October 19, 2011

Serbia Parliament: U.S. ambassador blocked by Radikali

Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 10:05 AM
http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2011&mm=10&dd=19&nav_id=550782
Radicals blocked the U.S. ambassador
Source: Beta 19 Oct. 2011
Belgrade - SRS MPs have caused the incident in the Serbian Parliament blocking the entrance to the U.S. Ambassador Mary Warlick and members of the Group of Friendship with the United States.

Radicals protest the arrival of U.S. Ambassador to the Parliament of Serbia (Beta)
The Assembly was to be a meeting of the Parliamentary Group of Friendship with the United States and U.S. Ambassador Mary Warlick on the occasion of 130 years of cooperation with the United States.
Beta
The Ambassador has arrived in the Assembly and entered the hall with several members of the Friendship Group. Part of the group members failed to enter the hall, as the radicals blocked the entrance. They wanted the banners to enter the hall, but the security prevented. Radicals after fifteen to twenty minutes removed the front door and hall. As they stand they pointed out the slogan "Children will not forgive you", "Stop killing Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija "," Bloody Mary "(Bloody Mary). "NATO = crime," "murderers, stop killing Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija", "20 years of U.S. crimes against the Serbs", "Blade Mary" ...

Beta
SRS MP Boris Aleksic was after the incident, criticized the government for receiving Ambassador Warlick in the Serbian parliament at the time when, as he said, NATO is preparing to attack Serbian barricades in Kosovo and Metohija. He said that is why the Radical members gathered outside the hall where " authority having relations with the United States. " Aleksic said that his colleagues wanted to send a clear message that "the United States conducted 20 years of crimes against the Serbian people and that we are now ready to once and for all finish with the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija." "We were not allowed to enter the meeting. What hide from deputies? they do not hide from deputies from the citizens, "said Aleksic. "They came from the U.S. Embassy to tell them how to behave when U.S. tanks move barricades on Serbian Kosovo. We will not allow them to," said Aleksic. SRS front of the MPs sang the national anthem of Serbia and the song "St. Vitus", "Sprem'te is, Sprem'te" and songs about the SRS leader Vojislav Seselj, on trial in The Hague.

October 18, 2011

New Russian Presence Complicates Kosovo Impasse on Border

A new ingredient has been introduced by Serbia into the standoff on the border with Kosovo in the form of a Russian base.

By Aryeh ben Hayim

First Publish: 10/18/2011, 8:00 PM

Russia has just set up a "humanitarian base" in the Serb city of Nis only 100 km away from the border with Kosovo.

The establishment of the Russian base, coincidentally, comes less than a week after Serbia felt snubbed by an EU commission report that did not mark progress on Serbia's joining the EU. Serbia felt it had taken a painful decision by arresting and extraditing two Serbs --Ratko Mladić and Goran Hadžić-- to the Hague to face war crimes charges. It felt that this measure was unappreciated

The Russian base will now figure in a month-long crisis surrounding the attempt by the government of Kosovo to establish border checkpoints on its northern border with Serbia. Ethnic Serbs have established roadblocks made of rocks, mud and logs to prevent access to the border points.

As Kosovo has tried to seal the border the Serbian towns are busily building parallel roads extending to the border to prevent Kosovo from blocking unimpeded access to Serbia. NATO that operates a KFOR peacekeeping force in Kosovo gave a deadline for the removal of the roadblocks but when it sent a convoy early this morning to one of the roadblocks it was turned back.

Serbian President Boris Tadić commented on the crisis. "We expect international factors to show international responsibility because there is also the Serb reality in Kosovo and not just the Albanian one."

After the setback to the European option nationalist parties in Serbia are weighing in in support of their compatriots in Kosovo and using the issue against the coalition. With Russia now close by another joker has been tossed into the picture.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/148896#.Tp37xvIg-T8

October 16, 2011

Tensions linger along Kosovo border

Serb-manned roadblocks have become a potential flashpoint on disputed NATO-patrolled frontier.

Last Modified: 16 Oct 2011 11:43

NATO peacekeepers have issued an ultimatum to Serbs to remove roadblocks on the border between Kosovo and Serbia, as a tense standoff threatens to trigger renewed violence in the region.

A trade row spilled over into violence in late July, when Kosovo's government in Pristina ordered its security forces to take over two crossings on the border with Serbia to enforce a newly imposed ban on Serbian goods.

FROM THE BLOGS

Kosovo's continuing limbo
By Barnaby Phillips in The Europe Blog

Serbs in northern Kosovo reacted angrily and an ethnic Albanian police officer was killed and four injured in ensuing clashes.

Serbs form a majority in the two northern provinces of Kosovo. Albanians form the majority in most other areas.

Local Serbs have for weeks been manning 16 barricades blocking the main access roads to the border gates.

The commander of NATO-led forces in Kosovo (KFOR) said his troops would remove roadblocks near sensitive border crossings on Monday, if local Serbs fail to do so voluntarily.

Kosovo unilaterally declared independence in 2008 but Serbia still considers the breakaway territory its southern province.

Al Jazeera's Barnaby Phillips reports from the Kosovo border.

Source:

Al Jazeera and agencies

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/10/201110167539819979.html

October 15, 2011

EU to takeover former Yugoslavia

14.10.2011

The European Union is going to grow through the republics of former Yugoslavia. Following Slovenia and Croatia, Montenegro may soon become an EU member. The long-awaited status of a candidate country was given to Serbia, but it was made clear that without a settlement of the Kosovo issue Serbs will not be able to enjoy the membership. 

The movement toward the former Yugoslavia was started by the EU in the mid-1990s. However, at the time there were talks only about the most advanced of its republics, Slovenia. The rest of them were either healing the wounds of war, or every now and then would get involved in armed conflicts. As a result, Slovenia, still the most prosperous not only among the republics of Yugoslavia, but also among all former socialist countries, joined the EU in 2004, and three years later - the euro area.

Two million-strong Slovenia did not cause the European Union any particular problems. The income levels are higher than in Portugal, and nearly the same as in Greece. The Slovenes have developed industry and agriculture, beautiful ski and sea resorts. In addition, the percentage of ethnic minorities there is substantially below 10 percent. 

Next in line was Croatia. Being (same as Slovenia), a predominantly Catholic country, it is in civilizational terms similar to countries in Western and Central Europe. Unlike with most other residents of the Yugoslav republics, visas for Croatian were abolished by the EU 15 years ago. But before the end of the 1990s Croatia was ruled by the authoritarian regime of Franjo Tudjman. There acceptance of Croats in the EU in 2005 has failed. The country has not yet given the Hague Tribunal all war criminals that "excelled" in the course of the 1991-1995 war.

Gradually, all wanted Croatian war criminals have taken their place in the Hague tribunal, and the negotiations ensued. Ultimately, this summer it was decided to take Croatia into the EU starting July 1 of 2013. This country is not rich and its GDP per capita is 61 percent of the EU average, unemployment stands at 20 percent. However, in Poland, Hungary, Latvia, and Lithuania the income numbers are approximately the same, and such EU member states as Bulgaria and Romania have the numbers that are few orders of magnitude lower. 

At the moment, the Croats are only a few steps away from the membership in the EU. In December a special agreement with the EU is to be signed. Then, Croatia will have to introduce a visa regime with Russia and Ukraine (require for all new EU members) and bring a few other items of legislation in line with the European standards. On October 12th it became clear that the EU will not limit itself with the two most prosperous republics of Yugoslavia. The EU Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fule released a report which shows that all post-Yugoslavian countries are considered potential recruits by the EU. Obviously, they will not get membership all at once, and their levels of readiness to join the EU are different.

To date, the closest to the European future is Montenegro, whose population is just over 600 thousand. The European Commission has already recommended to begin talks with it for admission to the EU. The only thing that can interfere with the Montenegrins in the negotiation process is the high level of corruption and organized crime. The Europeans made it clear that they would not put up with the Montenegrin clan system of the authorities.

How beneficial for Europe a possible membership of Montenegro would be? In civilizational terms, this Orthodox country is far more removed from the "core" of the EU than Croatia and Slovenia. In terms of income it is about the same as Bulgaria and Romania (11 thousand dollars a year per capita). The country cannot boast developed industry and agriculture, but has wonderful seaside resorts (Bar, Budva). The level of the resort infrastructure is still below that of Croatia (and Slovenia in particular).

In terms of ethnic relations today's Montenegro is relatively stable. Albanians make up approximately four percent of the population, Slavic Muslims - nearly 14. However, their relationship with the title Orthodox nations is far from ideal. This titular nation was not very successful in "self-determination." Less than 45 percent of the country considers themselves Montenegrins, and nearly a third - the Serbs. The EU will have to deal with the country unstable in many ways.

The report of the EU and the Serbian leadership may be considered a relative victory. Contrary to many gloomy forecasts, the country received their candidate status for the EU membership. It seems that the European Commission has partially kept their promise that after the capture of war crimes suspects and transferring them to The Hague Serbia substantial talks with Serbia will be started. The former military leader of the Bosnian Serbs Ratko Mladic and the former head of the Croatian Serbs Goran Hadzic were sent to the Hague, and the Europeans "relented."

However, Serbian membership in the EU is not guaranteed. Before substantive negotiations may be started, it needs to resolve Kosovo's status. The situation is at a true deadlock. Most EU member states have recognized Kosovo's independence, but some refuse to do so. The Serbian leaders insist that they will not give the area even in exchange for the European future. The situation in Kosovo has recently escalated. The negotiations on Serbia's EU membership seem to be postponed. 

In addition to Kosovo, Serbia has a problem with other ethnic minorities. Dissatisfaction with their situation is increasingly expressed by 60,000 Albanians from the Presevo Valley, 200, 000 Slavic Muslims in the Sandzak region, and 400 thousand Hungarians from the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina. Recently they were joined by 60,000 Romanians. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has demanded in the summer that the Serbian authorities "respect the rights of minorities."

Candidate status for EU membership before Serbia was granted to Macedonia. However, negotiations with it cannot be started because of a dispute over its name. Greece refuses to recognize the country called the Republic of Macedonia, fearing their claims on the homonymous province. Macedonians are not willing to change the name to "Republic of Skopje" and the Greeks do not intend to withdraw their veto on the negotiations. Now "the case of the name" is examined the Hague tribunal, but no solutions have been reached as of yet. 

Macedonia's issues are not limited to the name. Nearly a quarter of the population is Albanians. 10 years ago, they already took up arms, and the NATO forces have put out an armed conflict not without difficulty. The subject of separation of the western areas populated by the Albanians remains on the agenda. In addition, Bulgaria refuses to consider the Macedonian language as a separate one, considering it a dialect of Bulgarian. It is understandable why the EU is in no hurry to take Macedonia into its ranks.

The worst of all is the case with the European integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). The European Union put much effort to ensure that this former republic is relatively strong. However, only local Muslims are willing to centralize. Head of the Republic of Srpska, Milorad Dodik, speaks openly about frailty of BiH. The local Croats require a special allocation of Croatian national unit by blocking the creation of all-Bosnian authorities. As a result, the country cannot even apply for membership in the European Union. The European Commission stated that the country has not yet formed a government at the state level, and the lack of a common vision of its political leaders continues to block the holding of key reforms related to the EU. The European prospects of the Bosnians that cannot even boast Montenegrin income level remain murky.

Objectively accepting into its ranks the former Yugoslavia, the EU is obtaining a huge headache in the form of undeveloped economies and international conflicts. Yet, was it not the "locomotive of the EU" Germany that at the time made a considerable contribution to a fire that broke out the war in Yugoslavia? France, Britain and Italy were not without sin either. Absorption of the EU post-Yugoslavian space is the only way to somehow control what happens there. So the EU will do everything to have all the republics of Yugoslavia in its composition. In the end, a geopolitical vacuum in Europe is something unacceptable, and the Europeans do not want to share their own influence in the Balkan underbelly with anyone. But the cost of joining of the Balkans may be such that the Greek crisis on their background may pale in comparison. 

Vadim Trukhachev

Pravda.Ru

http://english.pravda.ru/world/europe/14-10-2011/119330-eu_yugoslavia-0/

Robert Fisk: Democratic governments don't deal with terrorists – until they do

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-democratic-governments-dont-deal-with-terrorists-ndash-until-they-do-2369660.html

Robert Fisk: Democratic governments don't deal with terrorists – until they do

The Independent, 13 October 2011

In three decades, the Israelis have freed 7,000 prisoners in return for 19 Israeli prisoners

Once upon a time, we lived in a world where democratic governments did no deals with "terrorists". No country promoted this nonsense more than Israel. And no Israeli leader repeated the mantra so often as one B Netanyahu Esq. After all, America never "gave way" to "terrorists". No deals would ever be done by Britain.

Indeed, if France were to release 1,000 prisoners for one French hostage – heaven forbid – Obama, La Clinton and Cameron would be loud in their fury at French cowardice. But yesterday there came not a squeak from Washington or London about Israel's latest "deal" with its supposedly "terrorist" enemies: 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier.

Of all nations on earth, Israel regularly "gives in" or does "deals" over "terrorist" demands more than any other. A quick trip down memory lane: in 1985, Israel released 1,150 prisoners for three captured Israeli soldiers in Lebanon. In 1998, for the remains of an Israeli soldier killed the previous year, Israel released 65 prisoners and the bodies of 40 dead Hezbollah men. I watched the grim procession of the latter to a south Lebanon village where the bodies reeked so badly that families were sick at the stench as they wept in mourning.

In 2004, I watched the arrogant figure of Samir Kantar – convicted of murdering a policeman and an Israeli civilian and his four-year-old daughter – stride across the Lebanese frontier from Israel a free man (along with two tractor loads of Hezbollah bodies, released in return for an Israeli agent lured into Beirut by Hezbollah). He was proclaimed a hero in Lebanon.

And so it goes on. In three decades, the Israelis have freed 7,000 prisoners in return for 19 Israeli prisoners and the remains of four dead Israeli soldiers. Quite an exchange rate. Ironically, Israel's latest "deal" – 1,027 Palestinians for one Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, captured in Gaza in 2006 – suggests that one Israeli life equals 1,300 Palestinian lives; this was almost the exact number of Palestinians killed in Gaza in the 2008-09 invasion when 13 Israelis were killed.

Oddly, Israel never explained – and most journalists never asked – why its soldiers simply could not discover where Shalit was held in Gaza. It must have been Israeli military incompetence on a massive scale – unless the missing soldier was taken briefly through the Gaza tunnels to Egypt. Perhaps, when he is released, he will tell us.

In the past 30 years, the hostage swaps have been engineered by the International Red Cross, the German intelligence service, the United Nations and now the Egyptians. Hamas, crowing as usual at its "success", might choose to hold its tongue. Arrangements currently suggest that in return for Shalit they will receive 500 Palestinians now and 527 Palestinians "later". More than 10 years ago, the UN engineered a similar swap. Half the Lebanese prisoners came home during the hostage swap; then the Israelis decided to keep the other half.

The UN's special negotiator told me personally that when he pointed this out to then-UN Secretary General, the latter said of the remaining prisoners: "Forget them." No doubt Hamas can be equally as ruthless. Since they are now trying to force journalists and others to obtain "visas" before visiting their Republic of Gaza, we may not know.

In any case, it's a dirty and outrageous business, doing deals with "terrorists". Do not utter the word hypocrisy. And don't expect Obama to say a word. After all, the poor man is seeking re-election.

Like Robert Fisk on The Independent on Facebook for updates

October 10, 2011

‘Kosovo plays NATO off against Serbia’

'Kosovo plays NATO off against Serbia'

permalink email story to a friend print version

Published: 10 October, 2011, 13:24
Edited: 10 October, 2011, 18:46

KFOR soldiers stand guard at Jarinje border crossing between Serbia and Kosovo (AFP Photo / SASA DJORDJEVIC)

(88.2Mb) embed video

The atmosphere in Kosovo has been tense for months, and the international organizations set up to be impartial, clearly seem to be taking sides in the conflict, Serbian First Deputy PM Ivica Dacic told RT.

RT: How do the recent events in the north of Kosovo characterize the plans of Kosovo authorities to reaffirm the so-called independence of the region?

Ivica Dacic: The latest events in the north of Serbia show two facts: first, that Pristina is about to set up customs around what they think is the independent state of Kosovo. On the other hand, they show that there are international unions and a whole number of states that approve Pristina's intentions. We are facing a situation here when international forces deployed in Kosovo in fact serve Pristina's needs rather than maintain a neutral position. This is why Serbia opposes this attempt to introduce a customs and administrative line on the border with Serbia. Serbia is all for dialogue and for negotiations.

I think that Kosovo is only making matters worse by addressing other states. While I have said many times that Serbia is all for a peaceful resolution of the arguments around Kosovo, Serbia also has to take care of its people living in Kosovo. Nobody can expect or demand of Serbia, for any goal – even to join the EU – to state that it is not interested in Serbs or that it has no interests in Kosovo. This is why Serbia demanded a session of the UN Security Council – a demand backed by Russia – but the Security Council was unable to take a decision. It was due to the resistance of Western states who think that the Kosovo case is closed. Kosovo proclaimed its independence unilaterally; those countries agreed with it and now they think there's nothing more to talk about. Well, I think there is. There is still room for negotiation, and all resolutions must be fair.

RT:Would a decisive Serbian stance lead to another surge of violence against Serbian population of Kosovo, ultimately increasing the flow of Serbian refugees from Kosovo?

ID: Over 200,000 Serbs moved to Serbia from Kosovo, fleeing NATO air raids and the subsequent deployment of NATO and KFOR forces. At the moment, there are some 200,000 Serbs there, and it is crucial for Serbia, it is a key national interest that they stay in Kosovo. Of course, Serbia has its red lines that it will never allow Pristina to cross: for example, to use force against Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija, which would spur a new wave of the conflict and lead to more ethnic cleansing and more refugees. Serbia has made it known to the international community that its patience cannot be tried with attacks against Serbia and the Kosovo Serbs.

According the EU Security Council, Serbian police and the Serbian army may not be stationed in Kosovo. On the other hand, Serbs are constantly being oppressed, which may lead to a new wave of ethnic cleansing. Thus, it is very important that peace remains and sincere dialogue continues.

We need to find a way out of the situation where on the one hand, there are countries that acknowledge the one-sided proclamation of independence, and on the other hand, there is Serbia, which does not recognize the Pristina initiative.

RT: Do you think that the northern part of Kosovo may fall under Serbian jurisdiction?

ID: This is a position that I have expressed for a long time: that I support the historical component of the agreement between Serbs and Albanians. We need to fine-tune and confirm administrative borders, which means that if Albanians have the right to say they don't want to be part of Serbia, then the Serbs have the right to say they don't want to live within an independent Kosovo. It is obvious that despite the fact that we all want to live in peace as one multi-ethnic civil state, there are great contradictions between the Albanian and Serbian parts of Kosovo.

Albanians and Serbs have fought for ages over those lands. This is why the only possible solution is to live in peace and put an end to all problems by either dividing the land in such a way that Serbian parts of Kosovo remain within Serbia, or by putting that part under international governance and removing it from the jurisdiction of Pristina. I think this is the only fast and correct solution.

RT:Most NATO and EU countries have recognized Kosovo's independence. To what extent can the NATO peace-keeping forces and the EU-delegated mission be impartial and objective in a situation like this?

ID: It is a delicate and well-justified question. When EULEX was sent to Kosovo, it guaranteed, and the European Union guaranteed as well, that it would be neutral. But the mission's recent actions have proved that the reality is far from neutral. When the president of EULEX announces the mission's intention to observe the laws of Kosovo, it testifies to their breaching of their neutrality status obligations. My experience suggests – and I have been in politics for 20 years already – that the partiality of big European states is evident. They are biased and pursue double standards in their politics. Unfortunately, this is the reality we have to face. We have to counter this sad reality or find ways out of the situation. Of course, the plans of Hashim Thaci are actually built around KFOR and EULEX, therefore, if Serbia opposes Thaci, this means it opposes KFOR and EULEX and has to wage war with the rest of the world once again. They are trying to prove that Serbia is opposed to the international community. All in all, I think you were right to say that – it is true that we would like KFOR and EULEX to fulfill their mission in a more neutral and discreet way.

RT: What, do you think, the inability of the UN Security Council to pass an adequate resolution on the situation in the north of Kosovo proves?

ID: It is obvious that the countries which have the right of veto all support the Albanians, it's clear, and they won't let any resolution brought forward by either Serbia or Russia pass. In any case, we don't want the UN Security Council to take our side – we only want it to be impartial and to further control the work of the international mission, ensure KFOR is neutral and not with the Pristina authorities. All things considered, it is obvious that the Security Council is at a stalemate position – on one hand, it cannot pass resolutions that would distress Pristina, and on the other hand, it cannot decide to grant Kosovo independence because before such a decision is taken, a political solution to the existing problems should be found. They say Serbia's stance is no longer relevant, it is unimportant – but it is not, if they want a peaceful decision, of course! If the problem of Kosovo is to be dealt with efficiently, the option of an agreement with Serbia has to be considered. As it is now, a new practice is emerging in international politics – any part of a sovereign country is free to proclaim its own independence with no regard to the attitude of the country it is part of. A Pandora's Box has been opened and it is still unclear how we should put the lid back in place. I think it has to be accomplished by signing an agreement with Serbia.

RT:Do you think the EU is in a position to put pressure on Serbia in order to make it recognize Kosovo's independence?

ID: Serbia is interested in joining the EU. This interest lies primarily in the economic sphere. On the other hand, the EU has never told Serbia it has to recognize Kosovo's independence. And the EU has repeatedly stated it is not going to impose such a decision on Serbia. But some pressure does exist, this is obvious, and it is exercised where minor issues are concerned – all this is likely to evolve into a direct recognition of Kosovo's independence in the long run. This is the issue of customs control and the elimination of Serbian institutions in the north of Kosovo. And if Serbia agrees to do it, it will be virtually an act of recognition of Kosovo's independence. I believe, it is clear that Serbia will never sacrifice its national interests for the sake of admission to the EU.

Serbia may hold talks with the EU on a range of issues, like other states – on trade quotas, political system, justice and combating crime, fishing issues Norway has been discussing with the EU. But these talks cannot be focused on a part of Serbian territory.

RT:One of the preconditions of Serbia's accession to the EU was the arrest and extradition of General Ratko Mladic to The Hague Tribunal. What does Serbia think of the legal proceedings? How is the trial going? Is Serbia satisfied with it?

ID: I think the EU has already forgotten about The Hague Tribunal, and the conditions it set for Serbia: that it should detain Mladic to enter the Union, and now Kosovo has become a central issue. A ground to put pressure on Serbia can always be found. Serbia has handed 46 people over to The Hague Tribunal, and all were convicted by it. We think the Tribunal has based its every decision on the assumption that all Serbs are to blame for the problems of ex-Yugoslavia. In most trials that have taken place lately, Serbs were in the dock. It was necessary that my country found Mladic, this is true, but it is also necessary that we prove his innocence in court. This should be done in the best interest of the state, because such cases have started to cast a shadow over the reputation of the country. Everyone who committed military crimes should be held responsible, but this responsibility cannot be collective, it cannot be assumed by a whole nation, a whole country.

We have the example of Croatia, where national heroes, generals of the Croatian army were convicted. And you see that Albanians are seldom among those who have to face punishment for the military crimes they committed against the Serbian population. The Hague Tribunal did not want to hear cases of organ trafficking involving Albanians who abused Serbs. It's time to ask the question: what global picture was The Hague Tribunal striving to draw of itself and other states of the world? The Tribunal is perceived as highly partial and discriminatory in Serbia, at least by common citizens. But despite all this, Serbia has met the commitments it made.

RT: And the last question, Mr. Minister: Kosovo has been a de facto independent state for three years already. Let's be realistic: how strong is the possibility that it comes back to become part of Serbia once again?

ID: We should be realists if we want to engage in serious politics – we should foresee all possible developments. Today, we have several options: the first, or Pristina, option – Kosovo is independent and has no further interest in Serbia whatsoever; the second, Serbian, option is stipulated by the Serbian Constitution – Kosovo is part of Serbia. We expect Kosovo to come back and let us take it under our wing. Neither the first, nor the second option is realistic, a compromise should be found. I think, when searching for a compromise, we must consider defining the status of Serbs living in the north of Kosovo as well as their monasteries, and try to regulate the relations between the Albanian and the Serbian people in general. I think this is the best and quickest way to resolve the problem.

http://rt.com/news/kosovo-serbia-eu-dacic-427/

October 07, 2011

Death of War Crimes Witness Casts Cloud on Kosovo

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/07/world/europe/death-of-war-crimes-witness-casts-cloud-on-kosovo.html?_r=1&ref=europe

Advertise on NYTimes.com

Death of War Crimes Witness Casts Cloud on Kosovo

By MATTHEW BRUNWASSER

Published: October 6, 2011

PRIZREN, KOSOVO — The death of a key witness in Germany in the war crimes trial of one of Kosovo's most powerful politicians has cast doubt on the effective prosecution of the case and threatens to derail local and international efforts to establish the rule of law here.

ntimidation, fear, clan loyalties and a culture of silence have long impeded the development of a functioning justice system in Kosovo, analysts say, and the death is seen as a major setback.

The witness, Agim Zogaj, 53, a former commander of the Kosovo Liberation Army who kept meticulous diary notes of alleged war crimes, was found dead last week, hanging from a tree in a park in the Western German city of Duisburg.

Mr. Zogaj was said by his family to have been under witness protection from the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo, or Eulex, for his testimony against Fatmir Limaj. Mr. Limaj is a lawmaker in Kosovo's governing party and a top former commander with the Kosovo Liberation Army and is seen by many Kosovars as a hero of the country's liberation.

In September, a Eulex judge placed Mr. Limaj under house arrest for one month while awaiting trial on war crimes charges of killing and torturing Serbian and Albanian prisoners in the central Kosovo village of Klecka. Mr. Zogaj was the commander responsible for the security of camps in the village, and many of the charges are based on his witness statements.

The police in Duisburg officially ruled the death a suicide after the autopsy last week, and Mr. Zogaj was buried in Prizren on Monday.

Afrim Zogaj, 46, spoke of "huge psychological pressure" on his brother. "It's not possible that he killed himself," he said, "and if he did, he was forced to do it."

In the family home in Prizren, where Mr. Zogaj's wife and three children lived while their father was in hiding, the blame was placed squarely on Eulex.

"Eulex is responsible for my husband's death," said his widow, Ganimeti Zogaj. "They didn't treat him well. They didn't provide anything for him at all."

Eulex has declined to comment on the death and issued a short statement expressing regret at the loss of life and explaining why it could not say more.

"Witness protection and security are extremely sensitive issues," it said, and we cannot "and will not confirm nor deny any operational details."

According to his brother, after an assault on the family home in March, Agim Zogaj was shot in the hand and leg and decided to testify and seek witness protection from Eulex. Eulex sent Mr. Zogaj to Duisburg to live with his brother.

When Eulex officials took him away from the family home after the attack, "they said, 'We will take care of him, he's our responsibility,"' said Idriz Zogaj, 75, the father.

Afrim Zogaj said Eulex had provided his brother no physical security in Germany

Vehbi Kajtazi, legal affairs reporter at Koha Ditore, a leading national daily in Kosovo, said: "The trust in Eulex has been destroyed. All the witnesses in the case will now start looking for ways to avoid testifying."

Mr. Kajtazi said the fallout would affect the entire judicial system.

"Witness protection was unreliable here even before this case" he said. "This is the worst signal you can send to future potential witnesses."

Intimidation and even killings of witnesses are nothing new or shocking in Kosovo, said Avni Zogiani, who leads Cohu, an anti-corruption nongovernmental organization.

"The E.U. is recklessly hunting for a symbolic success in Kosovo," Mr. Zogiani said. "They want to show European public opinion that the E.U. can have a foreign policy success while ignoring what is happening on the ground in Kosovo."

In the war crimes trial of the former Kosovo prime minister Ramush Haradinaj, 34 of 100 witnesses were allowed to conceal their identities, the most of any case at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, prosecutors said at the time. Eighteen had to be subpoenaed because they refused to appear, and others, once inside the courtroom, said they did not dare testify. He was acquitted of all charges in 2008, but in 2010 a partial retrial was ordered.

October 06, 2011

Why Kosovo but not Palestine?

Serbia was historically more aligned with Russia, while Israel serves US foreign policy interests in the Middle East.

Zoltan Grossman Last Modified: 06 Oct 2011 07:02

inShare2

Former President Clinton supported Kosovo's independence by launching a NATO bombing campaign against Serbia [GALLO/GETTY]

In his September 21 speech to the United Nations, President Obama announced that he would veto UN recognition of a Palestinian state, because its independence was not a result of a negotiated settlement with Israel.

He said that "peace depends upon compromise among people who must live together long after our ... votes have been tallied ... That's the lesson of Sudan, where a negotiated settlement led to an independent state. And that is and will be the path to a Palestinian state - negotiations between the parties."

But President Obama neglected to mention a recent prominent example of unilateral independence, the State of Kosovo, which was recognised by the United States three years ago - even though its statehood did not come about through a negotiated settlement with Serbia. If an independent state of Palestine should only be recognised with Israel's approval, then why did the US recognise the independence of Kosovo in 2008, over the objections of Serbia?

Why recognise Kosovo but not Palestine?

Serbs view Kosovo as the cradle of their national identity, where the Ottoman Empire defeated them in 1389. Kosovo maintained a Serb majority for centuries, but in the late 1800s it became a seat of Albanians' national awakening, and eventually gained an ethnic Albanian majority. It became part of Serb-dominated Yugoslavia after World War I, and (after the Axis occupation in World War II), the Yugoslav Communist government made Kosovo into a province within the republic of Serbia, recognising the rights of its Kosovar Albanian majority. In 1989, Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic vastly reduced Kosovo's autonomy, citing threats to the Serb minority, as the opening move in his nationalist crusade for a Greater Serbia.

"So far 83 UN member states (including the US) have recognised Kosovo - 44 fewer than the total member states that have recognised Palestine."

Like Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat first declared Palestinian sovereignty in 1988, Kosovar Albanian leader Ibrahim Rugova first declared Kosovo independent in 1990. No foreign powers recognised Kosovo at that time, but 127 UN member states have since recognised the State of Palestine.

Civil war erupted between Serbian forces and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in 1998, and more than 2,000 people died in the fighting. KLA fighters targeted ethnic Serb civilians in the province, as well as moderate Kosovar Albanians, and Serbian forces targeted Albanian civilians. In February 1999, President Clinton led NATO in a bombing campaign against Serbia, triggering Milosevic's plan for the "ethnic cleansing" (or forced removal) of Kosovo's Albanian majority, which began after the bombs started falling.

When the KLA came to power with backing from NATO troops in June 1999, it in turn ethnically cleansed thousands of Serbs, Roma (Gypsies), Turks and Jews from its territory, based on the accusation that these groups had sided with Serbian forces.

These minority groups had been living in Kosovo for centuries, unlike the Israeli settlers who are mostly recent transplants imported to Palestinian soil. When Serbia had settled some Serb war refugees in Kosovo from other ex-Yugoslav republics during the 1990s, Washington condemned the program as an attempt to shift the demographics of the province. The few Serbs living in Kosovo since 1999 have been subject to periodic pogroms, and a Serb enclave in the north has periodically threatened to rejoin Serbia, generating instability in the new state.

Whereas the prevailing mythology in the United States is that Clinton bombed former Yugoslavia to stop ethnic cleansing, people in the Balkans understand that US forces intervened against Serb ethnic cleansers, but intervened on the side of Croat and Albanian ethnic cleansers. After the fighting was over, NATO rubberstamped the results on the ground of these forced removals, and deemed the silence of the graveyard a "lasting peace".

Kosovo's parliament redeclared independence in 2008, in a move that was boycotted by Kosovo Serb delegates. So far, 83 UN member states (including the US) have recognised Kosovo - 44 fewer than the total members states that have recognised Palestine. Serbia asked the International Court of Justice to rule on the secession, and last year the Court issued an advisory opinion that unilateral declarations of independence are not prohibited under international law.

So what's the difference?

President Obama has promised to veto the Palestinian bid for statehood in a hypocritical move [GALLO/GETTY]

Serbia has a stronger legal case than Israel to object to unilateral independence, and not only because of the Kosovo's expulsion of most Serbs. Kosovo was not only recognised as a part of Yugoslavia before the 1990s, not as a Yugoslav republic of its own, but as a province within the republic of Serbia. On the other hand, the West Bank and Gaza (not to mention Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem) have never been recognised as a part of Israel. In addition, after coming to power, KLA fighters blatantly endangered the security of neighbouring states, by seeking to militarily "liberate" ethnic Albanians in western Macedonia and Serbia's Presevo Valley.

The difference is that Kosovo is under occupation by a foreign military alliance that backs the self-determination of its ethnic Albanian majority. The West Bank and East Jerusalem are under the occupation of a foreign military force that seeks to prevent the self-determination of its majority Palestinian population, and seeks to settle its own population in their place.

Serbia and Israel have remarkably similar messages toward the West. They contend that their military occupations have been justified to prevent a repeat of the genocide directed against them in World War II. (The Palestinians had nothing to do with this genocide, though Croatia and Albania were allied with the Axis Powers.)

"Serbia and Israel present themselves as bulwarks defending Western civilisation against Islamist extremism."

Serbia and Israel present themselves as bulwarks defending Western civilisation against Islamist extremism, even though both the Palestinian and Kosovar national movements began with secular ethnic-based identities, and include members of Christian minorities. Serbia and Israel have also used ancient religious justifications (such as shrines and archeological sites) for their military presence in lands where they do not have a demographic majority.

The difference is that the Israeli lobby in Washington is far stronger than the Serbian lobby. Milosevic's massive ethnic cleansings of Kosovar Albanians (as well as Croats and Bosnians) were more recent and televised than Israel's forced removal of Palestinians from their ancestral lands, in what they term the Nakba (Catastrophe) of 1948.

The KLA has long been implicated in heroin trafficking to raise funds for the cause and cash for personal enrichment. Former KLA commanders, including Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, have even been accused of trafficking in human organs. Kosovo is also a notorious center of sex trafficking in the Balkans, especially as Western troops have been stationed there. Whatever the veracity of any of these particular charges, none of them have prevented US support for Kosovo's independence.

The difference is that the Palestinian national movement has not been implicated in such international crime syndicates. We can be sure that if any Palestinian leaders were accused of just one of these crimes, the Israeli lobby would trumpet the charge loudly as an argument against a Palestinian state, and the White House would echo the claim.

Palestine and Israel have come down on different sides on Kosovo independence. Senior adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Yasser Abed Rabbo, cited Kosovo's example for unilateral independence when he said, "Kosovo is not better than us. We are worthy of independence before them and we ask for backing from the United States and European Union."

Meanwhile, Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman categorically refused to recognise Kosovo, claiming that its independence is a "sensitive issue" that should be part of "a really comprehensive and peaceful solution" established through negotiations. So both the Palestinians and Israelis are consistent in their consideration of Kosovo's example. The party that is not consistent is the United States, which with one hand recognises a new state, and with the other hand blocks another new state.

The difference may be that, since the days of Woodrow Wilson, Washington tends to support the unilateral self-determination of peoples only if they are white Europeans. More to the point, Israel serves US foreign policy interests in the Middle East, but Orthodox Christian Serbia has historically been more aligned with Russia.

The United Nations has not recognised Kosovo because it would set a negative precedent for unilateral secession around the world. Many states in the Arab League and European Union, on the other hand, view Kosovo as a positive precedent for Palestine. Some governments may oppose sovereignty for both Kosovo and Palestine. But the US is virtually alone in its backing for the State of Kosovo, while at the same time hypocritically blocking a State of Palestine.

Americans should start asking President Obama: If Kosovo has a right to exist, why doesn't Palestine also have a right to exist?

Zoltan Grossman is a professor of Geography and and Native American & World Indigenous Peoples Studies at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. He is a civilian Member of the Board of GI Voice, an antiwar veterans group that runs the Coffee Strong resource center for soldiers outside Fort Lewis. He can be reached at grossmaz@evergreen.edu.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

A version of this article was first published on Counterpunch.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/10/201110292016107881.html

October 04, 2011

Art and Science at LSE - "Different Face of Serbia"

MESSAGE FROM THE AUTHORS

For many years the general public in Britain and the rest of Western world associated Serbia mainly with the 1990's tragic and violent disintegration of former Yugoslavia. Embarking on the path of post-communist transition starting on 5th October 2000, eleven years after the fall of Berlin wall, the first decade of the 21st century Serbia spent in adapting itself to the new outlook of the world, from which it was excluded during most of the 1990's. During this decade the prevailing gloomy image of Serbia was somewhat improved by successes of its talented and glamorous tennis stars. But the new, democratic and modern Serbia was never adequately promoted by its official institutions, always too busy tackling difficult legacy of the recent past.

"Different Face of Serbia" – a series of academic, artistic and cultural events which we are presenting at the London School of Economics and Political Science during October 2011 - brings to the attention of academic audience and general public an independent, non-governmental view on contemporary Serbia. It is done through presenting work of several outstanding LSE alumni students and world-class authors of the 21st century Serbia. Our idea is to introduce to the world sophisticated, educated and cosmopolitan Serbia, whose image and reputation over the previous two decades were blemished mainly due to inability of its politicians to present it in a dignified way.

We chose to stage our programme at the LSE, an academic institution renowned for educating intellectual and political elites of contemporary world, for two reasons: LSE and its remarkable open-minded academic community can see and appreciate the new face of Serbia; at the same time the British public and world media closely follow vibrant intellectual life and events at the LSE.

Through this programme we hope to accomplish some longer-term effects too - to connect Serbian intellectuals, researchers, artists and our non-governmental sector colleagues with their counterparts in Britain and around the world. We would also like to set up and initiate new channels of communication and cooperation between the like-minded citizens of our globalized world. It is our belief that we are privileged to be members of the LSE's alumni global network. By focusing on individual intellectual and artistic excellence and achievements in service of the whole humanity we are eliminating the existing nation-related prejudices and stereotypes. Culture and science do not belong to any nation in particular, but represent the world's shared heritage, although national origin of its authors must be recognized and remembered.

In order to reinforce such a courageous statement, we would like to point out at intellectual understanding and generous grant from the Austrian bank ERSTE, which enabled us to present "Different Face of Serbia" in London.

For more specific information about program and activities please visit: http://www.mediafire.com/?c8xj907a1wdhb

Srdjan D. Stojanovic Jelena Stojanovic

October 02, 2011

James Ker Lindsey, "Good plan opens chances for partition of Kosovo"

James Ker Lindsey, expert

"Good plan opens chances for partition of Kosovo"

T. Spaic | 03. 10. 2011. - 00:02h | Comments 0

'Although some of the world most powerful countries are strongly opposing changing of borderlines, there are two realities in the field. One is that Kosovo is independent and the second one is that Serbs in the north are opposing authority of Pristina. It seems that it is possible to find a compromise. If Serbia has to accept independence of Kosovo, then Pristina has to accept that the north is a part of Serbia. Direct consequences of refusal of compromise shall have to bear both Serbia and Kosovo and not the USA or Russia', James Ker Lindsey, British expert in international relations in the Southeast Europe says in his interview with 'Blic'.

Professor at the London School of Economics and Political Science was in Belgrade several days ago where he promoted his latest book 'Kosovo – The Path to Contested Statehood in the Balkans', explains for 'Blic' that only countries not suffering direct consequences from their decisions can take hard stances.

'Russia may have strong stance towards refusal of Kosovo independence but it does not have to pay for that by its relation with the EU as Belgrade does. The USA also can insist on its stance but that shall not cost it the UN membership or participation in sports competition, or having a postal code or the Internet domain. If that is understood then Belgrade and Pristina may try to reach a compromise', Lindsey says.

What are the consequences of deployment of Kosovo policemen and customs officers in the north of Kosovo? Is that not a change of reality in the field?

- Pristina says clearly that it intends to establish the sovereignty in the whole territory of Kosovo. However, that need not mean that the last chance for negotiations over the Kosovo north has been lost. However, Serbian Government has to be very open towards the population and say that Serbia can no longer fight for the whole Kosovo. If we want to take the north, then we have to put some plan on the table. That has to be done very soon.

In what way can Belgrade do it?
- The key supporters of Pristina independence know that it shall not be easy and that it would cost them a lot that Pristina takes over control in the north because of strong hostility by the local Serbs towards authorities in Pristina. That is what Belgrade should use and put concrete proposals on the table offering solution. Presenting clear plans by Belgrade can open new possibility for negotiations over the north.

Who might support Belgrade's plan?
- The authorities in Serbia first have to get support of the people in Serbia to accept one huge change. I do not believe there is an alternative. Campaign against recognition of Kosovo independence was incredibly successful, but prevention of recognition does not mean solution to the problem. Large number of countries that have not recognized Kosovo can be a good stake in negotiations. It is necessary to reach a solution that both sides would be able to live with.

How to get the world powers to accept negotiations over partition or status of the north?
- If Belgrade presents a good and precise plan I believe that would make them calculate again the cost of maintaining Pristina's authority in the north.

What would be the maximum that Belgrade could get from the present situation?
- There is possibility that borders are changed and that Kosovo north belongs to Serbia. There are no provisions in international law preventing a country from negotiations over change of its borderlines.

http://english.blic.rs/News/8055/Good-plan-opens-chances-for-partition-of-Kosovo

October 01, 2011

VIDEO: "Shoot to Kill": NATO Assault on Peaceful Serbian Demonstrators in Kosovo

VIDEO: "Shoot to Kill" NATO Assault on Peaceful Serbian Demonstrators in Kosovo

by grtv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsTtvt9Nrww&feature=player_embedded

Violence has flared again in Northern Kosovo after NATO troops brutally dispersed a crowd of Serbian protesters at a makeshift roadblock, firing live ammunition at peaceful demonstrators, and have now established an armed presence in the area.

Over 100 KFOR troops arrived at the scene on Friday and forced the Serbs to leave the then-intact barricade, threatening the use of lethal force. KFOR said they would shoot anyone who failed to comply. They also ordered journalists to leave the immediate area. NATO's force in Kosovo has said it will shoot to kill anyone who crosses a barricaded area near the disputed checkpoint on Serbia's border with Kosovo, reports RT's Aleksey Yaroshevsky.

Allied pro-Kosovo forces then brought in bulldozers and demolished the barricade built by ethnic Serbs on the Kosovo side of the border with Serbia.

But Serbs at the remaining barricades say they will not leave their positions.

"We have lost a battle, but not the whole war," they told RT.

The Kosovar Serbs added that their move to erect barricades in Kosovo is driven by fear that Belgrade might abandon them in pursuit of EU membership.

Ethnic Serbs are more determined than ever to show that they do not wish to be part of the Kosovo republic.

"They are telling us to leave but we have nowhere to go," explained Petra, a local resident. "This is because Kosovo is our land, our home and our life. It seems that we are on our own now and we will stand our ground."

After peacefully retreating from the barricades, the Serbs established another makeshift checkpoint by putting two large trucks on a bridge, thus blocking access to northern Kosovo for the KFOR troops.

The situation remains tense but not violent with Serbs pulling back and grouping at a nearby bridge block post. The barricade secured by NATO troops is just one of about half a dozen constructed by Serbs, so the stand-off is continuing and an escalation of tension remains a possibility. RT's correspondent reports that he saw a group of Serbs tearing down a road sign posted by KFOR, indicating that their fighting spirit is far from lost.

Still, more than 10 wounded people remain in hospital in the town of Mitrovice after Tuesday's clashes with KFOR forces. Some of them have bullet wounds. RT spoke to them to get first-hand information about the clashes.

"We were standing by the barricade when the soldiers started shouting and shooting at us," recalls injured Aleksander Radunovic. "I did not know what they were shooting with so I got scared and started running away. Then I thought I had been hit on the shoulder, but it turned out I had received a perforating wound of my lung."

Significantly, KFOR and NATO are trying to convince the public that they only used rubber bullets and tear gas grenades against the Serbs to pacify them. But doctors in the local hospital told RT that the patients have unmistakable gunshot wounds.

"We received seven men in a serious condition: gunshot wounds, fractures and bruises -- they were not rubber bullets, not a single one of them had rubber bullet wounds," revealed the head surgeon of Mitrovica hospital, Radomir Ivankovic. "All those wounds were caused by regular bullets which we extracted from the bodies [of injured]."

The conflict zone in Kosovska Mitrovica is split between the Albanians and the Serbs, and as RT's crew witnessed last night, the latter are currently reinforcing their barricades with fresh piles of sandbags being placed across roads to block access to KFOR forces and the Kosovo police.

NATO helicopters are bringing additional troops to the conflict zone, and are reported to be flying over the border crossings approximately every 30 minutes.

There has been a strong international response on this week's developments in Kosovo.
The US has accused Serbs of provoking violence, while the Russian Foreign ministry has expressed deep concern over the situation in Kosovo, saying that this conflict, largely perceived as a border incident, could destabilize the situation in the whole region.

Russia's envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, has criticized NATO for a crude breach of the UN resolution on Kosovo, saying the alliance has failed to remain neutral.

"In this situation, NATO has definitely taken Pristina's side," Rogozin told Russia's TV channel Rossiya 24.

Russia's Foreign Ministry has also expressed deep concern over news suggesting an emergency carriage taking the injured to hospital was fired on by Kosovo forces during Tuesday clashes at the disputed checkpoint.

On Wednesday, members of the United Nations Security Council gathered for emergency consultations in New York to discuss the situation in southern Serbia, but failed to reach a common stance on the conflict in the turbulent region.

On Thursday, Kosovo's Interior Minister Bajram Rexhepi said that roadblocks put up by local Serbs will be removed, pledging, though, that ethnic Albanian-dominated authorities will make no unilateral moves, AP reports. The removal of barriers is "inevitable" as they prevent "freedom of movement for people and goods,'' the minister said, adding that any action would be coordinated with the NATO-led KFOR forces and the European Union mission.

Serbia's troubles

Is Serbia's EU bid dying?

Oct 1st 2011, 12:40 by T.J.

SERBIA'S government has banned a Gay Pride march scheduled to take place tomorrow in Belgrade, citing threats of violence from far-right groups. Earlier this week Serbs in northern Kosovo came to blows with KFOR, the NATO-led peacekeeping force; there wre injuries on both sides.

Both developments are bad news for Serbia and the rest of the region. On October 12th the western Balkans states receive their annual reports from the European Commission; Serbia's government has been hoping to win a recommendation for candidate status for membership of the European Union.

That now hangs in the balance. Two weeks ago a source told me that Serbia's EU hopes depended on progress in the next round of EU-sponsored talks between it and Kosovo, which had been scheduled for September 28th. But when the violence erupted in Kosovo, Serbia's negotiator, Borko Stefanovic, said he was prepared to discuss only that and nothing else. Result: no talks. This could make the difference when the commission issues its report.

Neither will the Gay Pride march decision help much. The government is, admittedly, in an awkward spot. Last year's march saw riots and looting, and the government will not want to risk a repeat of that for a cause that evokes little sympathy in the country. On the other hand, its ban makes it look feeble and unwilling to stand up to threats from violent extremists. If the government can't even ensure a peaceful Gay Pride march in its capital, goes the logic, how can it be ready to join the EU?

On August 23rd Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, told the Serbs that they had to dismantle their "parallel structures"—Serbian municipalities and the like—in Kosovo before they could hope to gain EU candidate status. Since then German diplomats have "clarified" this by saying that Serbia simply has to "start" dismantling them.

Whatever. Either way, the Germans, bogged down with Greece's problems, appear to be in no hurry to allow more troublesome Balkanites into European institutions. Other EU countries are hiding behind Mrs Merkel's skirts, allowing the big angry mother to take the flak for halting western Balkan EU integration. This risks leaving the western Balkans to languish in the peripheral neverland.

Some may wonder why Serbia and its neighbours want to join a club that has more than a few problems of its own. The answer is that the process of moving towards the EU is a modernising force in itself, even if EU countries themselves don't always behave as they should. Milan Rocen, Montenegro's foreign minister, said recently that it would have taken his country ten years to reform as much as it has done in the last year in the absence of the pull of Brussels.

After Croatia joins the EU in 2013, there is a real danger that no Balkan state will be allowed in for years. This is not the time to rebuff them.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2011/10/serbias-troubles

September 30, 2011

NATO issues Kosovo shoot to kill warning

permalink email story to a friend print version

Published: 30 September, 2011, 14:50

Kosovo Force KFOR soldiers guard the border crossing Jarinje between Serbia and northern Kosovo (AFP Photo / Dimitar Dilkoff)

(17.0Mb) embed video

NATO's force in Kosovo has said it will shoot to kill anyone who crosses a barricaded area near the disputed checkpoint on Serbia's border with Kosovo, reports RT's Aleksey Yaroshevsky.

On releasing this message, the allied pro-Kosovo forces brought in bulldozers and demolished the barricade built by ethnic Serbs in northern Kosovo at the border with Serbia.

But Serbs at the remaining barricades will not leave their positions.

"We have lost a battle, but not the whole war," they told RT.

The Serbs added that many of them felt compelled to erect barricades in Kosovo by fears that Belgrade might abandon them in pursuit for EU membership.

Earlier in the morning over 100 KFOR troops arrived at the scene and forced the Serbs to leave the intact at the time barricade, threatening the use of lethal force. KFOR said they would shoot anyone who fails to comply with the demand. They also ordered journalists to leave the immediate area.

The situation is tense but not violent with Serbs pulling back and grouping at a nearby bridge. The barricade secured by NATO troops is just one of about half a dozen constructed by Serbs, so the stand-off is continuing and an escalation of tension remains a possibility. Alexey Yaroshevsky reports that he saw a group of Serbs tearing down a road sign posted by KFOR, indicating that their fighting spirit is far from lost.

NATO helicopters are also bringing additional troops to the conflict zone, and are reported to be flying over the border crossings approximately every 30 minutes.

This is the closest barricaded area to the border posed between Kosovo and Serbia. The crossing, formerly controlled by Serbia, was seized by Kosovo police backed by the alliance two weeks ago.

Friday's developments come two days after clashes took place between the Serbs in northern Kosovo and the NATO-led troops, when the latter reportedly fired on Serb protesters in the Kosovska Mitrovica region, allegedly responding to an attack by the crowd.

Some 11 men injured on Tuesday in those clashes are still being treated for their wounds in hospital. Despite KFOR and NATO's claims that they used only rubber bullets and tear gas grenades to pacify the crowds, most of the injured have gunshot wounds. Doctors tending to the injured have confirmed to RT that they have undergone surgery to remove bullets from their bodies.

Russia's envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, has criticized NATO for a crude breach of the UN resolution on Kosovo, saying the alliance has failed to remain neutral.

"In this situation, NATO has definitely taken Pristina's side," Rogozin told Russia's TV channel Rossiya 24.

On Thursday, Kosovo's Interior Minister Bajram Rexhepi said that roadblocks put up by local Serbs will be removed, pledging, though, that ethnic Albanian-dominated authorities will make no unilateral moves, AP reports. The removal of barriers is "inevitable" as they prevent "freedom of movement for people and goods,'' the minister said, adding that any action would be coordinated with the NATO-led KFOR forces and the European Union mission.

http://rt.com/news/kosovo-kfor-clash-serbs-771/

ANTIC.org-SNN Archive

October 19, 2011

Radicals blocked the U.S. ambassador

October 18, 2011

New Russian Presence Complicates Kosovo Impasse on Border

October 16, 2011

October 15, 2011

EU to takeover former Yugoslavia

October 10, 2011

'Kosovo plays NATO off against Serbia'

October 07, 2011

Death of War Crimes Witness Casts Cloud on Kosovo

By MATTHEW BRUNWASSER

Published: October 6, 2011

October 06, 2011

October 04, 2011

October 02, 2011

"Good plan opens chances for partition of Kosovo"

October 01, 2011

Recommended Articles

Serbia's troubles

Is Serbia's EU bid dying?

September 30, 2011

NATO issues Kosovo shoot to kill warning

Facebook Badge

Search This Blog

Followers

Blog Archive

About Me