U.S. Expands Global Missile Shield Into Middle East, Balkans

U.S. Expands Global Missile Shield Into Middle East, Balkans   by Rick Rozoff
	.
Global Research, September 11, 2009
Stop NATO
Email this article to a friend Print this article
Toward the latter half of last month, the Polish daily Gazeta Wyborcza, "citing officials and lobbyists in Washington," revealed that the Pentagon would reevaluate planned interceptor missile deployments in Poland and a complementary missile radar site in the Czech Republic and instead shift global missile shield plans to Israel, Turkey and the Balkans [1] "Washington is now looking for alternative locations including in the Balkans,Israel and Turkey...." [2] The news came a week after it was reported that at the annual Space and Missile Defense Conference hosted by the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency in Huntsville, Alabama the Chicago-based Boeing Company offered to construct a"47,500-pound interceptor that could be flown to NATO bases as needed on Boeing-built C-17 cargo planes," a "two-stage interceptor designed to be globally deployable within 24 hours...." [3] This initiative, much as with the reports of plans to expand the American worldwide interceptor missile system to the Middle East and Southeastern Europe,has been presented as a way of alleviating Russian concerns over anti-missile components being deployed near its borders. But on the same day that Boeing announced the project for a rapid deployable missile launcher for NATO bases in Europe the First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, Tomas Pojar, was quoted as asserting that a "possible U.S. mobile anti-missile shield does not threaten the U.S. plans to build a radar base on Czech soil because the system is to be a combination of fixed and mobile elements." [4] That is, what is being presented in both instances as substitutes for U.S. and NATO missile shield deployments in Eastern Europe may in fact be added to rather than replace plans for Poland and the Czech Republic. On September 11 the new Czech envoy to NATO, Martin Povejsil, reiterated that Washington's plans to forge ahead with the missile system deployments in his nation and in Poland will proceed unhampered, stating "NATO still expects the U.S. system to be the core of its missile-defence structures that have been worked on." [5] On the day after the Polish newspaper revealed that American interceptor missile system deployments could be extended to Israel, Turkey and the Balkans, U.S. State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley said Washington's review of the missile defense strategy "is ongoing and has not reached completion yet. "Similarly, "Missile Defense Agency [Director] Patrick O'Reilly also denied the report of Polish newspapers. He supported the proposal to install SM-3 missile systems in Turkey and the Balkans." [6] The SM-3 - Standard Missile 3 - is a ship-based anti-ballistic missile used by the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, and was used by the Pentagon to destroy an American satellite in orbit in February 2008 in what was seen by some observers, especially in Russia, as an experiment for future space warfare. So the surfacing of reports that the U.S. may base missile shield facilities south and east of the Czech Republic and Poland is more likely indicative of yet another plan to expand the global system - already in place and being worked on in Alaska, Japan, Australia, Taiwan, Norway, Britain, Greenland and Israel -into areas previously off limits to such deployments and not necessarily an abandonment of American missile and troop deployments in Poland and a missile radar site in the Czech Republic. In confirmation of this scenario, U.S. National Security Adviser and former U.S. European Command and NATO top military chief James Jones told Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski on September 1 "The United States is assuring Poland that it has not made a decision on where to deploy a European missile defense system but will keep Warsaw informed," and pledged "the United States' firm and unwavering commitment to Poland's security and defense." [7] To demonstrate how close the Pentagon is to completing plans for an international interceptor missile system that can be used for blackmailing other nations into submission and laying the groundwork for a "winnable" war against major powers like Russia and China - by being able to neutralize missiles surviving a first strike and so an adversary's ability to retaliate - the new head of the Missile Defense Agency, U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Patrick O'Reilly,recently boasted that his agency's missile interceptions have proven 86%successful and that "The Defense Department recently committed an additional$900 million toward fielding the Army's theater high-altitude-area defense mobile missile defense system. The agency has finished seven of eight required tests of the system." O'Reilly added that he "expects to see it in the field next year." [8] The tests he referred to employed Aegis class warships equipped with SM-3s,meaning destroyers and cruisers that can be deployed to any part of the planet in conjunction with land-based and sea-based X-band radar (SBX). The Missile Defense Agency has on several occasions deployed a 28-story SBX to Adak, Alaska,at the western-most end of the Aleutian island chain in the Bering Sea off Russia's Kamchatka Peninsula. The U.S. National Security Presidential Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive [9] of January 9, 2009 explicitly mentions using the Arctic Ocean for so-called missile defense purposes, which means against Russia's northern territories, in conjunction with facilities in Alaska and Greenland. Missile shield radar bases in Britain and Norway and projected missile deployments in Poland and an X-band radar site in the Czech Republic will cover Russia's west, and comparable sites in Alaska and Japan will confront Russia (as well as China) to its east. To date the only quadrant uncovered is Russia's south. And that is where proposed missile shield deployments in Turkey, Israel and the Balkans come into play. Last autumn the United States began the stationing of its Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance (AN/TPY-2), formerly the Forward Based X-Band Transportable [FBX-T] Radar, to Israel. The AN/TPY-2 is part of the U.S. Army's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor missile system,one intermediate between the ground-based interceptor missiles planned for Poland and the recently developed PAC-3 Patriot theater missile defense, "one of the most comprehensive upgrade programs ever undertaken on an American weapon system." [10] The AN/TPY-2 "operates in the X-band frequency, and is capable of tracking and identifying small objects at long distance and at very high altitude, including space" and is a "high-power, transportable X-Band radar...designed to detect,track and discriminate ballistic missile threats." [11] The radar in Israel can be only the beginning of the development of the American anti-missile defense systems in the country, said a leading Russian analyst, Pavel Felgengauer, last September. [12] In July of 2008 the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, and his Israeli counterpart Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi approved the deployment and it was later confirmed by Pentagon chief Robert Gates and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, "marking the first permanent U.S. military presence on Israeli soil." [13] A year ago September the U.S. Senate passed an amendment allocating $89 million for the project. At the time Fox New reported that "About 120 American technicians and security guards will be stationed in Israel's southern Negev Desert to oversee the operation, the first time in the country's 60-year history that they've allowed a foreign military presence to be based here." [14] An Iranian news story shortly thereafter characterized the purpose and importance of the deployment by saying "The...most plausible scenario is that the U.S. intends to add one more strategic military base to the hundreds it operates around the world to contain and intimidate independent countries like Iran, Syria, and Lebanon." [15] Iran, Lebanon and Syria don't possess nuclear weapons or even long-range missiles that can deliver conventional warheads. Yet the Jerusalem Post wrote in November of 2008 that the X-band missile radar in Israel has a range of 4,300 kilometers (2,900 miles) and "is reported to be capable of tracking targets the size of a baseball from distances of close" to that range. The South Caucasus is only some 1,200 kilometers from Israel and the distance from Tel Aviv to Moscow is 2,641 kilometers. The U.S. missile radar in Israel, then, can monitor most of Southern and Western Russia. American-Israel missile radar and surveillance is being integrated with NATO-Israeli operations. A report of last December detailed: "Israel has reportedly provided NATO with intelligence on Iran amid US efforts to portray the country's military achievements as a threat. "Israeli diplomats said Sunday that Israel has contributed to the formation of two intelligence reports prepared by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) on 'missile development' and 'the nuclear arms race in the Middle East.'"[16] Before retiring as secretary general of NATO Jaap de Hoop Scheffer visited Israel this January and while there remarked that "Israel has been the first country to finalize with NATO, in October 2006, a very detailed individual cooperation program, which had been revised and upgraded last November." [17] In the same month the Israeli newspaper Haaretz provided more details on the increased cooperation between NATO and Israel in reporting that the latter was assigning a warship for NATO's almost eight-year-old Operation Active Endeavor naval surveillance and interdiction operation in the Mediterranean. "The request is another example of the increasing cooperation between Israel and NATO. Last week, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi participated in a meeting of army heads at the organization's Brussels headquarters. "[A] liaison officer from the Israeli Navy has also been stationed at the NATO base in Naples, Italy....NATO ships arrived for maneuvers and visits at the ports of Haifa in April 2008 and Eilat April and October 2007. AWACs early warning planes used by the organization landed at an Israel Air Force base in Lod a year ago." [18] The September 7 edition of the Jerusalem Post in a feature called "IDF preparing for US missile systems" announced that the Pentagon and the Israeli Defense Forces are to conduct their regular joint Juniper Cobra military exercises next month and that this year's drills, "the most complex and extensive to date,"will include "the newly-developed Arrow 2 as well as America's THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense) and the ship-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System." [19] The Arrow 2 is a theater anti-ballistic missile funded and produced in unison by the U.S. and Israel. The Jerusalem Post article added that "The Defense Ministry is preparing for the possibility that the United States will decide to leave missile defense systems in Israel following a joint missile defense exercise the two countries will hold next month," and that "the possibility is strong...particularly in light of reports that the Pentagon was conducting a review of its European missile shield and was leaning towards deploying the systems in Turkey. "According to various European news reports, Turkey, Israel and the Balkans are under evaluation as alternative sites for the systems....." [20] The already existing American missile tracking facility is in the Negev Desertnear Dimona where Israel is presumed to store its nuclear weapons. Almost a year ago a major Russian news source reported that "Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, [then] director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), has said more than once that Turkey, Georgia and even Ukraine could be future locations for ballistic missile defense systems. "[T]he Pentagon will most likely choose Turkey or, some Western analysts say,Israel or Japan." [21] A Turkish report of March of 2008 had already indicated what the Pentagon was planning: "Last March Pentagon chief Robert Gates visited Turkey to hold consultations on missile shield plans. "A powerful, 'forward based' X-band radar station could go in southeastern Europe, possibly in Turkey, the Caucasus or the Caspian Sea region, Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, head of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency, told a defense conference in Washington on Feb. 12." [22] In May of 2008 a Russian newspaper revealed that "the United States may deploy a high-frequency X-band radar in Georgia." [23] More recently, last November the Turkish daily Hurriyet wrote that "Israel and the United States have...declared their desire to establish a one-billion-dollar missile system in Turkey." [24] The deployment of advanced missile tracking and interceptor missile facilities in Israel and Turkey along with others in the South Caucasus - the Gabala radar station in Azerbaijan, currently used by Russia but coveted by Washington, is another possible addition - would nearly complete the stationing of a missile shield ring around Russia. The third site of the expansion of U.S. and NATO missile interception plans is the Balkans. Russian political analyst Pyotr Iskenderov wrote on September 3 that a possible location for such a deployment could be in the international no man's land that is Kosovo. "In spring of 2009, Albanian Prime-Minister Sali Berisha proposed to the US to locate an anti-missile system in his country if US-Polish talks failed. In Serbia Defense Minister Dragan Sutanovac, who is close to Serbian president Boris Tadic, made scandalous statements in favor of Serbia's entry to NATO. In this respect the location of a US military base in Serbia could be regarded as a compensation to Belgrade for losing Kosovo. This will also help to drive Russia away from Serbia." [25] Iskenderov theorized that American missiles could be stationed in Camp Bondsteel, the largest overseas U.S. military installation built since the war in Vietnam. The author, in reference to the use of the base for so-called"extraordinary renditions," said "the main object of the military infrastructure of Kosovo will be the US base of Camp Bondsteel, which is subordinate neither to NATO, nor the UN nor the EU....Here we should recall an unsavory role of Kosovo in the scandal liked with the secret jails of the CIA in Europe. "If earlier the US managed to hide one of their CIA secret prisons in Kosovo,then it won't be a problem to install radar and interceptor missiles in Camp Bondsteel." [26] Early this month the U.S. guided-missile destroyer Stout arrived home after a mission in the Black Sea and visits to Georgia, Bulgaria and Romania. It also engaged in naval maneuvers with Israel and Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean in August. Regarding the Black Sea operation, a local American newspaper wrote,"This was the ship's first deployment with the ballistic missile defense system- a technology designed to track and destroy missiles that can travel more than600 miles...." [27] The extension of American global missile shield designs into the Middle East and Southeastern Europe is an integral part of global geostrategic plans which were summarized concisely and penetratingly by a Bangladeshi writer last November: "The current NMD [National Missile Defense] project involves using radars in Alaska and California in the US and at Fylingdales in the UK, and in Greenland. The latest plan of deploying a radar base in the Czech Republic is basically relocating the existing radar base at the Kwajalein Atoll [in the] Marshall Islands. Besides, the US plans to install 10 more interceptors in silos in Poland. "Even after 1991, [the U.S.] did not go for closing down its military bases scattered around the world, but rather continued expanding the network in many strategic positions. "In Eastern Europe it basically filled the vacuum created by the end of the Warsaw Pact. "Moreover, Central Asia, a very crucial passageway in the global oil supply chain, also came under the purview of US dominance. These deliberate moves created lots of irritation among regional powers like Russia and China. "Surely the proposed radar base in the Czech Republic and missile interceptors in Poland are not to protect the US from Iran or North Korea's missiles but are to ensure the US plan to establish and exercise stringent control over the world using its prevailing 725 military bases." [28] Notes  1) Agence France-Presse, August 27, 2009 2) United Press International, August 27, 2009 3) Reuters, August 20, 2009 4) Czech News Agency, August 20, 2009 5) Czech News Agency, September 11, 2009 6) Azeri Press Agency, August 28, 2009 7) Associated Press, September 2, 2009 8) Chosun Ilbo, September 3, 2009 9) National Security Presidential Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-66.htm 10) Wikipedia 11) Global Security, September 3, 2009 12) Trend News Agency, September 13, 2008 13) Defense News, September 27, 2008 14) Fox News, November 10, 2008 15) Tehran Times, October 14, 2008' 16) Press TV, December 7, 2008 17) Haaretz, January 10, 2009 18) Haaretz, November 27, 2008 19) Jerusalem Post, September 7, 2009 20) Ibid 21) Russian Information Agency Novosti, September 12, 2008 22) Turkish Daily News, March 12, 2008 23) Nezavisimaya Gazeta, May 14, 2008 24) Hurriyet, November 22, 2008 25) Strategic Culture Foundation, September 4, 2009 26) Ibid 27) Virginian-Pilot, September 5, 2009 28) Sultan Mohammed Zakaria, Global hegemony and the victims Daily Star, November 1, 2008

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15169

Win, Hold and Lose

 

Ted Galen Carpenter

среда, 02. септембар 2009.

(The National Interest, 01.09.2009) Although President Obama insists that America's goal in Afghanistan is to disrupt, degrade, and defeat al-Qaeda, it is apparent that the objective is much broader than that. U.S. and NATO officials speak of supporting an indigenous political structure that will provide security to the Afghan people and implement good governance. Since the U.S.-led invasion that overthrew the Taliban government in late 2001, hordes of Western military and civilian personnel have been involved in everything from setting up schools to drilling wells to building roads. Although they avoid using the term nation-building, that is clearly what is taking place. Not only is Afghanistan an extremely unpromising candidate for such a mission, given its pervasive poverty, its fractured clan-based and tribal-based social structure, and its weak national identity, U.S. and NATO officials should also be sobered by the disappointing outcomes of other nation-building ventures over the past two decades. An audit of the two most prominent missions, Bosnia and Iraq, ought to inoculate Americans against pursuing the same fool's errand in Afghanistan. The Dayton Accords ended the Bosnian civil war nearly fourteen years ago. Yet as Washington Post correspondent Craig Whitlock discovered during a recent visit, Bosnia is no closer to being a viable country than it was in 1995. It still lacks a meaningful sense of nationhood or even the basic political cohesion and ethnic reconciliation to be an effective state. The reality is that if secession were allowed, the overwhelming majority of Bosnian Serbs would vote to detach their self-governing region (the Republika Srpska) from Bosnia and form an independent country or merge with Serbia. Most of the remaining Croats-who are already deserting the country in droves--would also likely choose to secede and join with Croatia. Bosnian Muslims constitute the only faction wishing to maintain Bosnia in its current incarnation. Political paralysis continues to plague the country. To the extent that political power has been exercised by Bosnia's inhabitants at all, it has been at the subnational level, i.e., the Republika Srpska and the Muslim-Croat federation. The national government is weak to the point of impotence. Most real political power has been exercised by the UN high representative, an international potentate who rules like a colonial governor. High representatives have routinely removed elected officials from office, disqualified candidates for elections, and imposed various policies by decree. The economic situation is not much better. Bosnia's economy is in terrible shape. Indeed, without the financial inputs from international aid agencies and the spending by the swarms of international bureaucrats in the country (which account for more than a third of its gross domestic product), Bosnia would scarcely have a functioning economy at all. Even with that assistance, the country's unemployment rate stands at a staggering 45 percent. Although Bosnia verges on being a nation-building fiasco, it eventually may be less of a disaster than Iraq. Recent events there suggest that those Americans who cheered the success of the surge strategy were premature in their elation. Violence is again on the rise, and tensions are soaring, both between Sunnis and Shiites and between Arabs and Kurds. Iraq has already ceased to be a unified state. The Baghdad government exercises no meaningful power in the Kurdish region in the north. Indeed, Iraqi Arabs who enter the territory are treated as foreigners-and not especially welcome foreigners. Although the Kurds have not proclaimed an independent country, in every sense that matters Iraq's Kurdistan region is de-facto independent, and the "Kurdish regional government" is the governing body of a sovereign state with its own flag, currency, and army. Moreover, it is a de facto sovereign state with far-reaching territorial ambitions. The Kurds claim the city of Kirkuk and its extensive oil deposits. There have also been nasty clashes with Iraqi Arab factions in the ethnically mixed province of Ninevah, where Kurds insist that several villages should be under the jurisdiction of the Kurdish region. Kurdish-Arab tensions have grown so severe that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made an unexpected trip to Iraq in late July to urge both sides to back away from a dangerous confrontation. General Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, admits that the Arab-Kurdish feud-especially over the status of Kirkuk-is the "number one driver of instabilities" in the country. Tensions in both the area around Kirkuk and in Nineveh province are so palpable that Odierno has suggested that U.S. troops be deployed to establish a buffer between Kurds and Arabs to prevent an outbreak of open warfare. There are also serious questions about the degree of stability in the rest of Iraq. True, the carnage that afflicted the country following the U.S. invasion, and which reached especially severe levels from early 2006 to mid 2007, has declined. Nevertheless, the casualty rates are still disturbingly high. Shiite-Sunni sectarian tensions simmer, and the massive bombings in Baghdad and other cities in mid-August suggest that they may soon again come to a boil. Even the improvement in the casualty numbers should not be overstated. According to the Ministry of the Interior, there were 437 deaths in July. Since Iraq's population is only 25 million, the July toll would translate into an equivalent of more than 5,000 deaths from political violence in the United States-or an annual rate of more than 60,000. Iraq is still in the throes of a civil war, albeit a relatively low-intensity one. That does not bode well for unity or even stability going forward. There are already calls by American pundits to abandon-or at least delay-plans for the withdrawal of all U.S. combat forces by the end of 2011, lest Iraq again erupt into chaos. Despite a fourteen-year effort and the expenditure of billions of dollars, the Bosnian nation-building mission is a failure. Despite a six-year effort (and counting), the expenditure of at least $700 billion, and the sacrifice of more than 4,300 American lives, the Iraq nation-building mission is failing. Yet, instead of learning from those bitter experiences, U.S. leaders seem intent on pursuing the same chimera in Afghanistan. As Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass has suggested, we need to "define success down" in Afghanistan. That means abandoning any notion of making ethnically fractured, pre-industrial Afghanistan into a modern, cohesive nation state. It means even abandoning the goal of a definitive victory over al-Qaeda. Instead, we need to treat the terrorist threat that al-Qaeda poses as a chronic, but manageable, security problem. That requires a willingness to work with any Afghan faction prepared to oppose the organization, harass it, and keep it off balance. Such a modest approach would be an imperfect and unsatisfying strategy, but foreign policy, like domestic politics, is the art of the possible. Containing and weakening al Qaeda may be possible, but building Afghanistan into a modern, democratic country is not. The increasingly evident failures of nation-building in Bosnia and Iraq-which were both more promising candidates than Afghanistan-should have taught us that lesson. (Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign-policy studies at the Cato Institute, is the author of eight books, including Smart Power: Toward a Prudent Foreign Policy for America (2008), and the co-author with Malou Innocent of a forthcoming Cato policy analysis, Escaping the "Graveyard of Empires": A Strategy to Exit Afghanistan (September 2009). He is also a contributing editor to The National Interest)

http://www.nspm.rs/nspm-in-english/win-hold-and-lose.html

South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Kosovo and the future

South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Kosovo and the future

26.08.2009 Source: URL: http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/108999-ossetiaabkhaziakosovo-0

One year after Russia's recognition of the Independence of the Republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the Caucasus begins to gain a new shape, enjoy more stability and make more sense, while Moscow is welcomed as a friend in its historic sphere of operations. Given the actions and reactions of other powers not so friendly to Moscow, it hardly comes as a surprise.

Climate of peace, finally

One year on, there is finally a climate of peace in the Caucasus. True, there continue to be a handful of agents provocateurs in Chechnya and there continue to be cells of criminals and bandits in Dagestan and Ingushetia, like everywhere else. However, the citizens of Abkhazia and South Ossetia today are more relaxed, feel safer, feel happier, feel at home with their new neighbours who wish to help them develop instead of exterminating them like Saakashvili's Georgians.

The tremendous effort in social and economic projects funded and financed by Moscow from the budget of the Russian Federation comes as a stark contrast to the years of oppression these Republics suffered under a Georgia which historically refused to hold the referendums it was bound to in these territories under the Soviet law it had signed. Nothing is mentioned of this in the russophobic western press.

Moscow showed extreme patience for years

For years, Moscow did its utmost to try to achieve a political and negotiated solution to the question of these territories populated by Ossetians and Abkhazes, ethnic Russians, inside Georgia, always from a point of view which would be satisfactory for Tblisi. Georgia spent years, and increasingly so under the Putchist mass murdering maniac Saakashvili, blocking the processes, obstructing the rule of law and finally, last Summer, launching a shocking act of butchery – one hopes, without the consent of Saakashvili's masters in Washington.

So what was Moscow supposed to do? Sit back and watch its citizens being slaughtered by a bunch of maniacs egged on by mercenaries from NATO sympathisers and US military advisors? Women and children were strafed with machinegun-fire in basement apartments. Old men were slaughtered in the streets. Babies were crushed with tanks by Georgian soldiers laughing in a drunken hysteria of derision and hatred. Is this the type of operations Washington trained them for?

Certainly US-sponsored Saakashvili made a dramatic miscalculation that night but what to expect from a tie-chewing lunatic wholly and totally unprepared for government and wholly and totally prepared to feather his nest and those of the mafia which surrounds him at the expense of the people of Georgia?

Moscow acted with restraint

Nobody knows what was going through the mind of Mikheil Saakashvili on that fateful night of August 7 to August 8, 2008. Hours after signing a peace agreement, he ordered his troops to launch a massive attack against Tskhinval and to prepare a similar assault on Abkhazia, thinking (absurdly) perhaps that because Prime Minister Putin was at the Olympic Games, Russia's attention would be focused elsewhere.

What followed was a humiliating defeat for the murderous Georgian military forces and their US backers and trainers (TV footage which western news sources had forgotten to edit showed very clear orders in American English to the fleeing Georgian troops) and despite the fact that Russia's Armed Forces had a resounding success and a brilliant victory, the response was measured and contained, limited to a punitive raid to downgrade Georgia's capacity to launch such a savage attack again.

Many questioned why Russia did not go all the way to Tblisi and drag Saakashvili before a court to be tried for war crimes, while meting out to the cities of Georgia what the Georgians did to Tskhinval. However, Moscow stands for the rule of law and this it upheld through a rightful expulsion of the aggressor, protecting civilian life and refraining from causing unnecessary damage (compare for example the US campaign in Iraq where civilian structures were wantonly targeted with military hardware or the criminal NATO campaign in Serbia where civilians were massacred).

Today and the future

One year on, South Ossetia and Abkhazia are undergoing a process of development and not repression. Their citizens live in peace and not in fear. The climate is one of happiness and not of bitterness, like before. There is love in the air instead of hatred. For those who doubt this, go to the Internet and ask Abkhazes and Ossetians their opinion. For those who wish to overturn the events of last August, while it is now too late, ask the people of Abkhazia and South Ossetia how they feel and who they would rather live with.

Nicaragua and the Russian Federation have already recognised the Republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and a further group of states is preparing to do so. Whether or not more wish to do so is immaterial. Under international law, they already exist.

Parallels with Kosovo are pointless

Parallels with Kosovo are pointless since the case is totally different. Kosovo was, is and always has been an integral part of Serbia right since the beginning of the Serb nation and the union of the Serbian peoples. It is not their fault that Albanians went there to give birth for generations and to create a population imbalance in their favour, it is not their fault that the Albanians launched terrorist attacks against the Serb authorities and it is not their fault that NATO decided to create a mafia state of drug traffickers, arms smugglers and pimps. Kosovo is Serbia and there is nothing in international law which states that a foreign power can simply carve off part of a country, give it to foreigners and say "This is yours". The times of drawing lines on maps ended long ago and there is something called international law which must be respected by all, or then by nobody.

Georgia was obliged to hold referendums in South Ossetia and Abkhazia regarding independence. It is clear that it did not hold them because it knew what the outcome would be. And given the attempted act of genocide last Summer, given that the overwhelming majority of South Ossetians and Abkhazes would choose to live in their own states supported by Russia, their friend, it makes great sense that Abkhazia and South Ossetia should be recognised as independent states, while an independent Kosovo is not only nonsense but a violation of international law.

Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY

PRAVDA.Ru

© 1999-2009. «PRAVDA.Ru». When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru's editors.

"Kosovo and Bosnia, the Ghetto of Christianity"

KOSOVO AND BOSNIA, THE GHETTO OF CHRISTIANITY

 

 

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/11-08-2009/108759-kosovo-0

 

 

 

Pristina, the capital of an Anglo created Islamic Jihadist state, which of course it is never sold as, is a true show case for what any Christian nation has to face if and when its majority falls from power. This of course is nothing new for our ancient ancestors who witnessed this and knew why they fought against Islam.

 

Unfortunately, the present day West, decadent in its form, ignorant in its self love, intellectually bankrupt and lazy, refuses to see the hell they have forced on Orthodox Christian victims and that they themselves soon face.

 

In Pristina, the show case of "tolerant" Islam and the Anglo-Sphere/UN enablers, one can find many historic Christian churches, in a city that was built by Christian Serbs over 1,200 years ago. Unfortunately they have all been blown up or burnt down.

 

In Pristina, one can find ancient Christian neighborhoods, belonging to the people who built the city and are now the ghettoized minorities who inhabit them. The look on their faces is that of fear, fear of their "merciful" and "tolerant" overlords. Anglos, this is your future, the present Hell you so willingly inflict on your Christian brothers and sisters as you give God the finger.

 

In Pristina's few remaining Orthodox neighborhoods and the various tiny towns and villages of Christian faith, are surrounded by wire and fences, the only way to keep the savages...er...moderate Islamics from murdering everyone in them. NATO, who created this monster of Islam, who birthed it with the Saudi father, breast fed it, protected it and allowed it to grow, on the bones and blood of Christians, is now protecting the remnants of those Christians from it's abomination of a child. But what happens when the it leaves and takes the leash off of its bastard creation?

 

The money that has flowed into the city has disappeared, funneled into the Saudi sponsored Islamic madras, and since the Saudis own the Western politicians, nothing is said. The Saudis are raising a new generation of white extremists who will be walking up to the Anglo churches, to the Anglo shopping temples and massacring those inside and to the last minute, they will look just like you and it will be the owners of your politicians, in Mecca and Riyadh who will laugh and jump in glee at your fates. This will come as little joy to the dead Christians, upon whose bones they will be jumping and already are.

 

In Bosnia, while the Croatian third and the Serbian third of that Frankenstein, are still Christian, they have, with NATO bombs and tanks, been force into a second rate position to the Islamic third, the so called Bosniaks. Even though they had at one point the strength to defend themselves, they are now far out gunned by the US/UK/Saudi/Egypt armed Bosniak Islamics. Yes, even "moderate" Egypt was quite happy to ship T62s to their Islamic brothers.

 

Anglos, NATO, what have you created? What blasphemy against God have you committed and are so proud of? Seek repentance while you can reverse the evil you have committed and save not murdered the Christianity of the western Balkans. Alas, it always falls on prideful, deaf ears.

 

Stanislav Mishin

 

The article has been reprinted with the kind permission from Stanislav Mishin and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina

 

Discuss this article with others on Pravda.ru forum

David and Goliath: Bosnian Serbs Against the West

David and Goliath: Bosnian Serbs Against the West   by Wanda Schindley
	.
Global Research, July 31, 2009
Strategic Culture Foundation
On June 20th the High Representative for Bosnia, Austrian Valentin Inzko, annulled legislation passed by the Bosnian Serb, Republika Srpska (RS), parliament that would reclaim some of the powers of "semi-autonomy" that were promised to it in the constitution but that have been stripped away incrementally by International Community (IC) High Representatives under the so-called Bonn powers. Inzko, the latest of seven High Representatives under the direction of Javier Solana, was offended that the Bosnian Serbs did not capitulate under the threat of "consequences" and withdraw the legislation on their own. Offering to negotiate and amend some things in the legislation was not satisfactory to High Representative Inzko, who has dictatorial powers over occupied Bosnia. Inzko saw the RS legislation to reclaim some of the constitutional powers stripped away by openly pro-Muslim High Representative Paddy Ashdown ten years after Dayton as "regressive." Until less than four years ago, the Bosnian Serbs had their own police force, army (even though they were pretty much stripped of armaments), courts, and so forth. But each new edict of the High Representative raised the bar and further stripped Bosnian Serbs of their institutions and constitutional "rights." Each mandate to expand the role of the central government in Sarajevo was movement toward the ultimate goal of a united One Bosnia—abolishment of the Serb entity set up at Dayton and the Dayton agreement signed (under threat of further bombardment) by Serbs and, apparently, with disappearing ink by the IC. While the UN occupation was biased toward Muslims and against Serbs as demonstrated, for instance, in the rules for and rate of reclaiming property by the two groups, the EU occupation appears even more intent on strangling the RS out of existence and humiliating Serbs into capitulating to a centralized government in Sarajevo, which for Serbs is really "regressive" to the some 400 years of Serb suffering under the occupation of the "Turks" of the Ottoman Empire. But Turkey is not the only country now meddling in the affairs of Bosnia and supporting the Islamic take-over of the entire country: Saudi Arabia is still a primary funder of Bosnian Muslims and the mosque-building (in some areas, one every few kilometers) that makes the country appear to be a real Muslim country (even though it is majority Christian); Iran supplied weapons to Bosnian Muslims during the war; and mujahideen fighters came from the Muslim world to fight Christians in their own back yards. Not only are Serbs in the RS expected to submit to the Islamists in Sarajevo (see the Bosnian Grand Mufti's defense of, for instance, Islamic education in public schools1), they also are being asked, in fact, demanded, to give up any thread of independence and, eventually, their Orthodox Christian religion, along with their democratic institutions. (Those who do not understand that "Islamic democracy" is an oxymoron should read Alija Izetbegovic's 1970 Islamic Declaration and study Sarajevo Chief Imam Nezim Halilovic Muderris' radical intolerance and calls for institutionalization of Sharia law in Bosnia.2) The Bosnian Court, for instance, of the "centralized" government has demonstrated its bias and inability to deal with the crimes committed against Serbs. The focus has been on convicting Serbs who, in spite of being dubbed by international media as "aggressors," were often fighting against foreign Islamic fighters from their own back yards to protect their families and property. Yet, the courts of Bosnia's central government have sentenced Serbs to 1,118 total years in jail, Croats to 140 years, and Bosnian Muslims to only 42 years in jail in spite of the realities of the civil war and atrocities committed by the foreign mujahidin and Bosnian Muslims.3 On 23 June, the Bosnian "central" government refused to extradite Croat war criminal Branimir Glavas, who was convicted and sentenced last month to 10 years in prison for torturing and killing Serbian civilians during the war. Yet, Serbs are held responsible for finding and depositing at The Hague even the un-convicted as the West repeats ad nauseam the unsubstantiated 40,000-rape hoax. (Even if it were true, the West has a higher per capita incident of rape under peaceful circumstances.) It is not as though Serbs, who produced Nikola Tesla, Mileva Maric (physicist wife of Albert Einstein who contributed to his famous theories), Mihajlo Pupin (Columbia's Pupin Hall named after him for his work on x-rays, long-distance telephone service), etc. are too stupid to take lessons from not only the historical but also the recent past. For instance, Serbs know that the IC's demands for "privatization" mean "rape" of their resources by the IC: (1.) Examples are replete in Serbia. For instance, in Pancevo, the successful glass factory, electric bulb factory, chemical factory, and beer factory (since 1722) are now closed after being "privatized" and bought. (2.) Croatia, after seceding with the bank in which all Yugoslavs had deposited, sold cheaply the Adriatic hotels (to which Croatia, historically a small province around Zagreb, did not have claim until all that was changed, first by Hitler when Italy capitulated in 1943 and then by the Croat Tito), mostly to Germans. (3.) In the RS, many factory workers went to work for years without pay as crooked "directors," supported by the IC, drove BMWs and as ancient forests were stripped, a la Brazil and then Haiti, and irreplaceable resources transported to Western Europe. The "Bonn powers," which allow High Representatives (called "viceroys" in another time) to fire elected officials and make or nullify laws, have been used mostly against Serbs. In spite of its efforts to comply with the Dayton Accords, the 49% of Bosnia included in the Republika Srpska remains the "bastard child" of Dayton, notwithstanding that the only major ethnic violence since the war has been between Bosnian Muslims and Croats who were unhappy in their "shotgun" marriage and that the Bosnian Muslims have been in violation of Dayton since January 1, 1996 when they were supposed to have sent home the foreign Islamic fighters who were imported to fight the Christian Serbs and, sometimes, Croats.4 Serbs stand alone against an IC which (along with the Vatican), during the 1990's wars, supported Croats, knowing that Croat leader Franjo Tudjman's goal was to have an "ethnically pure" Catholic Croatia, and Bosnian Muslims, knowing that Alija Izetbegovic had made clear in his 1970 Islamic Declaration that his idea of "democracy" was an "Islamic democracy." And now, almost 14 years after the end of the war, Serbs are blamed for the lack of progress toward a "modern multi-ethnic" state. Leaving aside the fact that before the orchestrated break-up of Yugoslavia Bosnia was a modern multi-ethnic republic, Bosnia has still not regained the economy, employment, technology, industry, and infrastructure it enjoyed before the war. The blame can easily be placed on Bosnian Serbs because they have not sufficiently cooperated in their own annihilation to make way for a One Bosnia, a Muslim-controlled Bosnia, in order to move toward "Euro-Atlantic integration," now framed as (eventual) membership in the EU. Bosnian Serbs are accused of being distrustful of and of misjudging the IC. Yet, any Serb distrust of the IC is rational considering the IC's involvement in the bombing of Serbs in Bosnia, Croatia (Slavonia and Krajina), Kosovo, and Serbia proper and the IC cheerleaders' continuing anti-Serb bias. Even those Serbs who sell out to the West are subject to being thrown overboard if they step out of line. But saying that trouble in Bosnia results from "misjudgment of the international community," as former High Representative Paddy Ashdown claimed last year in his editorial from Sarajevo after the arrest of Radovan Karadzic, is more than simplistic.5 It is wrong. Bosnian Serbs know very well that the intention of the IC is to "reform" the constitution and discard Dayton to make One Bosnia, and they have witnessed first-hand the unequal treatment under the UN and the EU. To many Serbs, submission to Sarajevo for the dangling carrot of EU membership is not attractive. It is a future without the small protections of "semi-autonomy" in the RS and being once again under the yoke of Muslims and being once again under Germany, which has shown little sympathy for non-Catholic Slavs through the German-dominated EU.6 Already there is concern that the Dayton agreement was simply a way to buy time for Saudi-backed Muslims to continue building mosques and buying property from desperate Serbs to gain control through stealth as the IC slurps up Bosnia's resources. IC lies might fool the uninformed Western public but not the Bosnian Serbs who have lived through the intervention and years of IC dictatorship. Mr. Inzko should reconsider his approach. Notes 1 Interview: Bosnia's Grand Mufti Defends Religious Freedom 2 See, for instance, http://de-construct.net/e-zine/?p=6690   3 The Hague court has been similarly biased against Serbs, meting out 904 years of sentences to Serbs, 171 years to Croats, 39 to Bosnian Muslims, and 19 to Kosovo Albanians. Figures from an interview with Dr. Elena Guskova on RTRS TV in Banja Luka, Republika Srpska. 4 Instead, the "moderate" Bosnian Muslim government gave the foreign mujahidin citizenship and failed to notice connections between those same fighters and major international terror attacks and has since banned Santa Claus. Also see the June 24th New York Times article "Documents Back Saudi Link to Extremists" (and Bosnia) 5 See Paddy Ashdown's "Europe needs a wake-up call. Bosnia is on the edge again." The Observer. UK, 27 July 2008. 6 Of the seven High Representatives to date, two were Austrian (Petritsch and Inzko), one German (Schwarz-Schilling), one Spanish (Westendorf), one English (Ashdown), one Swede (Carl Bildt) and one Slovak (Lajcak). Those who are from Catholic-dominated countries are joined by Ashdown, the Catholic Englishman.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14593

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.