Kosovo & Systematic Persecution by KLA

 

Lee Jay Walker

понедељак, 27. јул 2009.

(The Seoul Times, July 25, 2009) The former Yugoslavia was engulfed by many conflicts and ethnic and religious differences tore away at the very fabric of this nation. Like all wars, atrocities took place on all sides but the mass media in general focused on Serbian atrocities, while neglecting brutal crimes committed against the Serbian community. This certainly applies to the glossing over of war crimes done by the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). However, more and more evidence is coming to light about brutal KLA death camps and killing people for organs. Therefore, will former KLA members be charged with war crimes and will the "real truth" be told about international collusion? If not, then where does this leave Kosovo? Before focusing on this important issue I fear a major cover-up. After all, the American version of history is that Kosovo should be independent because Albanians suffered greatly, therefore, Serbia does not have a moral right to keep Kosovo under Serbia. Yet, if it comes to light that the KLA killed mainly Serbians, and also fellow Albanians, Roma, and other minorities, then where does this leave the American, British, and the Albanian version of events? Remember, we are not talking about massacres taking place by opposing armies; on the contrary, we are talking about the KLA killing civilians for organs and for other brutal reasons. Also, since the ending of the conflict it is clear that countless numbers of Christian Orthodox Churches have been destroyed and non-Albanian culture is on the wane. Added to this, thousands of people have been killed by Albanian nationalists and innocent Serbians, Roma, and others, have "been killed in silence" because it doesn't suit the interests of America, the United Kingdom, and other nations who supported the KLA. The BBC, a very liberal British network, highlighted the brutal deeds of the KLA during the airing of "Crossing Continents" and "Newsnight" which was broadcasted on April 9, 2009. Paul Mitchell, BBC correspondent, states that this provides "another side to the conflict which the world was not supposed to see." If we take this further, it also undermines the claims of America, the United Kingdom, and other nations who support the independence of Kosovo. After all, the findings show "a dirty covert war" and it raises further important questions, for example, how did the KLA develop overnight and where did they obtain their military hardware from? However, I do not want to get bogged down by the justifications of either side in this article. Instead I want to focus on the disturbing findings of the BBC and others who hope to bring to light the past evils of the KLA. Once more, before delving into this I wish to state that all sides in this conflict committed atrocities be they Albanian or Serbian. Also, the brutal civil wars which took place in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo, witnessed many massacres and like all wars, you have no pure side because war always leads to atrocities and often it is the civilian population which is victimized the most. Therefore, this article is not intended to be anti any one single ethnic group and of course many Albanians in Kosovo were also victims. Each ethnic and religious group suffered pain, irrespective if Orthodox Christian or Muslim, or if Serbian or Albanian. However, the mass media mainly gave a one sided point of view, and this point of view was anti-Serbian. Yet the findings by the BBC and others highlight a different story and one which continues to be mainly ignored. This applies to the brutal killings and torture of innocent Serbians by the KLA and others were also murdered by this terrorist organization. Yes, I stress terrorist organization for one simple reason. Throughout all of the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia it was clear that many Muslims remained in Serbia, after all, the Muslim community in Serbia is part and parcel of this independent nation which is multi-ethnic and multi-religious. However, did the KLA protect Serbian Orthodox Christians, Roma, and other minorities? The answer is clearly no. Instead the KLA used a reign of terror against all minorities and persecuted fellow Albanians who were deemed to be traitors. Therefore, the KLA was a terrorist organization and clearly this organization was involved in major criminality including the killing of innocents in order to sell organs. In the article written by Paul Mitchell, a former KLA prisoner states "I've seen a lot, people beaten, stabbed, hit with steel pipes, left without eating for 5 or 6 days. People had bullet proof vests on and were shot to see if it was working, thrown into tombs, beaten up and killed." The former KLA prisoner continues by saying "What can you feel when you see those things?" he added. "It's something that is stuck in my mind for the rest of my life. You cannot do those things to people, not even to animals." Another Albanian who is suffering the aftershocks of this brutal conflict also bravely speaks the truth. He highlights that he drove trucks with prisoners who were shackled and he stresses that the majority were Serbian civilians and not only this, he drove them from Kosovo to Albania. He continues by stating "I was sick. I was just waiting for it to end. It was hard. I thought we were fighting a war [of liberation] but this was something completely different." KLA sites of systematic torture and killings were based throughout Kosovo and also in parts of Albania. For example Kukes and Burrel in Albania were used by the KLA with regards to military training, obtaining weapons, and for other factors. This in itself raises the role of Albania and NATO nations which took part in the bombing of the former Yugoslavia. However, getting back to Kukes and Burrel and systematic torture and killing of innocents, it becomes apparent that these sites witnessed many barbaric atrocities. The International Centre for the Red Cross obtained information about brutal murders in Burrel in 2000. This applies to being informed by KLA fighters who stated that Serbian civilians were killed in 1999 in Burrel and these killings had an economic motive because organs were removed and then sold abroad. Of course, this information would be very troubling for both America and the United Kingdom, because both these nations had sold the war in the disguise of "good" versus "evil." However, if the good side, the KLA, is involved in killing civilians for harvesting organs and then selling these organs on to other nations, then what does this make America and the United Kingdom? Also, the hard sell by America, the United Kingdom, and other nations who support independence, is that independence is justified on the grounds of Serbian atrocities. Yet if the KLA was found to be involved in killing civilians for organs then "the spin machine" collapses and "democracy" rings hollow. The role of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) is also criticized because of deeds which took place. UNMIK's former head for Missing Persons and Forensics, Jose Pablo Baraybar, comments that "There were people that are certainly alive that were in Kukes, in that camp, as prisoners. Those people saw other people there, both Albanians and non-Albanians. There were members of the KLA leadership going through that camp. Many names were mentioned, and I would say that that is an established fact." More alarming, Baraybar openly admits that UNMIK was fully aware that the KLA had many detention centres and this in itself should have warranted a major investigation. Yet, claims Baraybar, "no proper investigation was ever carried out." Sian Jones, Amnesty International spokesperson was more scathing because Jones states that UNMIK "chose not to investigate." Jones also adds that there were "lots of allegations, lots of victims but little true justice." Therefore, it is clear that important vested interests have a need to cover-up the real truth behind "this dirty war." The United Nations, NATO, the role of Albania and major political leaders in nations like America and the United Kingdom, all come out of this in a terrible light. Also, it raises the issue of "war crime tribunals" and fairness and this terrible and tragic conflict questions the morality of major nations and institutions. The issue of Kosovo remains because the majority of the international community does not recognize Kosovo to be an independent nation. If the truth really "came to light" and a full and major investigation took place, then clearly you would have many disturbing findings. However, world leaders from major nations do not have to worry about war crimes, and this is the problem, you still have a world of "real power" versus nations of "limited power" and we all know that the outcome is dependent on this sad reality. The real tragedy of Kosovo, like all civil wars, is that innocents died on all sides. Yet it is clear that a major investigation is needed because killing innocents for organs is truly barbaric and you have enough evidence that this did take place. So will this disgraceful chapter come to light or will it be brushed under the carpet because of power politics? If we judge past history then it would appear that it will be brushed under the carpet. However, when major powers want to ignore issues like this, it is truly sickening and the role of the mass media in general is also a loser because not enough was said or done at the time of this conflict. Once more the propaganda machine of "the rich and powerful won" and the real losers were the innocents on all sides. However, one story was told, that of the persecution of the Albanians; but the other story, the persecution of Serbians, Roma, and other minorities remains untold. Yet the story of death camps and killing innocents for organs must be told and a true investigation is needed and this applies to everything and not just minor people who took part in this brutal war. http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=8646

 

A tale of two pipelines

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/22/gas-energy-europe-serbia

 

A tale of two pipelines

 

The Nabucco and South Stream projects will secure gas for the EU – and change the power balance in the Balkans

 

          o Ian Bancroft

          o guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 22 July 2009 07.00 BST

          o Article history

 

The EU's long-delayed Nabucco pipeline has received an important boost with the signing of an inter-governmental transit agreement between Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria. With Russia's rival South Stream project having already secured the support of Italy, Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece, the Balkans is gradually becoming a tale of two pipelines. The outcome of these respective projects, therefore, will have far-reaching implications not only for Europe's long-term energy security, but for the strategic balance of the Balkans and the pressures facing the EU's enlargement agenda.

 

The Nabucco pipeline, which is expected to cost around €9bn to construct and be operational by 2014-15, is intended to dilute the EU's reliance on Russian natural gas by transporting supplies from the Middle East and Central Asia, via Turkey and the Balkans, into Europe. The project has to date been afflicted by disagreements between Turkey and the EU over transit terms, and between Turkey and Azerbaijan, widely regarded as one of Nabucco's key potential suppliers.

 

Though Turkey's demands for 15% of the transited gas at discounted prices have not been included in the agreement, they are likely to become a major sticking point in the future, particularly if the EU continues to stifle Turkey's EU membership prospects. Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has been quick to emphasise how the Nabucco pipeline "will elevate Turkey to a significant position" for European energy security, while José Manuel Barroso spoke of "a new age in relations between Turkey and the European Union". Despite growing calls for the EU to open the energy chapter of the acquis communautaire, it remains extremely doubtful that Turkey's growing strategic importance will be sufficient to sway countries such as France and Cyprus to accept the prospect of it joining the EU anytime soon.

 

Important questions also remain over how the Nabucco pipeline will be funded and from where sufficient quantities of natural gas will be secured in order to ensure its long-term viability. At the end of June, Azerbaijan signed a deal with Gazprom to sell natural gas to Russia from 2010 onwards. Turkmenistan, meanwhile, recently finalized a 30-year agreement with China for the purchase of natural gas; a move which challenges the respective pursuits of Central Asian supplies by both Russia and Europe. Iraq and Iran, the latter possessing the largest gas reserves in the world after Russia and Turkmenistan, will therefore remain strategically important to Nabucco, despite deep-seated instability in the former and political tensions with the latter.

 

Russia, in comparison, facing fewer obstacles with respect to securing both funding and gas supplies, signed an agreement with the national gas companies of Italy, Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece in May 2009 for the construction of South Stream, including a deal between Gazprom and Italy's Eni to double its original planned capacity.

 

The inclusion of Serbia into the pipeline's proposed route, combined with the construction of a gas storage facility at Banatski Dvor in Vojvodina, will make the country a key regional energy hub. A June 2009 deal, meanwhile, between Serbia's state gas monopoly, Srbijagas, and Republika Srpska's gas company, Gaspromet, for the former to acquire a 40% stake in the latter, will serve to further integrate Republika Srpska into South Stream. By controlling the sole gas access point to Bosnia and Herzegovina, whose lack of gas reserves were exposed during last winter's dispute between Russia and the Ukraine, Serbia will therefore yield considerable influence over its natural gas supplies.

 

Though Nabucco is widely anticipated in European circles, the obstacles it faces in terms of securing sufficient and reliable supplies of natural gas mean that it will struggle to fulfil the objectives for which it was originally intended. Indeed, by elevating Turkey to a position of strategic importance to Europe's energy security, Nabucco will invariably become a bargaining tool given the former's aspirations for EU membership, thereby further complicating the EU's enlargement agenda. With South Stream – which will make Serbia a key regional energy hub – facing fewer obstacles to its successful realisation, energy will therefore have ever more important ramifications for the relative balance of power and influence in the Balkans.

 

What really happened in Srebrenica

http://serbianna.com/analysis/?p=100

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IN SREBRENICA

The HagueTribunal has stretched the definition of genocide to such extent that the term loses the terrible dignity of describing the most gruesome crimes of extermination of the entire population. In Srebrenica, during the Bosnian war between 1992 and 1995, roughly one fifth of the region's entire Muslim population perished in fighting or by other means. To claim that an area in which some twenty percent of the allegedly targeted population lost their lives has been subjected to genocide is absurd. To its designers and perpetrators, this accusation serves the legal purpose of denying the legitimacy to the Republika Srpska, and the political and propaganda purpose of demanding its abolition.

July 2009 - Diana Johnstone says that everyone who "retains a capacity for critical thinking should regard the lavish public breast-beating over 'Srebrenica' with certain skepticism." Her warning is apt: there is the regrettable tendency in Western media reporting and analysis to look at events in the eastern Bosnian enclave in isolation from the time continuum.

"What happened in July of 1995 is a matter of record. Srebrenica fell rather unexpectedly to Bosnian Serbian military forces," explained Dr. Srdja Trifkovic in his interview for CKCU 93.1 FM in Ottawa.

"A considerable number of Bosnian Muslims of military age, most of them armed, retreated in the direction of Tuzla. Some got through; some were killed while fighting their way; and some were taken prisoner and executed by the Bosnian Serb army. Between seven and eight thousand Bosnian Muslims departed Srebernica in the hope of reaching the town of Tuzla. There is no conclusive research to tell us how many of them survived, how many of them were killed in the fighting while trying to reach Tuzla, and how many were executed by the Bosnian Serb forces after being taken prisoner."

The much hallowed number of 8.000 still a matter of dispute

In Potocari, the village just outside Srebrenica, where the monument to the victims of the alleged massacre is situated, you can see the names of over 8.000 Muslim men. "That list covers not only Srebrenica, but seven or eight other municipalities in the region," says Trifkovic.

"The Muslims themselves, when erecting the shrine to the victims of the events of Srebrenica, couldn't come up with the magic number of Eight Thousand – short of resorting to the inclusion in that total of people from many surrounding municipalities, which had nothing to do with Srebrenica itself and most of them military victims of fighting. This in itself indicates that the myth of mass executions simply does not stand scrutiny."

What did Muslims do to Serbs?

One cannot understand what happened in Srebrenica in July of 1995 – Trifkovic insists – without looking at the events of previous three years, between late spring of 1992 and summer of 1995. During that period Srebrenica was an armed camp used by the Muslim forces to terrorize the surrounding Serbian communities and kill hundreds of unarmed civilians. That facts are not denied even by the ICTY at The Hague.

The Memorial Centre in Bratunac, the Serbian town not far from Srebrenica, has hundreds of photographs of Serbs killed by the Muslims during that period. All of them were killed by the armed Muslims belonging to Naser Oric's forces coming out of Srebrenica.

"A particularly gruesome crime happened on Serbian Orthodox Christmas in January 1993 in the villages along the Drina valley, such as Kravice, when children as young as 5 and 6, as well as elderly women of 80, were killed by having their throats split or having clubs smashed into their heads," explains Trifkovic.

"At the time of the fall of Srebrenica there was considerable bitterness in the Bosnian Serb ranks against the Muslims in the town. On the one hand Srebrenica was the headquarters of the 28th Muslim division and the hotbed of terrorism that was the springboard for offensives against the surrounding Serbian communities in which hundreds of Serb civilians were gruesomely slaughtered. At the same time Srebrenica was supposedly immune from attack because it was a designated UN 'safe heaven'."

"The record of Srebrenica as described by the UN Tribunal at The Hague is neither legally nor logically coherent," according to Trifkovic:

"Srebrenica was proclaimed to be a genocide in the trial of Bosnian Serb General Radislav Krstic, on the strength of the claim that even the deportation of children, women and elderly men from Srebrenica was an act of genocide. Even though there were no written or oral orders to the effect that a genocidal intent was existent and even though no such orders actually exist."

Muslims of Srebrenica sacrificed by Izetbegovic and Clinton

In his interview for the Sarajevo newspaper Dani, Hakija Meholjic, president of the SDA (Stranka demokratske akcije) for Srebrenica, declared in June 1998 that Bosnian Muslim president Alija Izetbegovic had told a delegation from Srebrenica something very interesting four years previously: "I was told by Clinton in April 1993 – Izetbegovic said – that if the Chetniks [Bosnian Serb forces] enter Srebrenica and carry out a slaughter of 5,000 Muslims, then there will be a Western military intervention."

"I wrote an article exploring this same possibility in late July 1995," says Trifkovic. "It was headlined 'Is Izetbegovic scarifying a pawn in order to win the game?' although Miholjic's account was not yet known at that time."

"When something so unexpected and apparently illogical happens as the sudden fall of Srebrenica, we should immediately ask the question who gains – cui bono. It is obvious that in case of Srebrenica it was the Muslim side. Miholjici's account offers the explanation for what is otherwise inexplicable. For over three years Srebrenica has resisted Serbian attacks. It was saved in the nick of time from falling to the Serbs in spring of 1993 when the French General Philippe Morillon rode into Srebrenica in an armed personal carrier. And yet in the summer of 1995 it suddenly falls almost without any fighting."

The quote by Miholjic is a serious indictment against Izetbegovic, says Trifkovic, but it is not surprising.

"Why should we be surprised that Izetbegovic was prepared to sacrifice Srebrenica if we know, as we do by know, that he staged a number of the so-called massacres in Sarajevo, including the famous 'breadline massacre' in the spring of 1992 and the Markale market explosion in February of 1994. These were stage-managed stunts done by Muslims themselves in order to create suitable images of blood and gore that would be presented around the world as a result of Serbian atrocities, and thus contribute to political decisions favourable to the Muslims."

"Such cynical exploitation of human life for political purposes is the hallmark of the Muslims in general, notably in the West Bank and Gaza, and of the Bosnian Muslim strategy in the 1990s in particular," says Trifkovic.

"Both NATO and the Bosnian Muslim leadership needed Srebrenica – not only for the bombing of the Bosnian Serbs in August of 1995, not only for the subsequent support to the combined Muslim - Croatian offensive against the Serbs, but also for the continuous claim that the Bosnian Serb Republic [Republika Srpska] is a flawed entity that does not deserve to exist."

Manipulation of reality

Srebrenica will be used as an anti-Serb trump card for a log time to come, Trifkovic warns:

"In the record of the wars of the Yugoslav disintegration there are several similar myths which need to be debunked, including the so-called Racak massacre in January of 1999. It was cooked up by the KLA Albanian terrorists, aided and abated by the U.S. 'diplomat' William Walker. The events in Vukovar in the fall of 1991 are in the same league. These are supposed to atone for, and even eliminate any collective memory of the real genocide committed by the Croatian Ustase against the Serbs during World War Two between 1941 and 1945."

"Srebernica" is an ongoing brazen manipulation of reality in order to obtain certain short-term political goals. That manipulation is still continuing, 14 years after the event. This only testifies to the lack of ability of the Western media class to think critically and to analyze Balkan events objectively, concluded Trifkovic.

Dr. Srdja Trifkovic is historian, author and former foreign affairs editor of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture — http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?cat=4 and www.trifkovic.mysite.com

Inteview Hatchett; Laughland; Narochnitskaya and Trifkovic

Video panel now on the web RT Republic Srpska - interview with Ronald Hatchett, John Laughland, Natalia Narochnitskaya and Srdja Trifkovic, recorded in Banja Luka on June 26.

 

It can be watched on

 

http://www.rtrs.tv/av/player.php?id=2138&x=1

 

Organized crime concerns in the Balkans

We also knew from the beginning of the war that there is a huge Albania mafia even here in the states!  Stella

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"Kosovo remains the undisputed center of every major crime related network in the region."

 

"Turkey remains the undisputable geoeconomic bridge between the Asian criminal networks, and the Balkans which mainly operate as a physical traverse route towards the large markets of the core countries of the EU, Germany, Italy, France and the UK."

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

http://www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/showArticle3.cfm?article_id=17685&topicID=32

 

Organized crime concerns in the Balkans

written by: Ioannis Michaletos, 22-Jun-09.

The current global financial crisis couples with the perennial instability of the Balkans, and raises suspicions around the creation of much stronger organized crime groups that will be able to dictate their rules of the game to both local governments and international institutions.

Already a trend emerges which has not be fully measured nor examined by the media that illustrates a significant rise in illegal activities and a sure rise in the criminal rates.

According to many reliable local sources, criminal gangs tend to merge and form much stronger teams that are often involved in more than one illegal sector and in parallel orchestrate multidimensional operations such as bank robberies in one country and narcotics contraband in another with a timely fashion and a well-coordinated structure.

The latest report by the State Department which was issued on the 27th of February 2009, points out that all Balkan states have serious organized crime problems and the local authorities have a great challenge to overcome.

Albania is considered as a transit country for the heroin trafficking from Afghanistan o Western Europe, as well as a production country of large quantities of Cannabis that are exported mainly through Greece and Italy to other EU states.

Bosnia-Herzegovina has a serious problem concerning the political clout crime kingpins exercise in its domestic political life, an issue directly related to drug trade, the modern white slave trade and the illegal immigration networks.

Bulgaria has been hit by a recent crime wave, and the domestic crime groups are more involved into synthetic drugs distribution and cocaine as well.

Greece is also hit by a crime wave involving armed robberies and weapons trafficking, and the general trend reveals an at least 20% rise in criminal rates on an annual basis. Illegal immigration networks also operate which gain millions of Euros per month by exploiting mostly Asian and African groups of people.

Montenegro is influenced by cocaine trade from Latin America, a similar pattern with Croatia. Both countries are also exit points for heroin distribution from Kosovo to Western Europe, as well as arms trafficking.

In Serbian drug use has increased and the role of private security firms operating as mafia front companies is being in question.

Romania is the least influenced by organized crime activities, but its Constanja port is being influenced by Albanian organized crime networks relating to narcotics trade, whilst Kosovo remains the undisputed center of every major crime related network in the region. The current fall in remittances from the Albanian Diaspora will most certainly give a rise in street crime in the Kosovo province in the near future.

FYR-Macedonia is experiencing issues concerning its role as a transit country for illegal immigration from Kosovo to Europe and from Asia as well. Moreover criminal gangs are well into the contraband trade of light arms, mainly Kalashnikovs. A most recent State Department anti-trafficking report issued on May cites an increasing problem relating to children and women trafficking.

Turkey remains the undisputable geoeconomic bridge between the Asian criminal networks, and the Balkans which mainly operate as a physical traverse route towards the large markets of the core countries of the EU, Germany, Italy, France and the UK.

Moreover there is a general upward tendency for contract killings in the Balkans, with the Albanian and the Bulgarian mafias, thought as the main culprits.

The impact of a Balkan organized crime powerful web cannot be more illustrative that in the Kosovo region. Populated by approximately 1,5 million permanent citizens, it has probably the highest number per thousand people of new constructions and gas stations, although unemployment reaches over 40% and official exports do not account more than 5-7% of the GDP.

The extent by which the local networks are able to formulate their international strategies is truly impressive. Most of the heads of the mafia reside in Kosovo, but there are considerable outposts of importance in a wide global geographical terrain stretching from Milano, Zurich to Vienna and Copenhagen, London to New York and Brussels.

In Kosovo alone the unresolved court cases reach up to 300,000 (One for every five citizens) and the respect for the rule of law according to numerous reports from media such as the -BBC, Guardian, Der Spiegel, Washington Post or security services from various countries, like Italy, Germany and UK- is completely out of touch with the accustomed norms in Europe.

Mari Foucci of the Kosovo Trust Agency in 2004 has complained that most of the developmental aid did not reach the local economy but instead was directed towards the local mafia groups. It is important to highlight that more than a third of Kosovo's GDP derives from external aid.

The issue grows bigger if one adds the gross misconducts done by UN employees since 1999, and a lot of relevant documents can be found in open intelligence sources such as the wikileaks. Already former UN employees have made joint companies in Kosovo in collaboration with figures related to organized crime and an emerging global corrupted nomenclature is taking control of Kosovo's economy in full extent.

Moreover, a much worrying trend is the formation of ethnically mixed gangs in the Balkans that tend to recruit people from various states and conduct their operations by adapting fully to the local environment. For the moment there seems to be a combination of Bulgarian and Romanian gangs and of Croatian& Montenegrins ones. The Albanians often join Greek gangs in Greece and the Turks are well-placed within gangs in Fyrom, Kosovo and Bulgaria.

Further, "Yugoslavian" gangs encompassing citizens from most ex-federation countries are active as well as networks including Middle Eastern and Western Europeans. Thus the work of the security services becomes more complicated; whilst the criminals can use the outreaches of their individual members so as to penetrate easier each country, acquire much needed information and local resources.

Lastly the current criminal groups in the Balkans, have already amassed a significant amount of capital that cannot be numerated precisely but it can be safely assumed that is reaches quite a few billions of Euros, along with thousands of properties and merchant companies.

Thus, sooner or later this criminal capital will have to be laundered through the legal system so as for the older generation -at least- to disengage itself from outlaw activities and ripe the fruits of law abiding business activity. That requires the collaboration of financial institutions which more likely will be concentrated in the Balkans, since the rest of the European banking system would not simply allow such a massive breach of regulations and most importantly a change of balance in the already established equilibrium of capital power in Europe as it exists since the end of WW2.

The Balkans already known for their corrupted public sector and their proximity with the Middle East will most likely become an important world hub for money laundering and the creation of business elite with a direct criminal background.

In a nutshell, organized crime is still a main threat for the stability of the region and an important aspect when dealing with Pan-European security affairs and the role of the underworld in the modern globalized world.

The signs of the era call for some definite and well-structured action by the agencies involved before the situation become unconstrained and create a situation non-containable with the present day conventional methods.

Ioannis Michaletos is WSN editor South East Europe.

Kosovo in limbo

Kosovo in limbo

SCOTT TAYLOR | ON TARGET
Mon. Jun 22 - 4:46 AM

THIS WEEK marks the 10th anniversary of NATO's entry into the war-torn Balkan province of Kosovo.

I can still vividly recall those violent and terror-filled days as I packed up my gear and fled north amidst the Serbian refugees and the withdrawing Yugoslav security forces.

For 78 days the allied NATO air force — including Canadian aircraft — had pounded infrastructure targets throughout Kosovo and Serbia in a failed attempt to force the Serbs to capitulate and accept the terms U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright had proposed at the 1999 Rambouillet peace talks.

What the nearly $13 billion worth of explosive ordnance dropped in that campaign failed to achieve was any substantial downgrading of the Serbian military forces; more importantly, it did not diminish the will of the Serbian people to resist.

Knowing the futility of their air defences, the Serbs I interviewed had been anxiously awaiting the start of a ground invasion so they could engage NATO soldiers on more even terms in the narrow mountain passes of Kosovo. That contested entry scenario was something NATO leaders were definitely anxious to avoid and they were forced to the bargaining table in Kumanovo, Macedonia.

After days of protracted negotiations, UN Resolution 1244 was ratified by both parties on June 10, 1999. Two days later the ceasefire went into effect.

Despite NATO's proclamations of a decisive victory, the terms of 1244 conceded to all the demands which had been put forward by the Serbs at Rambouillet. During the interim, Serbia would still control the checkpoints of Kosovo and a small number of Serb security forces would remain to protect the centuries-old orthodox churches and monasteries.

The most important element of 1244 was the formal recognition that Kosovo was the sovereign territory of Serbia. When drafted and signed, Resolution 1244 rendered all the death and destruction inflicted during the 78-day bombardment absolutely unnecessary. The Serbian will to resist had forced the mightiest military alliance in history to concede to their demands.

But NATO had no intention of abiding by the terms of Resolution 1244. The signing was just a ruse to get Serbian air defences out of Kosovo and NATO ground troops in without a fight.

NATO planners had no intention of letting any Serbian troops remain in Kosovo, no intention to ever let them return and no intention of disarming the Kosovo Liberation Army.

Incumbent in the ceasefire agreement, NATO was to provide a secure environment for both ethnic Serbs and ethnic Kosovar Albanians in the province when they assumed responsibility for security.

Instead, as expected, NATO troops did little to curtail the wave of violence inflicted on Serbs by the emboldened Kosovar Albanians. Unable to protect themselves, some 200,000 Serbs fled Kosovo. Crammed aboard a Belgrade-bound bus, I witnessed first-hand the Albanian mobs assaulting our convoy with rocks and bats.

Not surprisingly, over the past decade the continued presence of NATO troops in Kosovo has not prevented inter-ethnic violence. Rather than clarifying its future, the February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence by the Albanian Kosovars only complicated things further.

Following America's lead, Canada and 50 other countries recognized that independence. Serbia refused to acknowledge that declaration and is supported by Russia, China and another 138 nations.

For now, Kosovo remains in a diplomatic limbo, unable to join the United Nations, economically dependant on foreign aid and occupied by foreign troops for the foreseeable future.

The irony is that the U.S. State Department considers the Kosovo intervention a "success" when compared to their subsequent fiascos in Iraq and Afghanistan.

( staylor@herald.ca)

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1128592.html

UN Papers and the Gross Reality

Pyotr ISKENDEROV

UN Papers and the Gross Reality

(On the Tenth Anniversary of the UN Security Council Resolution on Kosovo)

June 10 is a sad date in the history of the UN, the institution originally meant to play the key role in ensuring peace, security, and the primacy of law in the world. The decade since the passing of the June 10, 1999 UN Security Council Resolution 1244 addressing the Kosovo problem – the document totally ignored throughout the period - has shown that the UN is no longer playing the role prescribed to it by the post-World War II system of the international law.

The Resolution the tenth anniversary of which nobody seems willing to celebrate in the UN headquarters, Belgrade, or Pristina is usually attributed to an intricate compromise. Ten years ago the Russian leadership managed to incorporate into it several fundamental principles concerning the Kosovo settlement. Most importantly, it was stressed in the document's preamble that the Kosovo problem had to be solved on the basis "of the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region". Correspondingly, the Resolution called for "substantial autonomy and meaningful self-administration for Kosovo". Besides, the UN Security Council reached consensus that international discussions of specific parameters of Kosovo's future status would begin only after the implementation in the province of the democratic standards guaranteeing the political, economic, cultural, and national rights of the province's non-Albanian population.

Nothing of the above materialized. From the outset, the West pushed for Kosovo independence, and only the requirements of Resolution 1244 which could be interpreted so as to broaden the rights and authority of Albanian separatists were actually met. As for Russia, its only accomplishments throughout the period since the passing of the resolution till the opening of the negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina on the status of Kosovo in February, 2006 were the snap offensive which led to the seizure of the Slatina airport by Russian peacekeepers and their quiet withdrawal in 2003 under the pretext that "it was impossible to change anything".

The subsequent talks under the auspices of the UN in which Russia took a somewhat bigger role ended with a predictable failure which made it possible for the Albanian separatists to declare the independence of Kosovo unilaterally in February, 2008. The independence was momentarily recognized by the Albanians' Western donors and ideological patrons.

The available information makes it possible to claim that both the passing of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the diplomatic maneuvers around Kosovo that ensued – those in which the Russian Foreign and Defense Ministries took part in particular – were nothing but a show originally planned by the West. In the process Moscow's role to which the Russian leadership somehow agreed was that of a "good policeman".

Obviously, Resolution 1244 was stillborn. The key problems were not the poor compliance with its requirements and Russia's inability to make its partners view the UN document with proper respect but the fact that the West had made all the decisions on the status of Kosovo already in the late 1998. The subsequent negotiation between Serbs and Albanians in Rambouillet, NATO airstrikes, discussions in the UN Security Council, and the deployment of the UN mission and NATO peacekeepers in the province were just steps in the realization of the already existing plan.

The build-up of the NATO presence in Kosovo also commenced in the late 1998. In the US the point of no return was reached when Michael Polt who coordinated the military policy in the Clinton Administration and later became the US Ambassador to Serbia convinced Secretary of State C. Powell to consent to the intervention in the region. Polt argued that by intervening in Kosovo NATO would send a clear message to all Eurasian countries, of course including Russia.

Yugoslavian Vice President Momir Bulatovic said: "It already became clear in October, 1998 that the decision on our future had been made. They started talking about the "humanitarian disaster" in Kosovo and the so-called NATO credibility. The latter meant that if NATO was unable to put an end to the "humanitarian disaster", then it simply had no right to exist. To avoid a military strike we were ready to make concessions to the extent of retaining only the minimal amount of state dignity and territorial integrity. They were interested in Kosovo's natural resources - we offered US and British companies to develop them at the token price of $1. They responded that the offer was attractive but unacceptable. Then NATO wanted a base in Kosovo. We offered them to have it for the same $1 token price. They were surprised but turned down the offer nevertheless. Trying to avoid conflict we eventually suggested that Yugoslavia should join NATO and thus automatically generate a solution to the Kosovo problem. Again the answer was No. Admitting us to NATO could resolve the dispute over Kosovo but could not solve any of the problems due to which NATO decided to attack our small country. NATO decided to move into Kosovo by forceavoiding any cooperation with us. The point is that if NATO does not reckon with us it would also be free of any obligations to other countries. They branded this the New World Order".

The US still had to secure Europe's consent to launching the offensive. Washington proposed "to give Serbs another chance" and to hold an international conference on Kosovo in Rambouillet in February, 1999. Belgrade faced totally unprecedented requirements deliberately formulated to make the aggression against Yugoslavia inevitable. Momir Bulatovic recalled: "In Rambouillet we were asked to agree to the deployment of NATO forces in Kosovo and to allow them access to all of the Yugoslavian territory. According to a document which looked like an ultimatum, all our expressways, railroads, air space, and installations were to be used by NATO free of charge and without any limitations. All NATO servicemen were to be exempt from our laws and or any criminal responsibilities. All the decision-making was to be left to the commander of the NATO contingent. The document was formulated so that no sane individual could ever sign it". As expected, Yugoslavia' representatives did not agree to the de facto occupation of their country.

Russia actively took part in the Rambouillet "negotiations" though the Russian leadership had to be aware that the West had already laid the finishing touches on the scenario for Kosovo. Russia's involvement only helped to make the enforced separation of Kosovo – the cradle of the Serbian national statehood – from Serbia appear more peaceful and take somewhat longer to complete...

Viewing the situation now in 2009 one can only hope that Russia has learned the lessons. Russian diplomats admit in private conversations that Moscow should start cooperating more actively with the Balkan political forces which can be regarded as its potential allies in future conflicts over Eurasian political arrangements and energy security. Kosovo has been torn out of Serbia - this is the gross reality, not a passage from some UN papers. Bringing it back would take something other than voting in the UN Security Council, an institution which has become nothing else than a decoration used by the global forces acting behind the curtain.

 

http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=2214

Treaties and Dreams

http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2009/06/09/treaties-and-dreams/
 

Treaties and Dreams

by Nebojsa Malic, June 10, 2009

Kosovo Armistice, a Decade Later

 

On June 10, 1999, the military-technical agreement (MTA) between NATO and the Yugoslav Army went into effect, along with UN Security Council Resolution 1244. Between them, they provided a somewhat graceful ending to NATO's first war. Conceived as a three-day demonstration of force, predicated on a disgraceful ultimatum, justified by an onslaught of vicious propaganda, the assault on then-Yugoslavia nearly tore the alliance apart on its 50th birthday. Just four years later, the invasion of Iraq saw it tossed aside in favor of a "coalition of the willing."

 

NATO never honored its obligations from the MTA or UNSCR 1244. Kosovo was turned over to the KLA, whose campaign of murder, pillage, and arson drove out hundreds of thousands of non-Albanians from the province. Over the next 10 years, Serb religious and cultural heritage has been systematically destroyed, and most of the surviving Serbs have been driven out or killed. Meanwhile, the UN and NATO authorities gradually created institutions of statehood and eventually sponsored a declaration of "independence" by the KLA regime.

Armistice, Not Surrender

In the face of such overwhelming evidence, one would be tempted to conclude that the treaty signed by NATO and Yugoslav officers in a tent near Kumanovo on June 9 was an unconditional surrender. Or, as Alliance spokesman Jamie Shea put it at a June 7 press conference, a "complete acceptance of our non-negotiable conditions." Yet it was nothing of the kind.

The MTA was an armistice, painstakingly negotiated over five days. The government in Belgrade accepted the proposal put forth by NATO emissary Martti Ahtisaari (accompanied by Russian envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin) on June 3. Yet Yugoslav and NATO officers negotiated till June 9 before settling on a text. During that week, NATO continued to bomb – as evidenced by the briefing given by Luftwaffe Maj. Gen. Walter Jertz at the aforementioned press conference.

On the anniversary of the armistice, the Belgrade daily Politika published an interview with one of the participants in the talks, Maj. Gen. Obrad Stevanovic of the Serbian police. Stevanovic said that the final text of the agreement only mentioned NATO in the context of its obligation to halt the bombing, and that KFOR was supposed to be a UN force. Likewise, there was no mention of the Rambouillet ultimatum.

In the end, none of that mattered much. Once NATO and the KLA came into possession of Kosovo, the MTA and 1244 were dead letters. Stevanovic maintains that none of the officers involved could have known NATO would not honor the deal, or that KFOR would fail to protect the civilians from the KLA. Yet that is precisely what happened.

A Strange Coincidence

With the benefit of hindsight, NATO turning over Kosovo to the KLA may seem like an obvious and foregone conclusion. After all, did the Alliance not just launch an illegal war of aggression on behalf of this terrorist organization hastily re-branded as "freedom fighters"? At the time, however, things seemed less clear-cut.

The war had not gone well for the Alliance. There were too many "mistakes," too much "collateral damage," and too little proof for tall tales of massacred Albanian civilians. That didn't stop the media from repeating them ad nauseam, but every day that Belgrade held out, the Alliance got weaker. On the other hand, the Yeltsin regime sold Belgrade down the river in early June, most likely at Washington's insistence. The proposal offered to Milosevic on June 3 was sufficiently watered down that he could accept it and claim a diplomatic victory.

Granted, that meant nothing once NATO got actual possession of the territory and the KLA could do as it pleased. Neither Milosevic nor the Russians were in any position to challenge that, however. Milosevic was ousted in a black-op "popular revolution" in 2000 and replaced with a client regime. Yeltsin was pressured to resign at the end of 1999, with his betrayal of Belgrade probably playing at least a partial role.

In the tragedy of Kosovo that ensued, few noticed that the war officially ended on a very symbolic date. Perhaps it was a coincidence, but there aren't many of those when it comes to the Balkans. Namely, June 10 was the date on which the first Albanian national movement was established in distant 1878, a crucial year in Balkans history.

1878 and the Congress of Berlin

By the mid-15th century, all of the Balkans had been conquered by the Ottoman Turks. The tide of Ottoman conquest, once seemingly unstoppable, began to recede after the failed siege of Vienna in 1683. The 18th century was marked by fierce wars with Austria and Russia, pushing the Turks back. Starting in 1804, uprisings by the Serbs and the Greeks further weakened the Ottoman hold over the Balkans.

As part of an administrative reform in 1864, the Ottoman Empire broke up its old provinces into smaller units called vilayets. In one of those provinces, Herzegovina, the excesses of Ottoman taxation provoked a rebellion in 1875. Using the distraction, Bulgarians rose up in the spring of 1876 but were cruelly suppressed. At this point, Serbia and Montenegro declared war on the Ottoman Empire. Despite Russian military aid, they were soon forced on the defensive. In April 1877, Russia entered the war; by March 1878, the Ottomans were defeated, and Russian forces were within reach of Istanbul.

With Austria-Hungary and Britain alarmed at the extent of Russian gains in the proposed Treaty of San Stefano, Germany's chancellor Bismarck called the Congress of Berlin. Intended to be a reprise of the 1815 Congress of Vienna, which had created four decades of peace in post-Napoleonic Europe, the Berlin affair merely sowed the seeds of future Balkans conflicts and ultimately the Great War.

For example, the San Stefano treaty outlined a sizable, independent Bulgarian state. At the Congress of Berlin, only a third of the outlined territory was recognized as Bulgaria; another third was set apart as "East Rumelia," and the rest (Macedonia) was restored to Ottoman rule. Though East Rumelia was peacefully integrated into Bulgaria in 1885, the issue of Macedonia proved a major bone of contention between Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece, marring the victory over the Ottomans in 1912 and resulting in Bulgaria joining the Central Powers in 1915 (and the Axis in World War II).

The Congress of Berlin is also where Austria-Hungary received a mandate to occupy Bosnia and Herzegovina, which put Vienna on a collision course with Belgrade and resulted in the Sarajevo assassination of 1914.

The League of Prizren

On June 10, 1878, Albanian religious and tribal leaders founded the League of Prizren, demanding greater recognition of Albanians within the Ottoman Empire and the consolidation of four vilayets – Shkoder, Kosovo, Ioannina, and Monastir (see a rough map here) – into an Albanian province. Though ultimately unsuccessful and disbanded after just three years, the League marked the beginning of an Albanian national movement. Just as Bulgarians saw the borders set out in Berlin as a grave injustice and considered the San Stefano borders their birthright, the Albanians claimed the four provinces as "ethnic Albanian lands" and have fought to acquire them ever since.

The independent Albania that was established in 1912 included the province of Shkoder and a part of Ioannina. Kosovo became a part of Serbia, and the vilayet of Monastir – i.e., Macedonia – was divided between Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece. The part that went to Serbia is today the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Following the Nazi-led invasion of Yugoslavia in 1941, parts of Kosovo and today's Macedonia were given to Italian-occupied Albania. Upon Italy's surrender in 1943, Albanian leaders formed the "Second League of Prizren" and sought Nazi patronage in establishing an "ethnic Albania."

Living the Dream

It is unclear whether Imperial leaders and generals knew the symbolism of June 10 when they chose that date for the Kumanovo agreement to go into force. It is, however, clear that NATO's occupation resulted in the establishment of the "independent state of Kosovo" in February 2008, as well as the 2001 insurrections in Macedonia and southern Serbia. Thus the "Albanian lands" claimed by the League of Prizren have been put under de facto Albanian control – thanks to the American Empire.

The latest example came just two weeks ago, on May 31, when the prime ministers of Albania and Kosovo ceremoniously opened a tunnel on the Pristina-Durres highway (built with Turkish funding). The Albanian prime minister, Sali Berisha, was quoted as saying:

"Today, one of the Albanians' most beautiful dreams has become reality. This is a tunnel of the unification of the nation. Today we decided that there are no obstacles, that there is nothing that can divide us, not only spiritually, but also physically." (Emphasis added.)

However, the one constant in this "beautiful dream" since 1878 has been that it could only be realized with the help of outside powers, and by force. From the Ottoman Empire to the Axis, all the sponsors of Albanian aspirations ultimately failed, and their victory proved ephemeral.

In 1999, the American Empire was the "indispensable nation," and it looked as if its power would last forever. That is by no means a certainty any longer. The question now is whether history repeats itself or merely rhymes.

WILLIAM MONTGOMERY | The Balkan Mess Redux

The Balkan Mess Redux

oLinkedin

oDigg

oFacebook

oMixx

oMySpace

oYahoo! Buzz

oPermalink

o 

By WILLIAM MONTGOMERY

Published: June 4, 2009

President Obama recently said of Iraq, "What we will not do is permit the pursuit of the perfect stand in the way of achievable goals." It would be a major step forward if this same approach was applied to Bosnia and Kosovo.

In both those countries, we have become trapped in policy "boxes" that make it impossible to achieve stability or long-term solutions, despite enormous investments of personnel and resources for almost two decades.

This is because we continue to insist that it is possible, with enough pressure and encouragement, to establish fully functioning multiethnic societies in Bosnia and Kosovo with no change in borders. And we have consistently ignored all evidence to the contrary and branded as obstructionist anyone who speaks openly about alternative approaches.

The reality is that no amount of threats or inducements, including fast membership in the European Union or NATO, will persuade the Bosnian Serbs to cede a significant portion of the rights and privileges given them under the Dayton Agreement to the central government, as the Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) and the international community are determined to bring about. The Bosnian Serbs are determined to have full control over their own destiny, and fear that if they continue to transfer authority to a central government, the more numerous Bosniaks will end up in control.

The end result is continued tension between the two Bosnian entities, a dysfunctional country, and the prospect of many more years of efforts by Western politicians — like Vice President Joe Biden on his recent visit — to pound a square peg into a round hole.

I know of what I speak: For more than 15 years, I was one of these pounders. I finally came to understand that the historical experiences in this region have implanted a mind-set very different from our own. We keep expecting the people in the Balkans to think and react as we do: It is not going to happen.

In Kosovo, the reality is that most of the Serbs have already left and will not be coming back. Many of those still remaining do so only because they hope or believe that they can ignore the central government of independent Kosovo and continue to look to Serbia for political and financial support.

Those Serbs living north of the Ibar River in particular act as if they are in fact living in Serbia. President Boris Tadic and his moderate government are trapped into supporting the Kosovo Serbs to prevent a nationalist backlash while trying to move toward the E.U.

These contradictions are becoming ever more obvious. But that is not the major danger.

Up to now, Kosovo Albanians have been patient with the refusal of Kosovo Serbs to recognize the independence of the former Serbian province, deferring to the international community to sort this problem out. But already opposition Kosovo Albanian politicians are starting to criticize the Kosovo government for its passivity on the matter.

This frustration will grow, leading to further deterioration of relations among Kosovo, Serbia and the international community, and an increase in violence against Kosovo Serbs.

In both Kosovo and Bosnia, we need to consider different solutions — ones which we may not like and which will have complications of their own, but which will be really...achievable. This is the only way the international community can bring its involvement in the Balkans to an end.

In Kosovo, this probably means some form of partition between the Albanians and the Serbs combined with joint recognition, pledges of full rights for minorities and a variety of sweeteners from the EU.

Bosnia is more complicated. There, a solution probably involves shaping a different relationship within Bosnia and permitting the Republika Srpska, the Serbian portion of the divided country, to hold a referendum on independence. This would have to include a lot of guarantees about future relationships, and be done as a complete package led and implemented by the international community.

In both cases, there would need to be a demonstrated will and readiness to use military force to prevent violence along the way.

There is another reason to broaden our thinking. We in the West act as if we control what happens in the region. This is not the case, as the outbreak of violence in 1990-91 in the former Yugoslavia and the growth of the Kosovo Liberation Army in 1997-99 demonstrated.

The fact is that both in Bosnia and in Kosovo, independent local forces can take matters into their own hands and in a very short time bring about renewed violence that we will be hard-pressed to contain. And we simply cannot afford to become even more entangled in the Balkans.

Like an alcoholic whose first step is to recognize he has a problem, we need to accept that the current policies are not tenable. Only then can we start thinking constructively about solutions which can bring lasting stability to the region.

William Montgomery is a former U.S. ambassador to Bulgaria, Croatia and Serbia/Montenegro and a former special adviser to the president on Bosnia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/opinion/05iht-edmontgomery.html?scp=2&sq=kosovo&st=cse

Kosovo's Minorities flee - The Guardian

Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 6:09 AM The flight of Kosovo's minorities (The Guardian) The EU insists that Kosovo is a tolerant and multi-ethnic society. So why are its minorities leaving?   Ian Bancroft guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 3 June 2009 20.30   A highly critical report by Minority Rights Group International (MRG) maintains that members of minority communities are beginning to leave Kosovo over a year after its unilateral declaration of independence, due to persistent exclusion and discrimination. In contradicting the conclusions of the EU's general affairs and external relations council, the report once again demonstrates the emptiness and evasiveness of statements by members of the international community asserting Kosovo's supposedly multi-ethnic character. Without urgent measures to improve the position of minorities in Kosovo, such a discourse will increasingly serve only to parody, not portray, the reality on the ground.   The report, Filling the Vacuum: Ensuring Protection and Legal Remedies for Minorities in Kosovo, concludes that Kosovo "lacks effective international protection for minorities, which is worsening the situation for smaller minorities and forcing some to leave the country for good". These minorities include not only Kosovo's Serbs, but also Ashkali, Bosniaks, Croats, Egyptians, Gorani, Roma and Turks, who together make up around 5% of the population of Kosovo according to local estimates.   MRG's conclusions clearly contradict those of the recent meeting of the EU's general affairs and external relations council, which "noted with satisfaction the initial results achieved by EULEX in assisting the Kosovo authorities in consolidating the rule of law and in contributing to a safe and secure environment for all inhabitants, regardless of their ethnic origins". The divergence between such statements and the reports of human rights organisations such as MRG has become a distinctive feature of the international community's efforts to provide positive assessments of Kosovo's institutions. The result is policies that are insufficient to contend with the substantive problems faced by local communities. Though the government of Kosovo have often been commended for its stated commitment to upholding minority rights, MRG's report goes on to describe how "a lack of political will among majority Albanians and poor investment in protection mechanisms have resulted in minority rights being eroded or compromised in the post-independence period". According to MRG, Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence has left "a vacuum in effective international protection for minorities"; a vacuum that the Kosovo government seems both unwilling and unable to fill. Without tackling deficiencies in the area of the rule of law - reconfirmed by a newly released report by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN), which describes Kosovo's courts as being "inefficient, opaque, and hampered by persistent institutional obstacles" - the plight of minorities will continue to be of secondary importance to the apparent need to proclaim Kosovo an example of a tolerant and multi-ethnic society. Indeed, Mark Lattimer, the executive director of MRG, also emphasised how "restrictions of movement and political, social and economic exclusion are particularly experienced by smaller minorities". Such conditions are only likely to be further aggravated by the worsening economic situation in Kosovo, especially for the Ashkali, Egyptian and Roma communities that suffer from deeply ingrained poverty and marginalisation. MRG has long drawn attention to the many failures to uphold the rights of minority communities in Kosovo, with a 2006 report, Minority Rights in Kosovo under International Rule, describing the situation of minorities as the worst in Europe and "little short of disastrous"; the international community having allowed "a segregated society to develop and become entrenched". Despite these and other warnings from human rights organisations, the international community has continued to not only ignore the difficulties faced by minority communities in Kosovo, but to regularly proclaim success with respect to minority rights protection. While both the international community and the Kosovo government insist that minority rights are guaranteed and conform to the highest international standards, MRG's report instead highlights how the segregation of Kosovo continues unabated. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that the litany of failures with respect to minority rights has been further exacerbated and entrenched by Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. In sidelining the imperatives of re-integration, the international community's approach towards Kosovo is likely to have ramifications elsewhere in the Western Balkans. Without immediate and substantial steps to tackle minority rights issues, especially the return of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees, Kosovo will remain the most segregated territory in Europe and a constant source of tension and instability for the entire region.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/03/kosovo-minorities-eu-government