taylor: It's a very dangerous time right now in the Balkans especially when you've got Agim Cheku accepted by the West and praised as good for the future of Kosovo. Some from the West admit, kind of on the edges, that there may be some issues with Cheku, some critics may accuse him of war crimes but those of us who have followed his career very well know he is guilty of wrongdoing in Meduk and in the shelling of Knin.  Cheku did things as a Croatian officer that are fully documented and recorded particularly by Canadians. These things are known to NATO and to the UN yet he was never brought to justice.

       This is something which flies in the face of the whole Milosevic thing where we jump to the conclusion of his guilt. He was indicted, brought to the Hague, all the things that he was accused of, now that he is dead, simply presumes that he is guilty of everything and it's a tremendous effort on the part of the West to put all the blame for all that happened into his casket. They're trying to bury all of the responsibility with Milosevic to say we can move forward. You can't do that. You can't now build the future of an independent Kosova, as they say, on a guy like Agim Cheku who is a murderous thug. I mean this guy is a real war criminal not someone removed in an office like Milosevic might have been, making policy. He was on the ground in command of his troops. He actually got wounded in action at Meduc because his guys were there. He was right on the ground. This is a war criminal and the West knows it yet is willing to turn a blind eye to keep the Albanians on side.

       The fact that the Albanian government is now saying the border will not be recognized is a very dangerous situation. It is something which anywhere else in the world would be sparking all kinds of controversy. Any country saying anything about a border that's not being recognized is almost a declaration of an undeclared war. This is pushing the future of Kosovo further towards the flame. It's like a barrel of gunpowder being pushed further towards the flame and of course all eyes are on Iraq and Afghanistan. The Balkans is a backwater right now, everyone's trying to put it behind them, trying to convince themselves that this was a victory, this was a success story. We're seven years into the occupation of Kosovo by NATO. They've not stopped the violence; they've not solved the problems. We've seen the violence spread into Macedonia and it will again. I mean all these names being raised, the fact that western Macedonia is now on the target list. They're [Albanians] not hiding their intentions, the fact that the West is blindly ignoring them is a dangerous sign because I don't think Macedonians can accept the situation the way it is. Also, what is going to happen to the Serbs in Kosovo; what is there for them to accept an independent Kosovo under the rule of an indicted war criminal?

 CMN:  Interpol has been looking for Cheku for some years now, because of his war crimes, trying to negotiate with him in Vienna, Austria, Serbia and with the Kosovo delegation. What's going to happen with these negotiations now that Cheku is a Prime Minister? Do you think that they should refuse to negotiate with him?

 Scott Taylor:  They should refuse. Canada should make its objection clear regarding Cheku as a choice of Prime Minister. He's the Prime Minister elect, he's not been sworn in as far as I know at this point but Canada played a key role in documenting his war crimes both in the Meduc and in Knin during Operation Storm, as a Croatian officer. He's an Albanian Kosovar.

        In 1995 he was the artillery commander who shelled Knin. He was the Croatian artillery commander. Very few people understand that as an Albanian Kosovar he was committing war crimes wearing a Croatian uniform. So there's a dual guilt. The Croatian army has some responsibility but he as an individual, as an Albanian serving in Croatian uniform, has to be accountable at some point. He ordered those killings. Now he's serving potentially as the Prime Minister of a country. What message does that send to the Serbs in Kosovo? They know what he did. I mean he fought for the Croatians not because he loved Croatia but because he hates Serbs. That was why he killed those people,  that is why the US MPRI groomed him, trained him and then when you look back on this they were grooming him in '93 to eventually become the commander in "99. So who is behind all of this? That's what's protecting him now is that he didn't act alone. He's the puppet, not the puppeteer. So the puppeteer is still saying that this guy is okay we'll accept him.  That's the problem, we need to look at who is behind Agim Cheku, not just Agim Cheku. Who's been grooming him, taking him, positioning him? Who created Frankenstein's monster? We see the monster, that's Cheku. Who is the doctor that created him?

 CMN: Who is the doctor?

 Scott Taylor:  The Americans. The MPRI, this Pentagon training cadre brought him, selected him from day one, saw in him the potential not just to serve as a Croatian. As soon as it blew up in Croatia he took off his Croatian epaulettes and became head of the Kosovo Liberation Army with NATO's blessing. The timing was all so orchestrated. It was planned and when you look at it as forensic looking back on how things developed it's very clear that even Kosovo in '98 '99 was planned as early as '93. It was all stepping stones and Cheku was one of the characters being manipulated. A brutal war criminal was being manipulated to get where he is now. But the fact that they still won't hold him accountable is because he knows who created him and if there is ever to be a trial of Agim Cheku at the Hague, in his own defense he's going to of course bring in all the evidence as to who really was behind all this in the Balkans.

 CMN:  So basically, is that why he never went to the Hague?

 Scott Taylor:  If he goes to the Hague he can bring some very key people with him and that's the problem. And that's why everyone is accepting him as the Prime Minister despite all the evidence that exists on what he did, collected by Canadian soldiers, horrific crimes. Yet he's being distanced from that, accepted as a political leader as a figurehead for the new Kosova.

 CMN: Were you surprised when you heard that Agim Cheku was the new Prime Minister of Kosovo?

 Scott Taylor:  I still can't believe he is still serving as the head of the TMK, the Kosovo Protection Corps. I can't believe every day that goes by that he's not indicted for what he did. It's a crime and then to find out that he's moving up and going to become a world leader.

 CMN: For you it was shocking news...

 Scott Taylor:  Yes it's incremental in its shock. The fact that he's not been brought to justice is one shock and then the fact that they're going to ignore that and move him to another level, it's unbelievable when everybody, Louise Arbour, Madeleine Albright, these people know what he did. It's not been hidden from them but they never indicted him. He by his very existence and his promotion, every time he gets put up it makes the Hague tribunal that much more of a joke. It's just incredible that they would turn a blind eye to what he did and allow him to proceed up. He wasn't a President or a Prime Minister. He started off as a very junior Colonel in the Croatian Army committing atrocities. Then they trained him again and he became a General and committed bigger atrocities. Then he became the commander of the KLA, committed more atrocities. He released his commanders to fight in Macedonia, connected with the TMK. All of that he is responsible for. All of that, the quest for a greater Albania. I don't think Agim Cheku has ever been on the sidelines.

       They held the Prizren meeting in 2001 or 2002 about the future of Albanian speaking people in the region of the Balkans, inside Kosovo, and NATO protected them. The meeting was held there and Cheku went to that. Rugova did not go. I mean politically it was seen as unwise, he didn't go but Cheku did. So this man, his nationalism, at least he's honest about that. He's not hiding this. He's not a hypocrite. For that I respect him because he's never played under false colours. NATO, the international community, the Hague: all of them turn a blind eye to what he's done. It's like rubbing it in their face. He's never denied what he is, never pretended to be anything but a man in a quest of, if military means are necessary, a Greater Albania.

 CMN: You were just recently in the Balkans. What was the reason for your visit and when did you come back?

 Scott Taylor:  I was giving a speech at the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts. I was a part of a conference to scientifically prove that Kosovo belongs to Serbia. There were a number of international delegates, mostly of course Serbian. For me I'm not an academic, my contribution to the whole thing was my eyewitness accounts. So I took the opportunity to drive down to Kosovo, made a quick trip and met some refugees, spoke to UN police, spoke to NATO soldiers and stayed at a monastery in Grachanica. There was a ceremony, a memorial of the second anniversary of the 17th March pogrom against the Serbs. I attended this and then I drove back and brought a report of what I had just done, to the conference. So again seeing people who have been displaced now for two years since the pogrom, some have been displaced for seven years, but this last wave of people displaced from '04 are still living in absolute squalor, unseen by the world. We saw the conditions that they lived in. They're forgotten by the Serbian government and by the world. They're just tucked away unable to return to their houses, living in Mitrovica basically as pawns in this game.

       It's something which most of these politicians that are making the decisions in Kosovo or for the future of Kosovo don't ever see; the real lives that are being affected. They lost their age old family farm and now they're living in some tiny office with all these people with no privacy, eating donated food which is the basic minimum, just beans. They are simply existing, waiting for something to happen but knowing that it never will. They're in limbo.

 CMN:  Were you there when Milosevic died?

 Scott Taylor:  I got back from Kosovo in time for Milosevic's funeral.

 CMN: Did you attend the funeral?

 Scott Taylor:  I went to the Belgrade memorial. There were 80,000 people out there in front of the Parliament buildings. Seeing how the international media was playing it you could almost predict how it was going to go. They portrayed it as a rejuvenation of Serbian nationalism, as a celebration of a war criminal etc. The Western media has already proclaimed guilt not just on Milosevic but on all the Serbian people. And that again extends to Macedonians because they're Slavs, ergo if oppressing Albanians is bad then the Macedonians are equally guilty of it.

       So you've got to look at the way it's being played out. Just the whole international media's take, you could pull back and see it through that prism. It wasn't good. I mean they were seeing the crowds out there and the statements that were being made about how the West was doing this to us and then the belief that Milosevic was poisoned etc: most of it being portrayed with some sort of derision by the Western media.  And yet if you look at the facts it's not outlandish that the Hague killed him. I mean those that were there, James Bisset, other witnesses that were at the same conference, many of us that were at the conference were ready to testify at the Hague.

 CMN: Did you see any familiar faces from here?

 Scott Taylor:  James Bisset was there.

 CMN:  Former Canadian Ambassador to Yugoslavia...

 Scott Taylor: And he had met Slobodan Milosevic as the President when he was Ambassador. He met him again as a prisoner in the Hague and he testified just days before he died. He was aware, because you get to meet Milosevic when you go to these things, of his health conditions, of his concerns. He knew that he wanted to go to Moscow because he didn't trust the Hague doctors. They'd found this anti leprosy drug in his body that frightened him because he knew that he wasn't taking that drug. He had never taken that drug. He didn't know where that came from and of course he was concerned. His visit to Moscow was denied and subsequently he was found dead. There were other witnesses. There were Americans and others at the conference who again had agreed to testify, were about to and knew that there was still a lot of fight in Milosevic. He wasn't "suicidal" as they claimed. He had a whole bunch more points he was going to make. If I testified, Agim Cheku would have been first and foremost, the main thrust of my testimony was to take it from Kosovo back to Croatia and focus on this individual. That was what I was to bring to the tribunal. Now we won't get the chance.

 CMN: It looks like the tribunal has nothing to do anymore.

 Scott Taylor:  Well they're going to keep trying other Serbian Generals. There are other trials going on and I've been asked as a potential witness for other Generals. I'll go if I can. There's some talk being floated by those witnesses who didn't testify, maybe they can set up some sort of parallel tribunal to at least put it somewhere on the record what we've been prepared to testify.

 CMN: It looks like the tribunal in the Hague was solely created for certain people; Serbs and Macedonians.

 Scott Taylor:  I think it's a historical precedent that anytime there is a war like this that the victor establishes the guilt of the vanquished. So in this case the Serbs have to be guilty of everything and Milosevic in particular. Now it's all buried in his casket and the Western media again was very complicit in going along with that. It was stunning to see how everything that was ever done in the Balkans, unquestioned. Christine Amanpour was unbelievable, reiterating things that were said and since then have been disproved; death camps and all making it look like the Holocaust. I mean the guy had tuberculosis, all this has been disproved, all of it resurfaced untouched and was put back out for the general consumption. I've likened it to all of us who know better, have built a sand castle of trying to get the truth, checking on things in Srebrenica, Rachak, exposing all the lies and deception etc.

       We were making headway, we were building up the sandcastle and then after Milosevic's death this flood came and swamped everything. And the average person now is probably even more anti-Serb, anti-Milosevic. He was equivalent to Stalin, Hitler whatever. I mean when you know the circumstances it wasn't like that. The Serbian people didn't like Milosevic for different reasons, because he caved in not because he stood firm.  To have such a huge disconnect between reality and Western media is very discouraging to see that again. I should point out that the CBC that was on the ground did not want, they were advised by an American journalist, that James Bisset was there and available for comment and they declined. Bisset who knew Milosevic as a president, as a prisoner and spoke to him just days before he died and testified was not considered a primary source. If he's not who is? They had their own agenda and it all came back very, very distressing and discouraging for me.

 CMN:  Regarding Macedonia. The Albanian minister of foreign affairs just recently said that if Kosovo is divided into an Albanian and a Serbian sector then Illyrida may be the next step.

 Scott Taylor: I think that statement is another indicator that the idea of a greater Albania is alive and well. They want south Serbia and they want Preshevo.

       The Macedonian Government is basically whistling past the graveyard as we say. They're trying to bolster their own spirits when they know better. I'm sure they're frightened by that statement. The fact that the international community didn't react to it and doesn't understand its importance, is kind of frightening and it indicates that they want Kosovo finished. They don't care what it takes, they want it somehow solved and all over with.

 CMN: They want an independent state?

 Scott Taylor:  It's the final solution. The comments that the media and I were getting from people, from American soldiers and from a Lieutenant Colonel who had just arrived from Texas and who spent all these months training and getting indoctrinated is that the sooner they have a resolution the better for the future. Then they can all start to build together no matter what happens in Kosovo, no matter whether it's independent as long, as it's solid then they can all stop their fighting and work together. This is some Utopian belief that the minute it becomes Kosova and the Serbs realize there's no going back, the ones living in the enclaves will somehow emerge into a rainbow world.

 CMN: They probably want a border with Bulgaria. This is what they were striving for during the Second World War. 

 Scott Taylor:  The map that they have, Greater Albania so by saying that this is still on the table we saw the fighting in 2001 it's a reality. They're stirring up trouble and it won't be so easily resolved. Even if they give Kosovo, Kosova its independence they will still want more. That's what we're hearing. Under existing boundaries, altered boundaries they're looking at pieces of land anywhere that there's a majority of ethnic Albanians, they want to include that in a greater Albania. So the border with Serbia would need to be redrawn even if it's not in the immediate plan. They will not accept things the way they are in the short term or in the long term.

 CMN: Macedonian President Crvenkovski wants the border between Kosovo and Macedonia resolved before the "Kosova issue" is resolved. Any comments?

 Scott Taylor:  It's one of the rare sensible statements I've heard from a Macedonian government official. It makes a lot of sense and that needs to be reinforced by the international community if that's agreed to, whatever the border happens to be.  I think they need to call in international monitors for that because of course still as Macedonians you need to protect your own borders. But in this case I think given the declarations made in the Kosovo Parliament they won't recognize certain borders. It needs to be declared, determined, made final and then it becomes inviolate. They have to bring in international monitors to make sure that this will not change. Then whatever happens inside Kosovo, it happens inside Kosovo, but it remains outside of Macedonia.



Liljana Ristova
Risto Stefov