Germany and Kosovo Precedent

Zivadin Jovanovic[1]

                     GERMANY AND KOSOVO PRECEDENT

            Dietmar Hartwig's[2] warning letters to Angela Merkel

 

It seems that the recent developments in Europe, and in particular the rising secessionism (Catalonia, Flandreau, Corsica, Veneto, Scotland), rings a bell, or rather is reminiscent of certain events. The ensuing ones are shedding more light on the roles of the EU (EEC), the USA, Great Britain and Germany. One wonders to what extent those democracies have been guided by the principles of the international law and democracy in the Kosovo crisis. How much did they appreciate the reports of their (expensive) missions in Kosovo and Metohija (КDОМ, КVМ, ЕCMM) depicting the realities on the ground? To what extent have they been defending the right to self-determination and human rights and to what extent using separatism for expansion of their geopolitical interests?

As strategies are slow to evolve, recollections of the past may help better understanding of the interests and roles of the USA, Germany, NATO, EU and other geopolitical players in the ongoing Kosovo negotiations in Brussels paired with Serbia's accession to the EU.

Over a longer period of time, the leading members of both, NATO and the EU, have been supporting the terrorist KLA[3] by political, financial and logistic means. This was particularly visible in 1998. In June that year USA abandoned previous position that KLA was terrorist organization and proclaimed it as liberation force[4]. OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM) with personnel of about 1.300[5], from October 1998 to March 1999 was just an imposed and imported umbrella for preparation of the ensuing military aggression. This period was particularly exploited for recuperation and equipping KLA with modern NATO equipment. Subsequently, NATO treated KLA as its ground force in launching military aggression against Serbia (FRY), country which in no way was threatening any other country or organization.

The aggression in clear breach of the UN Charter, without even trying to get consent of the UN Security Council, was a turning point in the world relations towards globalization of the interventionism without authorization of UN SC. To sum it up, the countries and integrations whose highest representatives swear that they have always been upholding the principles and rule-based policies, back in 1999 had provoked the strongest blow to the global legal order and to the United Nations since the end of World War II. The policies pursued by governments of those countries and by integrations thereof during the Yugoslav and the Kosovo crises have provoked the spread of secession movements, expansion of Islamic extremism and terrorism. Double standards policy toward separatism and terrorism backfire today in Europe and beyond.

By violating the basic principles enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act, in the UN Charter and in international conventions and treaties, NATO and EU member countries have induced a lasting instability in the Balkans as the most vulnerable part of Europe. Siding with the extremist, terrorist and criminals of KLA, in one hand, and condemning, satanizing and even bombing Serbia, in other hand,  had been anything but token of democratic, humanistic, law based, anti extremist or anti terrorist policy. Such EU and NATO key members' policy ought to be invoked today if we have a will and courage to explain at least some causes of the current spread of extremism, terrorism, organized crimes and separatism in Europe and beyond. If we are ready to face extremists and terrorist in proper way. Presently, USA, Germany and Great Britain are exerting pressure against Serbia, the one they have been demolishing, deceiving and humiliating by recognizing the forcible capture of her state territory in the form of an engineered unilateral and illegal secession of Kosovo, and requesting that Serbia erases it all from track-record and forgets it all "for the sake of her European future"! What kind of future could it possibly be built upon such foundations!?

The separatist and terrorist genie that the leading countries of NATO and the EU have unleashed from the bottle in Kosovo and Metohija back in 1998/99 for the purpose of furthering the geopolitical goals of the USA, Germany and the UK keeps spreading over Europe, while the EU and NATO believe they would be able to push it back into the bottle clearing they names and revive their dented unity by scarifying once again (interests of) Serbia! The real tragedy for Europe is the reasoning that truth is only what the EU commissioners declare to be the truth! The dominance of such reasoning is preventing the genuine understanding of historical maelstrom that has engulfed the Old Continent!

"War on the FRY was waged to rectify an erroneous decision of General Eisenhower from the Second World War. Therefore, due to strategic reasons, the U.S. soldiers have to be stationed there." This was the explanation given by American representatives at a NATO conference held in late April 2000 in Bratislava, noted by Willy Wimmer, former State Secretary in the German ministry of Defense, in his report to Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder dated 2 May 2000.

The first point in this report is an explicit U.S. request that NATO members and candidate members recognize 'independent state of Kosovo' as soon as possible, whereas the tenth, last point, reads that 'the right to self-determination takes precedence over all others". Should one be surprised now by the present referendum on secession of Catalonia? Or, to save their faces, Europeans should continue to keep repeating USA false, shortsighted claim that "Kosovo is unique case"?

Wimmer's report also notes the U.S. declared position at the Bratislava Conference was that the 1999 NATO attack on Yugoslavia without UN SC authorization is "a precedent to be invoked by anyone at any time, and which is going to be invoked". This renders any allegations of a principled and rule-based policy utterly dubious: if the military aggression launched in violation of the UN Charter is declared to be a precedent then unilateral secession being direct result of such aggression can hardly be claimed "unique case"! Normally, if the logic and principles have any place in NATO&EU geo-policies!

In the eve of NATO 1999 aggression on Yugoslavia two major international missions had been actively engaged in the Province of Kosovo and Metohija. One under auspices of OSCE known as Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), headed by American diplomat William Walker and the other under the auspices of EEC (EU) known as European Community Monitoring Mission (ECMM), headed by German diplomat and army officer Dietmar Hartwig. The author had opportunity to meet Mr. Hartwig in 2002 in Belgrade, on his request. This was about three years following the end of his EU assignment in Kosovo and Metohija. He demanded consultations on his intention to be witness in ICTY process against former President Slobodan Milosevic In the prolonged talks during his stay in Belgrade, Mr. Hartwig stated several times that during his assignment in Kosovo and Metohija before the NATO attack his KVM counterpart ambassador Walker surprised him by his harsh, highly provocative behavior and aggressive instructions to his subordinates. "You should all know that there is no such thing as high cost to deploy NATO in Kosovo. Any cost is acceptable" – was one of apparently Walker's typical instruction to his subordinates before the aggression started on March 24rth, 1999, according to Hartwig.

                              NATO aggression – illegitimate act

After Kosovo Albanian leadership declared unilateral illegal secession in 2006, Dietmar Hartwig in 2007 sent four letters to the German Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her that Germany should not recognize such unilateral illegal act. In his letter of October 26, 2007 Hartwig says:

"Not a single report (of ЕCMM) submitted from late November 1998 up to the evacuation (of ЕCMM, KVM) just before the war broke out (March 24rth, 1999), contains any account of Serbs having committed any major or systematic crimes against Albanians, and not a single report refers to any genocide or similar crimes… Quite the contrary, my (ECMM) reports have repeatedly communicated that, considering the increasingly more frequent KLA attacks against the Serbian executive authorities, their law enforcement kept demonstrating remarkable restraint and discipline. This was a clear and persistently reiterated goal of the Serbian administration – to abide to the Milošević-Holbrooke Agreement (of October 13, 1998) to the letter so not to provide any excuse to the international community for an intervention. In the phase of taking over the Regional Office in Priština, colleagues from various other missions – KDOM, U.S., British, Russian, etc. – confirmed that there were huge 'discrepancies in perception' between what said missions (and, to a certain degree, embassies as well) have been reporting to their respective governments and what the latter thereafter chose to release to the media and the public of their respective countries. This discrepancy could, ultimately, only be understood as an input to general preparations for war against Kosovo/Yugoslavia. The fact is that, until the time of my departure from Kosovo, there has never happened anything of what have been relentlessly claimed by the media and, with no less intensity, the politics, too. Accordingly, until 20 March (1999) there was no reason for military intervention, which renders illegitimate any measures undertaken thereafter by the international community."

                                     "Kosovo place of restlessness"

"The collective behavior of the EU Member States prior to, and after the war broke out, certainly gives rise to a serious concern, because the truth was lacking, and the credibility of the international community was damaged. However, the matter of my concern is exclusively the role of the FR of Germany and its role in this war and its political objective to separate Kosovo from Serbia…"

"The daily political news reporting over the previous months (before October 2007) made it progressively more evident that Germany not only supports the American desire to see Kosovo independent, but also actively engages on its own in dividing the Serbs…You are to be considered responsible for this. The same goes for your foreign minister, in particular, who knows perfectly well what is going on in Kosovo, and is presently pursuing your political directives by tirelessly advocating Kosovo's independence and, thus, its secession from Serbia. Instruct him, rather, to promote a durable solution for the Kosovo issue which is in line with the international law… It is only if all states choose to observe the applicable rights, we can have the foundations for the common life of all nations. Should Kosovo become independent, it will be perpetuated as the place of restlessness… Contribute to achieving the solution for Kosovo on the basis of the endorsed UNSC Resolution 1244 pursuant to which Kosovo remains a province of Serbia. American wishes and active efforts to see Kosovo secede from Serbia and see Kosovo and Kosovo Albanians achieve full independence, are contrary to the international law, politically deprecated and, on top of all, irresponsibly expensive…"

                                Others to claim "Kosovo solution"

"Kosovo's secession from Serbia guided by ethnic criterion would constitute a dangerous precedent and a signal for other ethnic communities in other countries, including in EU Member States, who could rightfully request the 'Kosovo solution'" – says Dietmar Hartwig in concluding his letter to Chancellor Merkel.

Enough said about the 'humanitarian intervention' and the concerns for the protection of rights of the Albanian population as the features of the "uniqueness of the Kosovo case". American Military base "Bondsteel" in the vicinity of the town of Uroševac, surely by a pure chance, happens to be among the largest U.S. military bases outside the USA! Perhaps their anxiety over being potentially spied on from the Serbian-Russian Humanitarian Center in the City of Niš uncovers awareness that "Bondsteel"  is illegally built there?!

It was the U.S.A, the EU and NATO, not Serbia, who froze the conflict following the armed aggression of 1999. They and kept it frozen for the past 18 years by not allowing complete implementation of UN SC resolution 1244. They pressed Serbia to fulfill all its commitments insisting on the legally obliging character of the resolution while exempting them and the Albanians from any obligation therein. They realized that full implementation of UNSCR 1244 means preservation of sovereignty and integrity of Serbia, values which do not suit their geopolitical objective of expanding to the East (Russia) and South-East (Mediterranean).                                                 

At present the West, primarily Germany, insist that Serbia 'unfreezes' Kosovo "independence process". How? By compelling Serbia to sign a 'legally binding agreement' with Pristine, to recognize a illegal unilateral secession, legalize illegal 1999 aggression, permanently accept over 250.000 dislocated Serbs and other non-Albanians from Kosovo and Metohija and essentially assume responsibility for all what has happened or may happen in the future!

                                        The German case

French General Pierre Marie Galois, close assistant to the late French President General De Gaulle, is very interesting and reliable witness of the Germany's politics toward Yugoslavia, particularly toward Serbia and Serbs. In his address to the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals on occasion of the 10^th anniversary of NATO aggression he recalls that "dismantling of Yugoslavia was an operation that had been planned in Germany for a long time. They were not just waiting for the death of President Tito in 1980, but were preparing succession and profiting from his departure by reorganizing this territory[6]." To explain and support this assessment, General Galois considers three key motives behind such German geopolitics:

First, "there was obvious (Germany's, aut.) desire to exert revenge on the Serbs who twice, from 1914 to 1918 and from 1939 to 1945 joined with allies against Germany"…"Second, Germans wanted to reward the Croats and the Bosnian Moslems who had joined Nazi Germany"…Third, they wanted Slovenia and Croatia in the sphere of Germany's interests (EEC) as well as access to the Mediterranean via Adriatic.

Historians will certainly judge objectively the validity of the General Galois' arguments, but it is beyond any doubt that he was exceptionally capable and highly respected military and political strategist in the post WWII France, with access to very important sources of information. Also, his assessment does not contradict other available information. Let it be noted, for instance, that in the eve of civil wars in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina at the beginning of 90-ies of the last Century thousands of tones of military hardware from former GDR was illegally exported from Germany to Croatia arming its paramilitary forces. In addition, Germany was the first country to recognize unilateral secessions of Slovenia and Croatia. It was done December 23^rd, 1991 by Minister Hans Dietrich Genscher who disregarded call of UN SG Perez de Cuellar who urged Germany to wait for recognition to be part of the peace plan. The rest of the 12 EEC members followed Genscher's step.

In the period of 90-es of the last Century Germany was the source of financing separatists and terrorists in Kosovo and Metohija (KLA). So called "Kosovo government in exile" headed by Bujar Bukosi had an office and network of collecting funds in Germany and other West European countries (Belgium, Switzerland, Italy) for recruiting, training and arming the terrorists. In various occasions and on various diplomatic levels this problem was presented to German authorities in order that they stop anti Serbian (FRY) activities from their territory and comply with the diplomatic rules, national and international laws, including specific decisions of the UN Security council. Unfortunately, these interventions had no effects.

On December 9-10^th, 1997, Council of the Peace Implementation in Bosnia and Herzegovina was convened in Bon (Dayton-Paris Peace Agreement). The Yugoslav Delegation, headed by Political Director of the Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Dragomir Vucicevic was well prepared for participation, particularly having regard that FR of Yugoslavia was one of the guarantors of the Dayton-Paris Peace Agreement. However, German Minister for Foreign Affairs Claus Kinkel, after opening the Conference, insisted that the agenda of the Conference be expanded to include consideration of the issue of Kosovo and Metohija which had no relevance to the Dayton-Paris Peace Agreement. Kinkel's method of fait-a-complie, naturally, was unacceptable from the point of the framework of the Conference, practice applied at the preceding conferences and principle of transparent preparations. In addition, Serbia (FRY) had maintained position that Kosovo and Metohija is an issue of internal nature which will be resolved by political methods respecting territorial integrity and sovereignty of Serbia (FRY). Therefore Yugoslav Delegation abandoned Bon Conference.

             Unitarization of Bosnia and fragmentation of Serbia

Interestingly, Bon's final document is one of the most extensive of all Council's documents and so called "Bon's Full Powers" made the High Representative the ultimate legislative and executive authority in Bosnia and Herzegovina – above the Parliamentary Assembly, Presidency, governments. So called Bon's 1997 principles made the whole Dayton-Paris system deformed, non-functional, non-delivering, and so up today. If there is a single or key cause for Bosnia and Herzegovina being dysfunctional and unstable today, than it is Bon's "Full Powers" originating from Germany's Foreign Ministry and its geopolitics. Using and abusing Bon's "Full Powers" the High Representative had been imposing laws systematically curbing authority of the entities and transferring the power to Sarajevo thus reopening process of centralization and unitarization, destabilizing political system as laid down in Dayton. This process has been particularly directed to deprive the powers of Serbian entity Republica Srpska entrusted to it by Deyton-Paris Peace Agreement.

Aforesaid, perhaps, would not be of much use if today we wouldn't be faced with similar German geopolitics and demands. Serbia, naturally, does not recognize illegal unilateral secession of its Province. Under UNSCR 1244 and under current Constitution Kosovo and Metohija makes integral part of sovereign Serbian state territory. Nevertheless, Germany insists that Serbia signs "legally binding document on normalization and good neighborliness" with Kosovo! In fact, such "legally binding" document would equal recognition of the illegal secession. This would also mean that Serbia will not object Kosovo's membership to the UN, UNESCO, OSCE, CE and other international organizations. Finally, by signing such a document, Serbia would "a posteriori" grant amnesty to NATO for its 1999 military aggression, i.e. for all human victims, enormous destruction and war damages. Interestingly, German diplomats have already prepared the draft of such an agreement which most likely will be presented in the way "take it or leave". Perhaps, the authors of the draft agreement are the same who in 1997 drafted Bon's "full powers" for High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina? The same ones who initiated Kosovo and Metohija to be part of Agenda of the Bon's Peace Implementation Council's meeting convened to consider implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement on Bosnia and Herzegovina, in December 1997?

                                   Objective - to bind Serbia only

UNSCR 1244 (1999) is legally binding document of the highest rank in the hierarchy of international public law. It provides guaranty for sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia as well as substantial autonomy for the Province of Kosovo and Metohija within Serbia. Serbia has long ago fulfilled all her obligations from this legally binding document. The others, including UNMIK, KFOR and particularly Kosovo Albanian leaders have not. For example, about 250.000 of displaced Serbs and other non-Albanians from Kosovo and Metohija 18 years after have no possibility as yet to freely and safely return to their homes and lands in the Province! Why? Many Serbs, including school children, harvesters, bus passengers and others have been abducted, or killed in the period since the Province got under the UN mandate. Nobody has been found guilty. Why?

In the Brussels negotiations process under EU auspices in the last several years a number of agreements have been reached. Again, Serbia has fully complied with all its obligations, the others have not.

So, even if Serbia would sign any new legally binding document which what in the opinion of the author Serbia should not do, it would bind only Serbia, not anybody else. All who supposedly would offer guaranty that this time it would be different have lost their credibility long ago, EU including.

Accepting legally binding agreement with Kosovo Serbia would be permitted to come to the door step of EU by 2025. Mere signature would not be enough for EU membership. Full implementation is required before. What happens if Serbia signs such an agreement and EU, or any of 27 member countries come with new demands and preconditions which Serbia would not be able to fulfill? Let us not be mistaken – the history of Serbia's relations with EU and with a number of neighboring countries abound such examples. Who is enough credible to guaranty to Serbia that this is excluded? Is it possible that Serbia delivers everything that she is required now and finally gets nothing?

Kosovo and Metohija, birthplace of Serbian state, culture, religion, and identity should not be considered commodity to exchange for EU membership.                                    

German diplomacy evokes "Germany's case" wherein both, West and East Germany (GDR) had been UN members while not formally recognizing each other. This reference is meant to be only face saving for the government in Belgrade, which keeps giving in substantial concessions and at the same time declaring it will never recognize Kosovo as sovereign state. It is, however, quite clear that there are no similarities to compare between FR Germany and GDR, in one hand, and Serbia and Kosovo, on the other. 

On April 12, 2007, German ambassador to Serbia Andreas Coble at the European Forum's conference in Belgrade stated that "if Serbian Government continues to insist that Kosovo is integral part of Serbia, it is possible that the question of Vojvodina[7] may be opened. Hungary might insist on Vojvodina. And not only that. There would be possibility for opening of the question of Sandzak (Raska)"[8]. Could really such elaborated statement be just of personal invention of visionary, well-intended diplomat, or perhaps he has learned about those "possibilities" in the course of preparations for his Belgrade ambassadorial post?

His successor Ambassador Andreas Mass in December 2011 gave astonishing public advice to Serbian nation to teach their children to love NATO because NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 for good of Serbia. Mass did not comment 4000 Serbian citizens killed by NATO, including by German bombers, killing children, train passengers, hospital patients. He did not mention use of missiles with depleted uranium, destroyed schools, hospitals, monuments. Nevertheless he was certain that Serbia will be member of NATO anyway. "The question is not whether but when Serbia will become NATO member" – said Mass.

Present German ambassador Aksel Ditman in the interview to the Belgrade weekly "NIN" on November 11^th, 2017, stated that Germany supports membership of unilaterally conceded Kosovo to the UN and other international organizations. In fact, Ambassador does not even pretend to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the receiving country which is all but diplomatic.

It is long time since Dietrich Genscher and Claus Kinkel were ministers of foreign affairs of Germany. But the same "good geopolitics" concerning Balkan and especially Serbs and Serbia, remain firmly implanted in Berlin.

With the best wishes,

Sa postovanjem,

Zivadin Jovanovic

 

---

[1] Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs of FR of Yugoslavia 1998-2000. Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals

[2] Head of EU  (EEC) Monitoring Mission in Kosovo and Metohija (ECMM) from 1998 until March 20^th, 1999

[3] Kosovo Liberation Army

[4] Special USA representative Richard Holbrook met KLA commanders June 20^th, 1998, in Junik, Kosovo and Metohija, Serbia

[5] Of 2000 planned

[6] Message au People Serbe, Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals, p. 36, Belgrade 2009

[7] Another Autonomous Province of Serbia partially populated by members of Hungarian national minority

[8] Populated by Moslems (Bosniaks) ethnic community

The Economist : What the Yugoslav war-crimes tribunal achieved

The Economist explainsWhat the Yugoslav war-crimes tribunal achieved

It closes this month after 24 years and 161 indictments

The Economist explains

Dec 7th 2017

by T.J.

 

THE International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which was established by the United Nations Security Council in 1993, closes at the end of this month. A few remaining appeals and retrials will become the responsibility of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals, which performs the same role with the now-closed Rwandan tribunal. The ramifications of the ICTY's work extend far beyond the region. It was the first such court to prosecute war crimes since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials at the end of the second world war. It indicted 161 people, including former presidents and prime ministers. All were caught, handed themselves in, or died. Ninety were convicted. Nineteen were acquitted. None is a fugitive. The court heard evidence from more than 4,650 witnesses in cases relating to genocide, ethnic cleansing, mass murder and sexual violence. 

Once a relatively liberal communist country, Yugoslavia disintegrated in the 1990s. It was a federation of six republics and two autonomous provinces—and a mish-mash of nationalities. Many regional leaders transmogrified into nationalists and war took hold. If Croatia was going to become independent then many of its Serb inhabitants would fight to remain in a Greater Serbian state. And Croat nationalists wanted a Greater Croatia that included Croat-inhabited parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And so on. As the Bosnian war ground on and Serb forces besieged Sarajevo, the Bosnian capital, foreign powers could not agree how to respond. No one wanted to send troops to separate the parties. But they all approved the prosecution of war criminals, so backed the establishment of the tribunal. At first the court, based in The Hague, had little money. It also had no police of its own to arrest anyone indicted. But over the years its influence increased. It demanded that the Balkan states and others carry out arrests, and also got help from NATO-led peacekeepers in Bosnia. It succeeded in making the handing over of those indicted a political issue, with sanctions slapped on Serbia and Croatia when they dragged their feet.

Some of its achievements were legal and some political. Several of the most evil of the wartime actors were imprisoned. The tribunal gave victims and civilians a voice, and often justice, in a way that would not otherwise have been possible. It created new legal precedents. Sexual violence is now considered a war crime. It established the groundwork for other courts, including those that looked into horrors committed in Rwanda and Sierra Leone, and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Its 2.5m pages of transcripts provide an extraordinary archive. It established that genocide had taken place when some 8,000 Bosniaks (Muslims) were murdered as Srebrenica fell. To weigh against all this there must be the acknowledgment that many believe that justice was not always done. The hopes that many had for the tribunal have at times been disappointed. It did not accelerate the process of reconciliation. Many believe there was interference, from America and elsewhere, in its work. In cases related to Kosovar Albanians, in particular, prosecutors alleged witness-tampering.

According to Eric Gordy, a sociologist at University College London's School of Slavonic and East European Studies, the court tried to end impunity for war crimes and in this "it was partially successful". It was founded at a time when there was still some consensus about the need for this. Now, sadly, that is no longer the case. There is no international tribunal indicting anyone for war crimes in Syria. Russia and America are among those countries that have either withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the ICC or never ratified its statute. It remains to be seen whether the Yugoslav tribunal will become a relic from a more hopeful time or a trailblazer in a cause that was always bound to suffer setbacks.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/12/economist-explains-3?cid1=cust/ddnew/email/n/n/2017127n/owned/n/n/ddnew/n/n/n/ne/Daily_Dispatch/email&etear=dailydispatch

 

 

 

'They treated her like a dog': tragedy of the six-year-old killed at Croatian border

theguardian.com

'They treated her like a dog': tragedy of the six-year-old killed at Croatian border | World news

Emma Graham-Harrison

8-10 minutes

---

When the train hit six-year-old Madina Hussiny, her family stumbled to the watching Croatian border police begging for help, her body limp in their arms.

The same officers had ordered the exhausted Afghan family down railway tracks towards Serbia in the dark without warning them there might still be trains running, said Madina's mother, Muslima Hussiny. But desperate and terrified, they had nowhere else to turn.

Madina was a casualty of a slow-burning crisis along Europe's borders that aid groups and activists say is causing untold suffering.

Thousands of migrants and refugees trapped in Serbia, where they have almost no chance of successfully claiming asylum and little hope of moving on legally, are resorting to increasingly desperate means to try to cross into the European Union.

The border police of Croatia, Hungary and Bulgaria have responded by forcing any people they catch back over the frontier, often violently, according to groups ranging from Human Rights Watch to Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF).

The tragedy of the Hussiny family, who tried to reach Croatia after spending nearly a year in Serbia hoping for legal passage into Hungary, was the latest in a string of deaths and injuries to children and adults across the Balkans.

"What we continue to witness is the negative consequences of the EU policies at the external EU borders," said MSF's humanitarian affairs adviser for Serbia, Andrea Contenta. "These policies continue to put people in danger. There is no safe way to travel."

The day that ended in tragedy had begun in hope. Muslima Hussiny decided to set off with six of her 10 children on 21 November after hearing that the border with Croatia was less tightly sealed than it had been in recent months.

Muslima said the group, with four children under 10, made it into Croatia by scrambling across fields and over and under fences, but they were picked up by police a few hours later as they rested in a park under blankets.

She was happy to see the officers at first, expecting to be taken to a police station to formally claim asylum, their right under European law. Instead, Muslima said, they were driven to the railway line and ordered to walk back towards Serbia.

"I begged: 'If you won't accept us, please let us stay here tonight. In this weather we are already tired and cold, the children are little,'" she said. "But they were inhuman."

Croatian authorities denied that Madina and her family had set foot in their country before her death, or that border police played any role in putting the six-year-old in the path of the train. They said the family were crossing from Serbia and were on the far side of the border when the train hit, but the death was recorded in Croatia because the family ran that way for help.

"We emphasise that treatment of the Croatian border police had not contributed in any way or caused the accident and the death of a child," the interior ministry said in a statement, adding that its treatment of all migrants and refugees followed EU law.

But multiple aid and human rights groups have documented hundreds of cases of people with a legal right to claim asylum being forced back over EU borders in Croatia, Hungary and Bulgaria, frequently with the use of violence.

At the start of this year, Médecins du Monde raised warnings about tactics including beatings, pepper spray and dog attacks in these "forced pushbacks".

There have been many reports of people being ordered back along the train tracks where Madina died. "Many of our patients tell us that the [Croatian] police allegedly brought them to the train line and ordered them to cross back. It's a recurrent pattern that we hear," said MSF's Contenta.

For a moment after the train screeched to a halt, Muslima's focus was on Madina's older sister, who tumbled to the ground as the train rushed past. Then she realised that the chubby chatterbox who was everyone's favourite was missing.

There was a frantic scramble with phone flashlights in the dark, and then Madina's older brother spotted her lying on the ground. Muslima hoped she was just concussed, but it quickly became clear she was terribly hurt. "Rashid took off her hat and there was blood everywhere. I picked her up and saw there was no sign of life."

When they stumbled back to the police, she said, the officers ignored Rashid's desperate pleas for medical help and ordered the family into a van, taking time to check that everyone they wanted to deport was accounted for.

So she hugged her daughter's battered body during a journey that stretched on for eternity and was over too soon. At some point on the road, the van stopped and nurses transferred Madina to an ambulance where they worked on her for a while. Then they drove away, ignoring Muslima's pleas to stay with her daughter.

"I told them: 'I want to go with my child, wherever you are taking her,'" she wept. "I asked: 'Why are you sending her alone, I want to be with her, it's my right to be together.'"

The next time she saw Madina was days later, when the body was icy cold and blood and mud were still smeared on her face.

The family had left their home after threats against their father, Rahmat Shah, for his work with the police. They moved first to the Afghan capital, Kabul, but danger followed them, so they left for Europe at the start of 2016 and reached Serbia around a year later.

Madina, at six, was a dimpled clown, kind and silly, inspiration for the whole family on the long journey. "She was always smiling, always the one everybody liked," said her oldest sister, Nilab, 17. "She talked a lot but always so sweet. My mum asked her: 'Why do you talk so much,' but she just smiled."

Nilab cannot shake the memories of the body as it was returned to the family, battered and muddied. "They just treated her like an animal, like a dog. Such a small body and they didn't treat it like a human," she said, tears welling up in her eyes.

In the days that followed the accident, the family had to fight for news of Madina's fate, information about her body and the right to bury her according to Muslim tradition.

They were sent back to Serbia the night she died, without confirmation of where she had been taken or whether she was dead, and not even a number to contact.

They met with little more compassion on the other side of the border, held overnight in a police room with only a table and chairs, still covered in Madina's blood, cold, hungry and desperate with grief.

It took them days to confirm she had been killed and to reclaim her body, and only then with the support of groups including MSF and HelpRefugees.

When Madina was returned to them on 24 November, the family were ordered to bury her immediately. There was no paperwork, and four bottles of water to perform the washing of the body that is a vital part of Muslim funeral rites.

They spent more than six hours in a tense standoff at the municipal cemetery with officials, her father said. "I told them I would rather you bury us all here than make me bury her like this."

But Serbian authorities threatened the whole family with deportation if they continued to resist, he said. Then UN officials arrived and warned the family that if they did not agree to the burial, Serbian authorities could go ahead without their consent.

So, unwillingly, they agreed to the burial. "I was shouting and crying when my wife and daughter took the body to wash," said Rahmat Shah. Because winter was setting in, it was already getting dark when she was laid into the ground. "I will carry it in my heart for ever, that I did not give her a proper ceremony."

Madina's grave lies at the edge of a municipal graveyard, on the bleak outskirts of the border town where she spent her last afternoon, on the edge of a vast, flat expanse of fields. There is no marker, but her family pray she will not be forgotten.

"Please spread our message as much as you can, because she came here with all her hopes," said her father. He is still waiting for her death certificate.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/they-treated-her-like-a-dog-tragedy-of-the-six-year-old-killed-at-croatian-border

 

 

Partagé avec Cliqz pour iOS

 

 

Envoyé de mon iPad

NATO, EU path, Russian arms - and why Putin matters to Serbs

b92.net

NATO, EU path, Russian arms - and why Putin matters to Serbs - PoliticsEnglish

8-10 minutes

---

Serbia has embarked on the European path, but has no intention of joining NATO, Aleksandar Vucic has said.

Source: Tanjug, TASS Friday, December 8, 2017 | 16:07

 

(Tanjug, file)

Speaking for TASS ahead of his trip to Moscow, the Serbian president revealed that his country plans to buy at least six Russian helicopters and air defense missile systems.

"Serbia is on the European path, but the difference between Serbia and other countries in the region is that Serbia does not want to join NATO. Ten days ago, I was in Brussels, at NATO's headquarters, and told the 29 leaders of the NATO member-countries that Serbia has no intention of joining NATO. Serbia will maintain its military neutrality. That has been Serbia's policy, and it will continue to be so," Vucic said.

"We have received six Russian MiG-29 warplanes, which are now undergoing modernization," he continued, and added:

"We expect they will be in full operational readiness within months. We have other applications: we want to buy weapons, we want to buy at least six military transport helicopters and air defense systems."

"Serbia is an independent country, a military neutral country, so we must be strong militarily to be able to defend our land. I hope to discuss this and many other topics with Vladimir Putin," Vucic said.

TASS noted in its report that the Serbian president will be in Moscow on December 18-20, where he will meet with President Vladimir Putin, with their talks expected to focus on a wide range of bilateral and global issues.

"I would like to address the Russian people and say one thing that politicians already know but it is important that ordinary people know it too: it is not always easy for Serbia but remember that Serbia is the only country among those seeking EU membership that has never voted against Russia at any international meetings and has never imposed any sanctions," Vucic told TASS ahead of his trip to Russia.

"I have many times told this not only to the Russian media outlets but all the others as well: Serbia will not impose sanctions on Russia, no pressure can make us change our position," he said, and remarked:

"Sometimes when you take part in some meetings in the West, ties between Russia and Serbia are discussed for one hour and forty-five minutes out of two hours."

Relations with Russia are Serbia's priority for the future, the Serbian president said.

"Serbia has made a decision which is not an easy one, but it is not just a question of our traditional relations, as some claim it to be. It is a matter of our future relationship, as we see Russia as one of our key partners in the future and not only in the past with its great figures such as Dostoevsky, Yesenin and Pushkin, whom any American would mention to you, but we see Russia as our partner in the political, economic and any other field," Vucic said.

He thinks that relations of Serbia and Russia are developing exceptionally thanks to Vladimir Putin, the agency said.

"Development of Serbian-Russian relations is always credited more to President Putin than to us. People here (in Serbia) respect and love Russia, but we are a small country and only thanks to President Putin's leadership, attention is paid to Serbia," Vucic said.

"If we recall Vladimir Putin's predecessors, Serbia hardly existed for them. Not only for the Russian people is Putin important, during his mandate he has been taking care of and showing attention to the Serbian people as well, and we are grateful him for everything," he told TASS, and added:

"For us in Serbia, a meeting with president of the Russian Federation is always a particular event, a milestone. I hope to discuss global issues at our meeting and to thank once again the Russian Federation for its support to the territorial integrity of the Republic of Serbia. Those are not idle words but true gratitude."

 

The Murder of Yugoslavia

sputniknews.com

The Murder of Yugoslavia - Sputnik International

Sputnik

6-7 minutes

---

Columnists

17:41 28.11.2017Get short URL

The conviction of former Bosnian Serb commander Ratko Mladic by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) reminds us of a brutal conflict in which atrocities were committed by all contending parties, including the West with a NATO air assault of 78 days' duration in which hundreds of civilians were killed.

As nobel-prize winning English playwright Harold Pinter described it: "The NATO action in Serbia had nothing to do with the fate of the Kosovan Albanians; it was yet another blatant and brutal assertion of US power."

Based on the wholesale demonization of the Serbs that ensued both during and after a conflict which resulted in the destruction and dismantlement of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), you would think the Serbs were both the cause of the conflict and the only side engaged in it. Such a rendering of what stands as one of the most tragic episodes in the history of the Balkans is offensive not only to those who suffered but also to the truth. 

The destruction of the Federal Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) was the overarching crime inside of which every other crime and atrocity committed in the course of the conflict must be understood. The attempt to elide this wider crime, to focus instead on the atrocities carried out in the conflict that followed, is no accident. For what we are dealing with is Western imperialism red in tooth and claw; and how in the case of the former Yugoslavia the West succeeded in exploiting the regressive nationalist and ethnic fissures that have long criss-crossed the Balkans to achieve its objective of dismantling the last socialist state in Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Under the constitution of the SFRY said nationalist and ethnic fissures were successfully sublimated in favor of a common Yugoslav identity around which its citizens could cohere and unite to forge a multi-ethnic and multi-religious state, which for decades stood as a beacon social and economic justice. In this respect it proved eminently successful in the post-war period.

The problems to beset Yugoslavia came on the back of the debt crisis that engulfed the country in the 1980s. Under Tito's leadership Yugoslavia the had embarked on an overly ambitious program of hyper-investment with the objective of developing its poorer regions, raising living standards, and effect the modernization of industry and infrastructure. The program was rolled out under the auspices of the model of workers' self-management, which had been established in the 1950s to decentralize the management of industry to the factory floor, thus giving ordinary workers a stake in the running of the economy and, with it, the socialist system which underpinned it.

However the economic autonomy provided under self-management included the ability to borrow for investment. Borrowing by the 1970s had gotten out of control, with the abundance of cheap credit and money swirling around the economy leading inexorably to hyperinflation. The result on the back of the resulting debt crisis was economic recession, in response to which the richer and resource-rich parts of the country began to resent subsidizing its poorer regions. We see a similar pattern when it comes to the economic basis of the Catalan independence movement from Spain today, of which more later.

A process of growing ethnic tensions, exploited by nationalist parties, culminated in a unilateral declaration of independence by Slovenia in 1990 on the back of a referendum that was conducted in violation of the SFRY constitution. Croatia followed suit with, crucially, the independence of both being recognized by the West — thus setting in train the conditions for the brutal conflict that resulted when the central government did as any sovereign government faced with secessionism would and sought to impose its writ. 

© REUTERS/ Peter Dejong/Pool

Returning to Catalan independence, here we are obliged to make a brief detour to raise the glaring double standards of the West in its recognition of secession when it emerged in the former Yugoslavia, and its refusal to recognize it in the case of Catalonia from Spain in recent times. The stench of hypocrisy abounds when you consider this, constituting as it does more evidence that where the West is concerned national sovereignty is only respected when it comes to its allies or those states that are strong enough to resist its violation in pursuit of wider strategic and economic hegemonic objectives. It is the ethos, per a latter day Roman Empire, of might is right — the very same that lies at the root the international order in our time, regardless of the lofty and vacuous platitutdes tirelessly peddled by Washington and its allies when it comes to democracy and human rights.

Writer and political science Professor Susan L. Woodward put it astutely: "In recognizing Slovene and Croation independence, the European Community [forerunner to the EU] was not only creating new states but dissolving an existing one — Yugoslavia."

During World War II, Hitler's hatred of the Serbs was only exceeded by his hatred of the Jews. British historian Anthony Beevor reveals that during the war the fascist dictator "was bent on vengeance against the Serbian population [over its anti-Nazi stance]. Yugoslavia was to be broken up, with morsels of territory given to his Hungarian, Bulgarian, and Italian allies. Croatia, under a fascist government, became an Italian protectorate, while Germany occupied Serbia."

The irony is that though Hitler may have failed in his objective of breaking up Yugoslavia, the West succeeded in the same objective five decades later.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.

Check out John's Sputnik radio show, Hard Facts.

 

Glimmers of hope in the Balkans

ekathimerini.com

Glimmers of hope in the Balkans | Comment

NIKOS KONSTANDARAS

4-5 minutes

---

In a recent report for the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, economist Jens Bastian noted how an 'anchor investment' like Cosco's in Piraeus creates a spillover effect – from further Chinese investments in local companies to rail links in Central Europe.

What with the general insecurity in the broader region, it has almost gone unnoticed that there just might be cause for hope in our neighborhood. Perhaps it is because the shock of a mass influx of refugees and migrants tested relations between countries but also prompted closer cooperation; perhaps the change of climate stems from the change of government in Skopje; perhaps it is simply time for Southeastern Europe to find a way out of chronic inertia, as its countries display anemic growth; perhaps China's dynamic entry is getting things moving. What matters is that various forms of cooperation are developing in a region distinguished by tension and conflict.

Indicative of this is that Greece, Bulgaria and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are working together to guard their borders, for the better management of refugees and migrants and for greater effectiveness against organized crime. The relationship is both bilateral and within framework of the European Union. The current quietness on Greece's northern borders is, of course, the result of the EU-Turkey deal which saw migrant flows dry up (until they picked up again over the last few months, with 4,800 new arrivals in September). Also, the Frontex common border force and newly minted European coast guard, along with intense pressure from Brussels, resulted in greater cooperation. This is a priority for Bulgaria, which undertakes the EU's revolving presidency on January 1 and is also a candidate for joining the Schengen Area of passport-free travel. For Skopje, cross-border police cooperation is part of a package of confidence-building measures being negotiated with Athens.

Greece supports Bulgaria's and Romania's efforts to join Schengen, despite the fact that it finds itself in an awkward situation with its partners within the zone, with Germany imposing strict controls on airline passengers traveling from Greece. It is encouraging, however, that the government whose leader famously declared that it would be no big deal if Greece were booted out of the Schengen area now appears to understand its value and willing to fight to remain within it.
On the economic front, China's dynamic entry into the region, which began with shipping company Cosco's investment in the port of Piraeus, has had a broad impact. As part of its "One Belt, One Road" initiative, Beijing is working on major infrastructure and logistics projects, as well as having Chinese state banks offer low-interest loans to businesses. In a recent report for the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, economist Jens Bastian noted how an "anchor investment" like Cosco's in Piraeus creates a spillover effect – from further Chinese investments in local companies to rail links in Central Europe. Such thinking is contagious: In September Greece and Bulgaria signed a memorandum of cooperation for rail links between the ports of Thessaloniki, Kavala and Alexandroupoli and the Black Sea and the Danube.

The change of government in Skopje seems to be leading to warmer relations with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia's neighbors, including Greece. United Nations-mediated negotiations on the name issue in Brussels on December 11-12, along with a visit by the country's deputy prime minister, might lead to some progress. Skopje is aware that its hopes for joining NATO and for starting accession talks with the EU pass through Athens.

The Balkans are, of course, synonymous with nationalist passions, endless historical conflicts and dashed hopes. Without being led astray by excessive expectations, though, it would be useful to note positive signals and encourage any moves toward cooperation between neighbors, for their common security and development.

 

pravdareport.com

Serbia forgives USA for 1999 bombings, forgets all victims, holds joint drills with NATO

Dmitriy Sudakov

3-4 minutes

---

On November 14-17, Serbia will hold exercises of local and American paratroopers. The manoeuvres at Batajnica military airfield with the participation of about 100 servicemen from the 173rd Airborne Brigade of the US Army are to promote the expansion of relations between the countries and "enhance security and peace in the region."

The administration of Serbia, the territory of which the Americans were bombing for four months in 1999, agreed to the joint exercises to retain its power, chairman of the Russian Party of Serbia, Slobodan Nikolic, told Pravda.Ru.

"Serbian President Alexander Vučić wants to have good relations with both Russia and the United States. Figuratively speaking, he tries to sit between two chairs. The majority of the Serbian people and the Russian party of Serbia condemn this approach and this military event. Today, Serbia conducts similar exercises with NATO soldiers five or six times more often than it does with Russia.

It is worthy of note that there is a branch of the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations in the city of Nis. Its specialists have cleared several hundred square kilometres of mines that NATO had planted during the bombings in 1999. This division of the Russian EMERCOM has not received a diplomatic status yet, but NATO already has a diplomatic status. NATO soldiers can move around Serbia and do what they want."

"Has Serbia forgotten those who were killed in the bombings? Why does Serbia look up to the USA so much these days?"

"The leadership of Serbia is looking for an option to stay in power. It now depends on the US and the European Union, because the country remains in a very bad economic situation. The Serbian authorities are looking for investment, they have already signed the Brussels contract. The labor force in Serbia is the cheapest - people work for 200 euros.

"Yet, we traditionally associate ourselves with Russia, as our peoples cooperate through history. We recently celebrated the "Liberation of Belgrade," then we paid tribute to the "Battle of the Danube," when the Red Army was helping us.

Our authorities claim that Serbia will never join NATO. I think that it will not happen, as the Serbian people do not want that. The probability for Serbia to become a NATO member is eight percent. The Serbian authorities try to observe balance and sit between two chairs. The USA and the EU put pressure on Serbia, forcing the country to impose sanctions against Russia and recognise the independence of Kosovo.

Interviewed by Lada Korotun
Pravda.Ru

Read article on the Russian version of Pravda.Ru

Serbians unfold banner on unity with Russians at EuroLeague match

 

Russian representative calls Inzko out as "Serbophobe"

b92.net

UNSC: Russian representative calls Inzko out as "Serbophobe" - World

6-8 minutes

---

Russia's Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Vladimir Safronkov has accused the high representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) of Serbophobia.

Source: Tanjug Wednesday, November 8, 2017 | 14:23

 

(Getty Images, illustration purposes, file)

According to Safrankov, who spoke during a UN Security Council meeting, Valentin Inzko has also "lost touch with reality."

Inzko was submitting his new report on the state of affairs in BiH, which Safronkov assessed was "the least objective in the past eight years."

According to TASS, the Russian diplomat said the document speaks less about the implementation of the peace agreement, and represents more "a collection of attacks on the Serb Republic (RS, Serb entity in BiH)."

These attacks, Safronkov continued, have been chosen tendentiously and in a biased manner - "which, unfortunately, has already been accepted by some delegations in the hall."

According to him, only one thing proceeds from Inzko's report: that only Serbs are to blame for all the problems in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

"It is clear to anyone who is at all familiar with the situation in BiH, that the picture painted by the high representative is far removed from reality; it is misleading and shows that the author has lost touch with reality," Safronkov said.

It is worrying, he continued, that Inzko is leaning toward open Serbophobia, and that his daily activities have been reduced to clarifying relations with Banja Luka (RS) and lobbying in favor of Bosnia's Euro-Atlantic integration - "despite of his mandate and the internal political reality of the country where he resides."

Safronkov recalled that Inzko represents, by his own choosing, the international community as a whole, not its individual members. "He is under obligation to implement a harmonized line, not to execute somebody's individual orders, and be guided by personal animosities," Safronkov stressed.

According to him, the high representative should not engage in antagonisms, but in fulfilling his obligations in good faith. "This approach means encouraging the process of national reconciliation, internal political, mutually respected dialogue, compromise and consensus, and, of course, respect the opinions of all parties," Safronkov said.

Also on Wednesday in New York, Russia supported a UN Security Council resolution that extends EU's military operation in BiH, but once again strongly criticized the high representative.

 

gazetaexpress.com

Italy expels Kosovo radical imam for security reasons

GazetaExpress

2 minutes

---

Wednesday, 01 November 2017 09:14

A Muslim religious leader from Kosovo was expelled from Italy for posing threat of national security, according to Italian media.

The imam identified as Idriz Idrizovic, 39, was deported from the city of Lecco in the northern Lombardy region, where he lived since 2008, at the order of the Italian Interior Ministry, according to Ansa news agency. The man was allegedly linked to other Muslim preachers from the Balkans, who are believed to support an extremist view of religion. Officers from military police Carabinieri arrested the imam at his home on Monday, and a court in Lecco later upheld the ministry's expulsion order on the basis that the man represented a danger for Italy, state broadcaster RAI News 24 also reported. He was to be brought to Milan airport for a flight to Kosovo on Tuesday. Idrizovic lived in a small town in the province of Lecco with his wife and five children. 

Date: 01 November 2017 09:14

Author: GazetaExpress

 

On choices, democracy and ‘sliding toward the Kremlin’

rt.com

On choices, democracy and 'sliding toward the Kremlin' — RT Op-Edge

6-8 minutes

---

Both the current and the previous US administration swear by sovereignty and the right of nations to choose their own way. In practice, however, only one choice is acceptable to Washington ‒ as Serbia discovered back in 1999, and was just reminded of.

On Monday, US Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Hoyt Brian Yee told the government in Belgrade that Serbia "cannot sit on two chairs at the same time," and "must very clearly demonstrate" the declared desire to join the European Union.

"Countries must choose which path to follow; regardless of how difficult it would be, the country has to make its strategic choices which must be part of official policy," Hoyt said, according to AP.

Serbian Defense Minister Aleksandar Vulin called Hoyt's remarks "hostile" and "very undiplomatic pressure."

"This is not a statement made by a friend or a person respecting Serbia, respecting our right to decide independently," he said on Tuesday.

According to AP, however, Vulin is "known for his pro-Russian stance," and Serbia is "formally seeking EU membership, but under pressure from its historic Slavic ally Russia it has gradually slid toward the Kremlin."

In this bit of editorial guidance, one of the world's biggest news agencies basically suggests that seeking membership in the EU, NATO and "other Western bodies" is normal and desirable, while any reluctance to do so must be down to Russian pressure.

Anyone even remotely familiar with recent history, though, will recall why most Serbians might be opposed to that choice. The Deputy Assistant ought to remember as well: according to his official State Department biography, in 1999 he was Deputy Director of the Private Office of NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana.

Read more

 

The war violated NATO's own charter as well as that of the UN. For 78 days, NATO targeted civilian infrastructure, including the Serbian state TV station, in an attempt to force Belgrade to surrender its province of Kosovo. Yet the world's most powerful military alliance, as NATO fancies itself, failed to achieve its objectives by force. It was political subterfuge that let alliance occupation troops into Kosovo, under the fig leaf of a UN peacekeeping mission (UNSC 1244). The ethnic Albanian rebels declared independence in 2008, and the government in Serbia has been under pressure to recognize the separation ever since.

While official NATO histories talk about the war being fought over the plight of ethnic Albanians, one Washington insider dared admit that Yugoslavia had been "disrupting plans to bring a wider stable of nations into the transatlantic community."

"It was Yugoslavia's resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform ‒ not the plight of the Kosovar Albanians ‒ that best explains NATO's war," wrote John Norris ('Collision Course,' 2005), with the endorsement of the State Department's foremost Russia expert, Strobe Talbott.

Yet it was NATO's attempt to crush Yugoslavia's stubborn resistance to its post-Cold War dominance that "lost Russia," dispelling illusions about Western-style liberal democracy that had taken root in the Yeltsin era.

"It is fair to say that all layers of Russian society were deeply and indelibly shocked" by NATO's bombing, the legendary Soviet dissident, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn told Der Spiegel in 2007.

Read more

 

Just the other day, Russian President Vladimir Putin cited the bombing of Belgrade as the West's response to Moscow's trust after the Cold War:

"What we got in return is well-known – a complete disregard for our national interests, support for separatism in the Caucasus, a circumvention of the UN Security Council, the bombing of Yugoslavia, the invasion of Iraq, and so on," Putin said at the Valdai discussion club in Sochi.

Now, both the current and the previous US administration often speak of the "world order" the US has built and act as guardians of, in which countries are free to make their own decisions and choices as to who they associate with.

"Like all independent nations, Ukraine must be free to decide its own destiny," Barack Obama said in September 2014, addressing the people of Estonia.

Three years later, his successor Donald Trump would tell the UN General Assembly that Americans "do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather, to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch," and that he was "renewing this founding principle of sovereignty" in Washington's conduct of foreign affairs.

Read more

 

Ukraine, of course, was not free to decide its own destiny ‒ instead, US diplomats plotted and schemed how to "midwife" regime change under the guise of popular revolution. The "free and democratic" government thus installed in Kiev proceeded to crush dissenters with fire and blood, declaring them "terrorists" and "Russian invaders."

Nor has Serbia been allowed to make its own choices since its own "regime change" in 2000, with every government in Belgrade being "midwifed" and managed by the US ambassador or some Deputy Assistant or another. For all of Trump's promises to "drain the swamp" and complaints he's purging the State Department, this US policy has yet to change.

The current government of President Aleksandar Vucic was allowed to come to power only after bending the knee and letting Western consultants rebrand them as "progressives." Since then, Vucic has implemented every US, EU and NATO demand, including the de-facto recognition of "Kosovian" independence in the form of borders, courts, government, documents, and international memberships. That's not good enough, of course: the EU is demanding official recognition before talks on Serbia joining the mega-state can even start.

According to the Deputy Assistant and mainstream media, such behavior amounts to choice and democracy, while any actual independent thought is "pro-Russian" and "sliding toward the Kremlin." Good to know.

Nebojsa Malic for RT

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

 

Washington Forbids Serbia from De-Mining Syria

globalresearch.ca

Washington Forbids Serbia from De-Mining Syria | Global Research

By Daniel McAdams

4-5 minutes

---

 

This may be one of the cruelest and most cynical moves of Washington in its entire dark "regime change Syria" chapter. Serbian media sources are reporting, based on quotes from US Embassy Belgrade personnel, that the United States has sought and been given assurances by the Serbian government and military that Serbian de-mining experts will not be deploying to Syria to assist in removing the ubiquitous horrific mines and other explosive devices left behind by a retreating ISIS.

As the rout of ISIS forces continues in Syria, the civilian population begins returning to their homes and their lives that had been disrupted by the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and other extremist groups. According to the United Nations, more than 600,000 Syrians have returned to areas liberated by the Syrian government with the assistance of Russia and Iranian forces.

But that is where the tragic problems often begin. As the Economist reported earlier this year, the joy of returning to a life where the scourge of ISIS has been eliminated can be cut short in an instant by what ISIS leaves behind:

'The first explosion killed our neighbour and his sister-in-law when they entered their house,' said Ali Hussain Omari, a former fighter from the city. 'Three days later another mine killed my cousin. His 11-year-old daughter's leg was amputated and their house was destroyed. A week later another mine in an olive tree exploded. My neighbour lost his leg.'

What a horrible irony to have survived the marauding jihadists only to be blown to pieces by the terrors they left behind.

Which is why it is all the more disturbing that the United States government is so adamant that US-trained Serbian de-mining experts NOT deploy to Syria to help make post-ISIS Syria safe for civilians to return.

The "spat" between US Ambassador to Belgrade Kyle Scott and Defense Minister Aleksandar Vulin began when the Serbian side announced that it would participate in the de-mining efforts in Syria in a manner that would have Serbian forces coordinating with Russians. The Americans reminded their Serb allies, through US Embassy spokesman Eric Heyden, that:

…the US government provided significant donations in money, equipment and training to help the Serbian Army get rid of the mines left over from the war, and thus make Serbia a safer place. That is why, over the past 15 years, we have provided more that USD 20 million in aid for mine clearing operations in Serbia. During our last major joint exercise, in April 2017, the US government donated some USD 450,000 in medical and demining equipment to the Serbian Army to improve its capacities…

In other words, "we funded your training in de-mining operations and if you want to continue receiving money from the United States you had better cancel your plans to assist with de-mining in Syria."

Washington's concerns over Serb participation in de-mining in Syria was, according to press reports, heeded by Belgrade. Heyden further announced:

Media reports from Russia have stated that deminers from Serbia would be deployed together with Russian forces in Syria. In the last six months, in our numerous conversations with the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and the VS General Staff, the US government received multiple assurances that this story is incorrect, and that the goal of our bilateral training was to enable members of the Serbian Army to clear the area of the former military airport in Sjenica, and to open it for use…

Once that was settled, the US announced that it "has plans for next year to continue helping to develop the Serbian Army's capacity in this project."

And the Syrian victims of ISIS and other (probably US-backed) extremist mines that continue to kill and maim innocent civilians and children? Too bad for them. More innocents will die in the name of the current US Cold War 2.0 psychosis.

Featured image is from the author.