November 02, 2006

Don't Support Independence for Kosovo, Urges Former Envoy

 
http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2006/november/1/kosovo/
Embassy, November 1st, 2006
NEWS STORY
By Brian Adeba

Don't Support Independence for Kosovo, Urges Former Envoy

Canada's last ambassador to Yugoslavia says rights, but analysts say last week's independence vote is purely symbolic.

As voters in Serbia prepared to vote on a new constitution last week, a former Canadian ambassador to the former Yugoslavia and a top prelate from the Serbian Orthodox church called on Canada not to support moves to grant independence to Kosovo.

Flanked by Bishop Artemijc Radosavljevic of Kosovo, James Bissett, who was Canada's last ambassador to the country formerly known as Yugoslavia, told a press conference on Parliament Hill that the ethnic Albanian leadership in Kosovo is incapable of protecting the rights of non-Albanians in the former Yugoslav province.

"If there's any group of people in the world less deserving of independence, it's the Albanians in Kosovo, who have proven by their terror and their barbaric treatment of non-Albanians in the last seven years that they are not meeting any standards that would qualify them for joining the democratic nations of the United Nations," said Mr. Bissett.

Kosovo has been under UN protection since 1999 when NATO launched an air campaign to drive out Serbian forces to stop the mass killing of the region's Albanian population. The region was the centre of the Serbian Empire until 1389, when the Ottoman Turks defeated the Serbs. The Serbs regained Kosovo from the Turks in 1913 and proceeded to declare it a province of Serbia. There are 1.5 million ethnic Albanians in Kosovo and 200,000 Serbs. When fighting erupted between ethnic Albanian guerillas of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in the late 1990s, about 100,000 Serbs were forced to flee their homes in the province. KLA activities elicited a brutal response from Serbian forces, leading NATO to intervene to stop what at the time was seen as the cleansing of ethnic Albanians. Serbs consider Kosovo as the birthplace of their empire and have resisted attempts to grant it independence, even though the region is ruled by ethnic Albanians under UN protection.

Bishop Artemijc accused the ethnic Albanian leadership of allowing the destruction of 150 churches and abetting the expulsion of Serbs from the region.

"Independence means the destruction of my people and uprooting from my birth place," he said.

Although Canada did not take part in the NATO bombing, it has a duty, as a member of the international community, to prevent an imposed independence on Kosovo, Mr. Bissett said.

Symbolic Vote Won't Drive Independence

The UN, under former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari, is expected to deliver a verdict on the status of Kosovo by the end of this year. Diplomats and analysts predict Mr. Ahtisaari will suggest independence for Kosovo under the supervision of the European Union. Mr. Bissett also called on Mr. Ahtisaari to resign for uttering partisan statements in public.

"The parameters are geared in such a way that will grant one solution–independence. Ahtasaari has said as much and that statement alone should have completely disqualified him and he should have been asked to step down," said Mr. Bissett.

Agim Hadri, president of the Kosovo Information Centre, a Toronto-based non-profit organization that aims to inform Canadians about Kosovo, dismissed claims that the Albanian population is forcing Serbs out of Kosovo as "pure manipulation." He also said the region's Albanian population supports independence, and nothing short of it will satisfy them.

"It is now almost the reality, it just remains to be put on paper," he said.

Mr. Hadri also dismissed Bishop Artemijc's claims that Serbs are facing eviction in Kosovo, arguing that many left Kosovo on their own will. Mr. Hadri also said Mr. Bissett should not be taken seriously because he is partisan.

"He was always pro-Serbia during the NATO humanitarian intervention, and I don't think we have to take into consideration what he said."

Last week Serbians voted by a thin majority of 51 per cent to recognize Kosovo as an integral part of Serbia. Edith Klein, program advisor for the European Studies progam at the University of Toronto, said the vote will remain symbolic, as it is unlikely to halt the drive for independence.

"It's a way for the government of Serbia to make noise, but there's no substantial meaning to it," she said, adding that the thin majority is a clear indication that some Serbs want to move beyond the Kosovo issue.

"More moderate Serbs accept that Kosovo is not part of the future," said Ms. Klein.

Fears that political stability will remain elusive in a scenario where Kosovo becomes independent are unrealistic, said Robert Austin, from the Centre for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at the University of Toronto.

"I think an independent Kosovo is the best thing for stability in the region because there's no way you could put the old Yugoslavia back," he said, adding that it will normalize political life and lead to a new focus on the economy. Mr. Austin also said UN and international mediators are aware that last week's referendum in Serbia will have no impact on the future of Kosovo.

Ethnic Albanians, who have boycotted previous elections organized by Serbia, were barred from voting.

Mr. Austin also believes that an independent Kosovo will put into place measures to ensure the rights of the Serb minority are respected since the region will still be under the scrutiny of the European Union.

brian@embassymag.ca



 


All new Yahoo! Mail -
Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane.


Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


November 01, 2006

Serbia and its New Constitution: On the Brink of a New Era?

Serbia and its New Constitution: On the Brink of a New Era?



Serbia and its New Constitution: On the Brink of a New Era?
Can Karpat, AIA Balkan Section
Since the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, Serbia has been supposed to adopt a new Constitution. Finally, after endless delays and hesitations, Serbia adopted its first post-communist Constitution last weekend. Within weeks, the exact date of the early elections will be fixed. And President Boris Tadic insists that the presidential elections be held before the end of this year as well. Serbia is definitely on the brink of a new era. Will this era also bring luck to Serbia and the rest of the Balkans…

Since the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, Serbia has been supposed to adopt a new Constitution. Finally, after endless delays and hesitations, Serbia adopted its first post-communist Constitution last weekend.
   
Serbian orthodox priest walks by a bill board reading 'Yes' in favor of the new constitution (photo: AP)  
Serbian orthodox priest walks by a bill board reading 'Yes' in favor of the new constitution  
In spite of the patriotic posters "For the good of Serbia, let us vote at the referendum", last weekend only 53.66 percent of the registered voters went to the polls. And just 51.46 of them voted for the adoption of the new Constitution.
Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica stated with proud that "there is no country which checked the mood of its public in the way Serbia has done with the new Constitution - first with the voting in Parliament, and then with its confirmation at the referendum with a majority vote".
This is nothing but Premier's wishful thinking. Of course, superficially, it seems as though the Constitution had been adopted with two levels of voting, one by Parliament, the other by the people - thus with genuine gravity. Yet, much criticised and with right was the way the Constitution prepared: in a great rush so that Zoran Ostojic from the liberal Civic Alliance of Serbia (GSS) calls it "49-hour Constitution" and without the participation of the public nor the minorities. 
And of course, no surprise that Prime Minister declared "victory". Although in a deliciously diplomatic way he called it "victory of Serbia", he must have hinted at his government's victory as well.
However, statistics do not lie. It is obvious that with such figures ( 53.66 and 51.46 percent), the adoption of the Constitution is far from being a victory. Rather, it indicates the weariness of the Serbs from politics - or even their indifference towards it.
If we must see the empty side of the glass … Almost one Serb over two rejected the Constitution supported by the four major political parties. This fact is crystal clear. The intriguing question is: Did they also reject the preamble on which the government counted all its success?
During the pre-referendum campaigns, which, without surprise, turned into a sort of pre-elections campaigns too, the "Kosovo preamble" was the focus of all arguments. In order to stimulate the people, Pink TV broadcasted films on the Battle of Kosovo.
It is extremely regrettable that this Serbian television found nothing but a battle coming from as early as 1389 in order to justify Serbia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Did the channel insinuate that the international community of modern times is in fact a reflection of the Ottomans of Kosovo Polje? Complete mystery indeed.
Thus, it must be of an extreme relief for the outside world that ordinary Serbs did not let themselves be influenced by such suspect arguments. And thus, the poll according to which 60 percent of the Serbs would "tolerate" the secession of Kosovo was confirmed. For ordinary Serbs, there are more serious and urgent economic and social problems than the Kosovo question.
In a way, there was no surprise at this referendum. More than 90 percent of the Kosovo Serbs voted for the Constitution. Albanians of the Presevo Valley boycotted the referendum as a sign of solidarity with their brethren from Kosovo. And only 42 percent of the inhabitants of Vojvodina approved of the new Constitution.
It seems that finally Serbia alienated all of its Albanian inhabitants. Since the focus was the notorious Kosovo preamble, this was the price to pay indeed.
As for Vojvodina, it seems that the people sided with the President of the Assembly Bojan Kostres who called the citizens to boycott the referendum, rather than with Prime Minister Bojan Pajtic who supported the new Constitution. Pajtic was even enthusiastic about the draft: "We even got what we didn't state in the platform, for example that Vojvodina has its symbols, and the Constitution stipulates those symbols". With this Constitution, Vojvodina is granted financial autonomy. However, we live in the "era of minorities" so that minorities are even on the brink of demanding more rights than majorities - with the blessing of the EU.
And finally the Serbs of Kosovo. It is no surprise that the preamble just hypnotised them. What is worrying is the way that they celebrated their -though statistically scarce as we have seen- "victory" in the divided town of Mitrovica (northern Kosovo), hailing Ratko Mladic among others. Unless being a disagreeable Cassandra, this was far from being a good sign for the future when Kosovo will obtain some kind of independence.
   
 
  Serbian PM 
Vojislav Kostunica
Of course the new Constitution has its good points. According to Zoran Ivosevic, a former judge of the Supreme Court of Serbia, "the areas of economy, public financing and property rights, and organisation of power -especially the judiciary- were done very carefully".
However, the Kosovo preamble and the first article which declares that "Serbia is the homeland of the Serbs" either alienated some (Albanians and other minorities) or toughened others (Kosovo Serbs).
Yet, one must admit that to criticise is an easy and comfortable job. Every analyst criticise à fond Serbia's deeds and advise her not to do what she does, though no one really tell her what she should do instead.
En résumé, Vojislav Kostunica has not much reason to rejoice. The Constitution has been adopted with a very scarce majority. His government is always a precarious minority government. Within weeks, the exact date of the early elections will be fixed. And President Boris Tadic insists that the presidential elections be held before the end of this year as well.
Therefore, Serbia is definitely on the brink of a new era. However, whether this era will also bring luck to Serbia and the rest of the Balkans is yet to be seen in coming months. 
 



Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


Kosovo Serbs called best-protected group

Kosovo Serbs called best-protected group



Kosovo Serbs called best-protected group

BELGRADE, Serbia, Nov. 1 (UPI) -- A U.S. envoy says minority Serbs in Serbia's mainly ethnic-Albanian Kosovo province will be the best protected national group in the Balkans.

Frank Wisner, U.S. envoy in talks on Kosovo's future status, told Serbian leaders in Belgrade that Washington wants the U.N.-led talks between the Serbian government and leaders of ethnic-Albanians to be completed this year, Belgrade's B92 radio-television reported Wednesday.

In an interview with B92, Wisner said the United States hopes the talks will be completed with as much cooperation and compromise as possible.

The Serbian government in Belgrade, representing about 100,000 Serbs in Kosovo, and the leaders of ethnic-Albanians, who make up 90 percent of Kosovo's population of 1.8 million have shown in the talks, begun in February, their stands are diametrically opposed.

The ethnic-Albanian leaders insist on Kosovo's independence from Belgrade, while the Belgrade government says Kosovo will always be an integral part of Serbia.

The U.N. civil administration and NATO protection troops have been deployed in Kosovo since 1999 to contain ethnic armed conflicts.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20061101-090753-7709r




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


James Bissett: Keep an eye on that 'damned silly thing' in Kosovo

James Bissett: Keep an eye on that 'damned silly thing' in Kosovo






Centre for Research on Globalization
October 31, 2006

KEEP AN EYE ON THAT 'DAMNED SILLY THING' IN KOSOVO

UN and NATO in defiance of International Law


by James Bissett

Serbian voters have approved a new constitution that, among other things,
reaffirms sovereignty over Kosovo which, since the bombing of Serbia in
1999, has been administrated by the United Nations with the help of NATO
troops. The weekend referendum result will further complicate efforts of
Western policy- makers to grant independence to Kosovo since, to do so
without Serbia's consent, would violate the U N Charter on territorial
integrity and inviolability of borders. Nevertheless, there have been
indications that the UN special envoy, Marrti Ahtisaari, will soon recommend
that Kosovo be separated from Serbia and become an independent country.

This would be a mistake.

For the past seven years Kosovo has become one of the most dangerous places
on Earth. It is the center of heroin, weapons and human trafficking into
Western Europe. Murder and abduction of non –Albanians are a daily
occurrence. Civil society is non-existent and living standards are
equivalent to those of Haiti. There is evidence that Islamic extremists with
Al Qaeda connections are a growing presence. In short, Kosovo has all the
characteristics of a failed state.

Under the watchful eyes of the UN and NATO, more than 200,000 Serbs, Jews,
Romans and other non-Albanians have been expelled from Kosovo. Those who
remain are in constant danger. And some of those encouraged by the UN to
return have been murdered The Prime Minister of Kosovo, Agim Ceku, a former
leader of the Kosovo Liberation Army, has been accused of war crimes by the
Serbs. He is the man who led Croatian forces in 1993 that over ran Serbian
villages protected by Canadian peacekeepers. When his fighters were driven
out, the Canadians found all of the civilians and animals in the villages
had been slaughtered.

One of the crimes committed by the Albanian majority in Kosovo has been the
razing of over 150 Christian churches and monasteries. Many of these
churches dated back to the 13th and 14th centuries. Their destruction has
been a deliberate effort to remove all semblance of Christian heritage in
Kosovo. Shamefully, there has been no international outrage, no serious
attempt to apprehend the perpetrators and no expression of alarm or protest
on the part of Christian churches in the West.

The U N resolution that ended the bombing campaign against Serbia guaranteed
that Kosovo would have a functioning civil society, democratic institutions,
security for all citizens and respect for the rule of law. It called for the
disarming of the Kosovo Liberation Army and other armed groups. It provided
for the return to Kosovo of limited numbers of Serbian security forces to
guard the Christian Holy places. And it reasserted Serbia's sovereignty over
Kosovo.

Sadly, it seems the UN and NATO had no intention of honouring these
commitments. These are hard facts and they stand as a testimony of failure.
The performance of these two international institutions has been marked by
duplicity, double standards and cowardice.

Independence for Kosovo would establish a dangerous precedent. President
Vladimir Putin of Russia has already warned that a decision to grant Kosovo
independence could be applicable to post-soviet territory .He has particular
interest in regions of the former Soviet Union that have aspirations for
independence. The most volatile ones are the Georgian provinces of Abkhazia
and South Ossetia; these two regions broke away from Georgia in 1992 and
want independent status. Recognition of Kosovo independence would give them
their precedent. And could result in bloodshed with serious implications for
world security.

Bismarck, once said that the Balkans were not worth the bones of a single
Pomeranian grenadier. Yet, he also predicted that, if there were to be
another war in Europe, it would be because of some "damned silly thing" in
the Balkans. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in
1914, sparking off the First World War, proved him right.

Ominously, there is again a strong possibility that another "damned silly
thing" is taking place in the Balkans: the seeming determination of Western
policy makers to grant the Serbian province of Kosovo its independence. In
foreign policy, as in other human endeavours, you can't get good results if
you do dumb things.

James Bissett is former Canadian Ambassador to Yugoslavia





Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


October 31, 2006

ANDREAS VON BULOW-1ST TO QUESTION 9.11 STORY - GOOGLE VIDEO

ANDREAS VON BULOW-1ST TO QUESTION 9.11 STORY - GOOGLE VIDEO





http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7983456992913081117

========================================

GERMAN POLITICIAN & INTELLIGENCE OVERSEER, ANDREAS VON BULOW-1ST TO QUESTION 9.11 STORY - GOOGLE VIDEO

Date: Sunday, 29 October 2006, 7:30 a.m.

Here is an interview with Andreas von Bulow who was in the German goverment for many years with some kind of intelligence job.

He was one of the first major world figures who came out and said that the official story of 911 was a "false flag" story and that the 19 hijackers were "patsies."

He speaks in English answering questions from an offscreen person.





Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


October 30, 2006

Monitors Say Vote on Serbian Constitution Is Too Close to Call






Monitors Say Vote on Serbian Constitution Is Too Close to Call




 The New York Times



October 30, 2006

Monitors Say Vote on Serbian Constitution Is Too Close to Call

LJUBLJANA, Slovenia, Oct. 29 — Estimates by an independent election monitoring group showed Sunday that a vote on Serbia’s new constitution was too close to call.

Official results were not expected until Monday. The monitoring group said its survey showed that 52 percent of voters had approved the document, with a margin of error of two percentage points, making the estimated victory margin statistically insignificant. The proposed constitution needed support from more than 50 percent of voters to pass.

The Center for Free Elections and Democracy, the monitoring group, came up with its figure by interviewing officials at 600 of the country’s 2,000 polling places to learn their vote tallies and by extrapolating from them.

The group also watched voting at those and other polling places to check for irregularities. The Belgrade-based group, which has monitored 10 Serbian elections since 2004, has called those elections correctly.

One of the most discussed provisions of the 206-article constitution declared that the province of Kosovo is an “integral part of Serbia.” The declaration was symbolic, because the fate of the province lies with the United Nations Security Council, which is likely to vote to enable Kosovo’s independence.

Critics of the constitution have said the document would not move the country far enough toward full democracy.

The proposed constitution was drafted and supported by nationalists and pro-democracy reformers in Parliament. Many reformers supported the document despite its flaws because they wanted to make clear to Serbs that they were doing everything they could to hold on to the province.

Reformers feared that the United Nations vote would create a backlash that could lead to gains for the Serbian Radical Party, the leading nationalist party. They also agreed to rush through the drafting of the constitution so it could be in place before the United Nations vote.

Despite the high-profile provision on Kosovo, the document did not seem to excite the populace. Voting was so slow over the weekend that it appeared the constitution might not get the needed votes, which would be a significant embarrassment for the government.

Voting surged late Sunday after an intensive get-out-the-vote campaign in the afternoon. Senior politicians as well as members of the Serbian Orthodox Church issued statements urging people to vote.

“Citizens, get out and circle ‘yes’ for Serbia, ‘yes’ for a better life for every citizen,” President Boris Tadic was quoted as saying by the state-run Tanjug news agency.

Between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m., when the polls closed, an estimated 20 percent of Serbia’s electorate went to the polls. Officials of the monitoring group said they recorded an increase in reports of electoral irregularities during that time. The group did not consider the irregularities significant enough to compromise the vote.

The overall turnout was 53.5 percent, according to the group’s survey.

Kosovo is regarded by many Serbs as being central to their national identity. It has been administered by the United Nations since June 1999, when NATO-led troops took control of the province after 78 days of bombing. NATO wrested Kosovo from the hands of Yugoslav security forces accused of committing widespread atrocities against the majority Albanian population.

Kosovo’s future is the subject of United Nations-led negotiations between the Serbian government and ethnic Albanians in the province. The ethnic Albanians want independence, while the Serbian government and the province’s small Serbian community demand that Kosovo remain part of Serbia.

Few Western diplomats say the groups will be able to reach agreement, leaving the decision to the United Nations Security Council, which is expected to impose a settlement in the next several months to enable Kosovo to claim independence.

While much of the constitution’s contents had been heavily criticized by rights groups as contradictory in parts and giving too much power to Parliament, there was little public debate about its contents. The charter would replace one drafted by the authoritarian government of Slobodan Milosevic in 1990.

Serbia’s government worked hard to help ensure the adoption of the new charter. A government-financed publicity campaign urged people to vote “yes,” and voting was held over two days in an attempt to draw Serbia’s election-weary voters to the polls.

Kosovo’s estimated 1.3 million ethnic Albanians were also excluded from the election. Including the Albanians would have increased the number of voters and made it difficult to secure approval of more than 50 percent of the electorate.

“The government gambled,” said Bratislav Grubacic, a leading political analyst and editor of the VIP news agency in Belgrade. “They hoped by putting Kosovo in the constitution, they would manage to draw out the Serbian electorate.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/world/europe/30serbia.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print



Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


Kosovo: approaching independence or chaos?

Kosovo: approaching independence or chaos?



Kosovo: approaching independence or chaos?

Peter Lippman
30 - 10 - 2006

Serbs endorsement of a constitution reaffirming sovereignty over Kosovo casts a further shadow over the "final status" of the contested territory. Peter Lippman, recently in Pristina, maps one of Europe's most intractable disputes.
------------------------------------------
 
Some places in the world have their own characteristic sound. The predominant noise of the cities of Kosovo is that of the electrical generator. Seven years after liberation from Slobodan Milosevic's iron rule, Kosovo's energy supply system remains at a poor developing-country level. There are daily blackouts. Kosovo's Albanian majority has tired of promises, and has been disappointed by local and international haplessness in fixing this problem. This is a more immediate factor in ordinary people's lives than the abstract question of independence, and it is only one of the more salient examples of the hardship of living in a wrecked, post-war society.
 
But this is the Kosovo Catch-22: there seems little chance of progress in guaranteeing basic services until the "final status" of the turbulent former province of Serbia is resolved, yet that resolution is hostage to profound disagreement between the Belgrade government and the authorities in Kosovo's capital, Pristina.
 
It took seven years since the ending of the Nato-led war of March-June 1999 - since when Kosovo has been governed under the auspices of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (Unmik) - for the international community to facilitate the negotiations that are to lead to "final status" for Kosovo.
 
The talks in Vienna, which bring together representatives of the Albanian population of the province with both the government of Serbia and Kosovo Serbs, have been guided by a six-member Contact Group (comprising representatives from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Russia). In six months, they have produced no progress. Now, in the referendum of 28-29 October 2006, the Serbs have endorsed a new constitution which restates Belgrade's claim over Kosovo. The Albanians of Kosovo (around 95% of the total population) reject this and see an independent state as their future. The result is deadlock.

Peter Lippman is a writer and human-rights activist from the United States who has worked extensively in Bosnia and much of ex-Yugoslvia since the early 1980s

Also by Peter Lippman in openDemocracy:

"Srebrenica’s search for justice" (24 August 2006)


 
 
A change in the weather
 
The current situation in Kosovo is stable if fragile. But the slow process of negotiations in Vienna, now combined with Serbia's referendum vote, reinforces a situation of much worry, tension, and periodic unrest.
 
During a recent visit to Kosovo, I witnessed significant changes in the atmosphere compared to earlier visits. The euphoria of Kosovo's Albanian population after the 1999 war has long given way to concerns over survival in a moribund economy. Commercial activity appears to be blooming, with new shops brightening the formerly dull environment of Pristina. But in an economy devoid of industrial production, this activity is superficial.
 
Meanwhile, periodic incidents of violence are increasing, reflecting the heightening anxiety accompanying tense negotiations. In August a 16-year-old Albanian threw a bomb into a café in the Serb-held portion of the divided northern town of Mitrovica, injuring nine people. And in recent months car-bombings and other low-grade violence, targeting both Albanians and Serbs, have increased.
 
These tensions notwithstanding, it has seemed for a long time certain that the tortuous discussions over Kosovo would, by sometime in 2007, result in its independence. Kosovo is still formally a part of Serbia. But international officials recognise the fact that no Albanian is willing to return to a situation of Serbian domination, and have been arguing - all but explicitly - the case for independence.
 
There are problems both of practice and principle before this scenario becomes feasible: guarantees of firm protection of the Serb population (who, along with other minorities, were mistreated and in many cases expelled by some Albanians in 1999) would have to be secured and accepted; a solution to the Serb-dominated enclave around Mitrovica must be found; the Albanians would have to be confident that the form of "independence" agreed does not compromise their sovereignty; and the government of Serbia would need to be persuaded to surrender a territory it (and many Serbs) regard as a historic, even spiritual part of the homeland.
 
The legacy of war
 
Memories of horrible events on both sides of the conflict inform the plans and desires of the participants in the current process. My Albanian friend Xhafer recalls what happened when the Serbs came to his town to expel his community:
 
"At the beginning, they started torching a few houses on the periphery of our neighborhood, to terrorise us. They didn't plan to destroy everything, as they wanted to use our houses for their refugees from Croatia. Some of us collected in one house. We had a plan to hide in a chicken coop if the soldiers came. But then my mother insisted we move; maybe she had a premonition. So we left a couple of hours before the soldiers came, and when they did, they took twelve men away. Some of those people, including friends of mine, are still missing, and others were found dead. It is hard for me to accept that we escaped death by two hours."
 
In June 1999 the Serb forces withdrew and hundreds of thousands of Albanians, having been expelled to neighbouring countries, came back en masse to their destroyed villages and looted homes. The traumatic events of a war that for them had lasted a year left Albanians with little sympathy when some of their number, in the absence of any rule of law, began attacking Serbs and Roma; this resulted in the flight of between 100,000 and 200,000 Serbs, along with the majority of the Roma population.
 
In the ensuing years an ill-prepared Unmik gradually worked to restore order in what had become its protectorate. Demobilised Albanian guerrillas transformed themselves into politicians, but found only a few local Serbs with whom to collaborate in creating an orderly society. Serb fear was manipulated by the Belgrade government in order to prevent the cementing of Albanian sovereignty in the province. Serbia worked to discourage even a semblance of multi-ethnic democracy, agitating for the return of Kosovo to Serbian control or, at the very least, a partition of the province.
 
In its governance, Unmik painstakingly nurtured a movement towards cooperation among Kosovo's ethnicities. International officials presided over the repair of thousands of houses and reconstruction of infrastructure, as Albanians waited for an economic recovery that never arrived. But local Serbs campaigned for autonomy and freedom of movement, often obstructing the movement of everyone else in the province by blockading main roads near their enclaves. A particular sore point for the Albanians was the ongoing obstruction of their return to homes in the northern part of the divided city of Mitrovica, controlled by the Serbs. Attempts by Albanians to visit their houses in that area were met with violent attacks by Serbs, but there were periodic flare-ups of violence against the Serbs as well.
 
The Vienna impasse
 
The international community, anxious to proceed towards final status, approved the opening of negotiations at the beginning of 2006. Final status issues include protection of minorities; autonomy for Serb communities; protection of religious sites; decentralisation; and a special relationship between Kosovo Serb communities and the government of Serbia. Each of these points is a matter of fierce contention between the negotiating parties.
 
A major influence in the negotiations is the stance of the Belgrade government. Serbian representatives at Vienna have striven to retain the greatest possible authority in the province. Their hardened position is that, while Kosovo may have extensive autonomy, it must remain under the sovereignty of Serbia as its traditional purview and the "cradle of Serbian civilisation". Against this stance, Albanian negotiators take independence as their starting-point, and insist that only lesser issues are negotiable.
 
Meanwhile, international officials have repeatedly insisted on three conditions: the establishment of a unified, multiethnic Kosovo with no partition; no boundary changes; and no return to pre-1999 political arrangements.
 
These conditions require little interpretation to understand that independence is foreseen. But even if this assumed to be a "public secret", the definition of Kosovo's independence is now under great scrutiny. One of the thorniest issues is the allocation of local power. Belgrade is pressing for the establishment of new Serb-dominated municipalities. There are currently five Serb municipalities, but Serb representatives are demanding as many as ten more. Belgrade is also pressing for the power to support the governments of these municipalities financially, the establishment of a Serbian-language-based school curriculum, and special authorities for Serbs in the courts and police forces. Albanian negotiators see these and similar demands as amounting to the establishment of extraterritorial powers for Belgrade.
 
It has become obvious that the two sides will not be able to reach a compromise through the Vienna process. This has led UN special envoy and mediator for the final-status process, Martti Ahtisaari, to warn that ultimately the international community may decide the fate of Kosovo on its own. In September, the Contact Group authorised Ahtisaari to propose a solution for Kosovo's final status and achieve a settlement by the end of 2006.
 
Belgrade's blind alley
 
Serbs living in Serbia are not preoccupied with Kosovo in their daily lives. But while Kosovo's independence has appeared foreordained, there is no politician in Belgrade who is willing to acknowledge this and make the best of it. President Boris Tadic and prime minister Vojislav Kostunica have repeatedly proclaimed Kosovo's permanent status as a province of Serbia.
 
Recent polls have shown that the extremist opposition Serbian Radical Party would again hold the largest number of seats in elections scheduled for 2007. (The leader of the Radicals, Vojislav Seselj, currently sits in a prison at The Hague awaiting trial for participation in war crimes in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo.) The Radicals are already the largest single party in parliament, but Kostunica and Tadic were able to form a majority coalition from more "moderate" (though still hardened nationalist) parties, including Slobodan Milosevic's Socialist Party.
 
The threat of being replaced by the Radicals is a prominent factor in Belgrade's current rigid stance. In September the Serbian parliament, preparing for the drafting of the new constitution, proposed a passage that would declare Kosovo as an integral part of Serbia for all time. The Radicals then raised the stakes with the government by declaring that this was a good idea - but that the government must prepare to back up its words with force.
 
Tomislav Nikolic, head of the Radicals, called on Serbia's leaders to prepare the country's army for a war, saying: "I want to know what our armed forces will do. If we don't have enough motivation and weapons, then don't tell us that Kosovo is part of Serbia."
 
Nikolic knows very well that Serbia cannot both wage war in Kosovo and make any progress in its bid to join the European Union. The time for military solutions in the region has, in any case, passed. But he also knows that his calculating pronouncements keep the heat on Tadic and Kostunica, and add to his own popularity. These political factors put the Belgrade government in a bind where Kosovo is concerned.
 
The Tadic-Kostunica coalition, in response to the threat from more extreme nationalist forces, pressed ahead with the new constitution at the end of September. With no politician in Serbia's parliament willing to oppose the retention of Kosovo, the constitution was adopted unanimously by all representatives present. This paved the way for the national referendum on 28-29 October.
 
Throughout the referendum campaign, criticism of the constitution (and its adoption process) has been voiced, on a number of grounds: that it curtails civil liberties, especially in the court system; that it was drafted hastily and without public discussion; and that Albanians in Kosovo would be largely excluded from the vote (even if they wished to participate).
 
In the event, the criticisms had little effect - except, perhaps, on the abstention rate. In a weak turnout of 53.5% of the electorate, 96% voted in favour of giving the government the simple majority it needed to pass the draft, which is thus now in force.
 
The new constitution, with its emphasis on Serbia's ownership of Kosovo, has been described as a signal that Serbia will not surrender the province without great resistance. But the internal politics of Serbia, especially the survival of the current government, remain the key factor.
 
The next political event in Serbia, as fraught with tension as the constitution's adoption, will be elections for a new government. Tadic and Kostunica desperately want these elections to take place before the international community bequeaths independence upon Kosovo, as any government going into new elections soon after such a development would do so in a fatally weakened condition. There has been talk recently of the Contact Group delaying a final-status decision until elections can be held (which would - theoretically - return the present coalition to power); but this conflicts with Ahtisaari's mandate (and determination) to resolve the question by the end of 2006.
 
Albanian options
 
Meanwhile, some Kosovar Albanians are opposed to the negotiations altogether. They find expression in the grassroots organisation Vetevendosje (Self-Determination). Its leader, the prominent young activist Albin Kurti, describes the concession by Albanian negotiators of additional Serb-controlled municipalities as a move that will allow a the creation of a contiguous Serb-controlled territory. Explaining that this territory could then secede and be annexed to Serbia, he calls this development the "Bosnianisation of Kosovo."
 
Vetevendosje has held several demonstrations to press its demand for an end to the negotiations, even blocking the entrances to Unmik's headquarters and seeing dozens of its supporters arrested. The group has characterised Unmik's presence as supporting the "recolonisation" of Kosovo. It calls for the establishment of a strict time-limit for Kosovo's independence, without further negotiations. Kurti states that decentralisation of Kosovo could be acceptable in some form - but only after independence.
 
Vetevendosje is often characterised as "extreme" by other Albanians; many complain that it would best devote its energies to opposing corruption or criticising haphazard corruption schemes involving rigged contracts. But some of its campaigns - such as the boycott of Serbian imports to Kosovo - have won greater support. The territory imports 95% of its consumer goods, a significant portion from Serbia. Even construction supplies, used to repair the thousands of houses destroyed by Serb forces, have been trucked in from Serbia. This, and the fact that the traditional agricultural economy of Kosovo is withering, makes the boycott movement popular.
 
A time to act
 
There are some good leaders in Kosovo who call for tolerance and reconciliation, and offer specific ideas about protection of minorities. But these honest people do not have much influence.
 
In any event, the possibility of arriving at a practical resolution to the problems mentioned above - especially in present international circumstances - is far beyond the capacity of any public figures among the Serbs and Albanians of the province.
 
For all its hardships, Kosovo is not poor, especially in human resources. A timely resolution of Kosovo's final status, attended by a continued security presence provided by international forces, could encourage investment and revive the optimism of all its inhabitants. If Kosovo continues to live in limbo, more and more people are likely to agree with the acquaintance who told me: "There are no prospects here, and young people desire to leave in any way they can, legally or illegally."
 
It is clear that the international community must soon navigate a path towards a clear and peaceful resolution. That will demand courage and energy. It is also the only way. The cost of inaction could be great



Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


A Visit to the resilient capital of Serbia is never boring






A Visit to the resilient capital of Serbia is never boring




Theatrical edge of Belgrade
 
A Visit to the resilient capital of Serbia is never boring

October 29, 2006
Belgrade is one of the oldest cities in Europe, and it has been both victim and victimizer throughout its long and often brutal history.

Many travelers still remember how, during the Cold War, this capital of the former Yugoslavia was one of the more prosperous and liberal places behind the Iron Curtain, whose inhabitants liked to boast that their passport garnered respect in both the Eastern and Western blocs. But then came the death of longtime leader Josip Broz Tito, the fall of communism, the rise of the super-nationalist Slobodan Milosevic and, during the 1990s, the all-out calamity of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Now relegated to the capital of Serbia rather than the sprawling nation of Yugoslavia that once encompassed a large area of the Balkans, Belgrade is still "in recovery." But as someone who traveled through the country in 1991, and watched events there first-hand in 1996 and 1997 -- and who has subsequently met many artists who fled their home and settled in Chicago -- I can vouch for the toughness and resilience of the Belgradians, and for their innate theatricality. (During the student uprisings over stolen local elections in late 1996, many in the city opened their windows as the state-run nightly TV news was broadcast, banging loudly on pots and pans in an attempt to drown out the lies.) True, the city might still be a spot favored primarily by the Lonely Planet crowd that prides itself on offbeat destinations. But one thing is certain; it is never boring.

Though much of the city has a grimy Soviet-era quality, with ugly post-World War II buildings in the vast areas of the city that were heavily bombed (first by the Germans, then by the Allies), just enough of the majesty of earlier centuries exists in the center to lend some charm. You can find it on Prince Michael Street (the elegant pedestrian mall where even in the darkest times the women looked chic and shoe stores were up-to-the-minute); near the National Theatre; around the handsome Parliament building; at the history-layered Belgrade Fortress. Downtown's Republic Square holds memories of turbulent recent times. And the nearby Hotel Moskva, with its Old World tea room -- where I often went to escape the riot police and chaos of the streets -- will always be a personal favorite.

Tatjana Radisic, one of many Belgrade-trained theater artists who have forged careers in Chicago during the past decade or so, is an exceptionally talented costume designer who has worked at the Goodman, Steppenwolf and Redmoon theaters. Her designs can now be seen at Northlight Theatre (where the all-American "Inherit the Wind" is playing), and will soon be on view at Victory Gardens Theatre (where the musical fairy tale, "The Snow Queen," will debut).

She is now in Belgrade; I asked her to e-mail me impressions to update my own.

Radisic wrote that the fall colors are beautiful but "underneath this romantic image it seems to me that the country is boiling."

On the other hand, cultural life is alive and well, with the 22nd Belgrade International Jazz Festival, the 46th International Book Fair, the 40th International Theater Festival and the Sixth Biennial of Stage Design (where Radisic's U.S. work was nominated for an award), have all taken place in recent months. The old theaters are still working -- and still receive government funding -- though fewer and fewer young people go.

Meanwhile, Prince Michael Street remains "a great catwalk," writes Radisic. "It's full of kids, street singers and musicians, and, as always beautiful young people. The dominant street fashion is tight jeans and small, tight winter jackets. They all look very fashionable, but somehow uniform. It's the new generation, born in the 1980s and '90s -- growing up during the wars, sanctions, hyperinflation, black market, protests."

This generation did not travel abroad and has a Hollywood-distorted image of wealth and fame, said Radisic.

"It's all part of the Turbo-Folk culture that developed during Milosevic's time -- a mixture of money, sex, fast cars, tough guys, arms and bimbos."

hweiss@suntimes.com

http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/weiss/114481,TRA-News-Belgrade29.article




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


EU fears U.N. proposal may fall short on Kosovo

EU fears U.N. proposal may fall short on Kosovo




EU fears U.N. proposal may fall short on Kosovo
         

REUTERS

4:26 a.m. October 30, 2006

BRUSSELS – European officials are worried that a U.N. mediator will avoid outlining a clear final status for Kosovo, risking a unilateral declaration of independence that may cause a diplomatic crisis and split the European Union.

Officials familiar with Finnish mediator Martti Ahtisaari's thinking say he is set to stop short of proposing independence for the breakaway Serbian province in deference to fierce hostility from Belgrade and strong Russian opposition.

'The dangerous situation is if there is no clear recommendation as to the final status,' one senior EU official said. 'There is a very significant risk of that.'

EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn, in charge of the European integration of the Western Balkans, has been urging Ahtisaari to ensure clarity in his proposals for an agreed settlement, due to be issued sometime in November.

Many European officials are urging the mediator to delay his push for a deal until after early Serbian elections possible in December, following a weekend referendum that approved a new constitution declaring Kosovo an integral part of Serbia.

But the United States and Britain are pressing for a final status agreement this year, arguing that delay risks provoking violence among Kosovo's overwhelmingly Albanian population.

Kosovo has been under United Nations protection in a state of legal limbo since 1999, when NATO waged an air campaign to drive out Serbian forces and stop ethnic cleansing.

Its prime minister, Agim Ceku, insists independence by the end of this year is the only acceptable outcome for Kosovo's 2 million people, some 90 percent of whom are ethnic Albanians.

'Nothing less than independence will be acceptable,' the former general told Reuters in an interview this month.

'MESSY SCENARIO'

While Washington and London argue that Kosovo's situation is unique, Russia sees it as a precedent for changing international borders without the consent of the country concerned.

If Kosovo can have independence against Belgrade's wishes, then breakaway regions of Moldova or Georgia backed by Moscow should enjoy the same right, Russian officials contend.

The EU official said Ahtisaari, a former Finnish president and veteran negotiator often tipped for the Nobel peace prize, felt it was not his duty to make 'a judgment of Solomon'.

He planned to set out legal arrangements on governance, decentralisation and minority rights but leave the ultimate final status decision to the U.N. Security Council.

The Kosovo daily Express, quoting two diplomats it said had seen Ahtisaari's draft, said the plan would not include the word 'independence' but recommend Kosovo be given 'treaty-making powers' and the right to join international organisations.

A senior European diplomat in the Kosovo capital Pristina said the report 'seems to tie in very much with what we know.

'He doesn't mention independence but Ahtisaari is describing the criteria which characterise an independent country,' he said.

An EU official in Brussels said that could trigger a 'messy scenario' in which the Security Council would be deadlocked and the Kosovo government, perhaps with the green light from Washington, would declare independence.

If that happened, there would be an intense diplomatic battle over recognition, with the United States likely to lead a drive for recognition against Russian resistance.

The EU risked a split between 'Orthodox and Habsburg' member states closer to Serbia and others such as Britain that might recognise Kosovo individually, he said.

DELAY OR HASTEN?

An EU diplomat in Brussels said a discussion of Kosovo among ambassadors of the 25-nation bloc last week was based on the assumption that Ahtisaari would delay.

'Now it looks as if the whole schedule has been delayed. Ahtisaari will want to see Serbian elections before presenting his report. People recognise it is a very complicated process,' the diplomat said.

But Macedonian Foreign Minister Antonio Milososki said after talks with EU officials last Friday that a delay in Kosovo's final status could affect his own country next door.

'The situation in our country is stable, however we are aware that certain risks exist on Kosovo,' he said. 'You need only three people, one landmine, one flag and a press communique to have an incident.

'Therefore we think a decision concerning the final status of Kosovo should be taken earlier ... The endless prolongation of the status quo is not creating a bigger space for some ideal solution. There will be no ideal solution,' he said.

It was always best to take difficult decisions in the Balkans in winter, he said, before the snows melt and fighters can take to the mountains.

(Additional reporting by Mark John in Brussels and Matt Robinson in Pristina)

EU fears UN proposal may fall short on Kosovo




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


October 28, 2006

Kosovo Serbs see constitution referendum crucial for their future in the province

Kosovo Serbs see constitution referendum crucial for their future in the province 



 
International Herald Tribune
Kosovo Serbs see constitution referendum crucial for their future in the province
 
 
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2006
 
OSOJANE, Serbia In the tiny western village of Osojane in the breakaway province of Kosovo, Vlastimir Vukovic shared his home-made plum brandy with a fellow Serb. The bottle he kept it in had a label written in Albanian, as is virtually everything else surrounding the remote Serb enclave — from the road signs to the graffiti on the walls.

On Saturday, the Serbs plan to walk past NATO peacekeepers' tanks guarding the village and into the local school to cast ballots in a referendum on a new constitution that declares Kosovo an integral part of Serbia.

Vukovic says the vote is crucial if there is to be a future for the Serbs in Kosovo, where the majority ethnic Albanians are seeking independence.

"There is no life for Serbs here, unless Kosovo is part of Serbia," said Vukovic, 68.

Some 100,000 Serbs remain in Kosovo, most of them in isolated enclaves under the protection of the peacekeepers.

Although diplomats insist the referendum has no bearing on U.N.-led negotiations on the political future of Kosovo, the vote reflects the deep divisions between the province's communities.

The province, now administered by the United Nations, has struggled to recover from a 1998-99 war that left some 10,000 dead and pitted Serbs and ethnic Albanians against one another.

A key article in the new constitution reasserts the breakaway province — which the Serbs consider its cultural heartland — is a part of Serbia. Western diplomats say the province is likely to gain some form of independence.

"I will never live in an independent Kosovo," Vukovic said. "The constitution treats Kosovo as Serbia and that means Belgrade will protects us," he said.

He passed a glass of brandy to Jagos Djuric, sitting next to him. The two are among some 30 Serbs who returned to live in Osojane after initially fleeing in the aftermath of the conflict, when ethnic Albanians sought revenge for the actions of Serb forces.

Djuric, 52, said living conditions were difficult, jobs were scarce and there was no safety — issues he believes only Serbia can alleviate if it retains control of the province.

Ethnic Albanians insist Serbia has lost the right to govern the province after the death and destruction it brought.

"It cannot bring them any good," said Ylber Hysa, an ethnic Albanian legislator involved in talks with Serbia. "In Kosovo the vote is more an act of internal politics and a provocation rather than a true attempt to retain Kosovo within Serbia."

Analysts contend that the vote will just harden the stands of the opposing communities.

"The referendum will make it difficult for Belgrade to recognize any change in Kosovo's status," said Daniel Serwer, an expert on peace and security operations at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

"This is what Kostunica wants: Belgrade locked into a position of seeking recovery of territory. This could be a source of instability for many years to come," he said.

http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/ap/2006/10/27/europe/EU_GEN_Kosovo_Constitution.php






Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


U.S. Ambassador Answers Questions on Serbia

U.S. Ambassador Answers Questions on Serbia



U.S. Ambassador Answers Questions on Serbia

USINFO Webchat transcript, October 27

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of International Information Programs
USINFO Webchat Transcript

“Ask the Ambassador” with Ambassador to the Republic of Serbia Michael C. Polt

Guest:     Michael C. Polt
Date:      October 27, 2006
Time:      9:00am EDT (1300 GMT)

WEBCHAT MODERATOR: Join Ambassador Michael C. Polt at 1300 GMT (1500 CET) on October 27 to discuss global issues of concern to Serbs and Americans.

WEBCHAT MODERATOR: We'll be getting started very shortly. Thanks for coming today.

QUESTION [vpekic]: Dear Mr. Ambassador,

1. What have been your personal emotions/views regarding the Montenegrin independence process and the re-birth of this new nation in Europe after 88 years during your mandate in Belgrade?

2. What has surprised you most about Serbia and does it still surprise you?

ANSWER [Ambassador Michael Polt]

1. The most important element of the Montenegrin referendum was the free, democratic, and peaceful expression of the will of the people. Montenegrin independence is the only such peaceful result as a consequence of the break-up of Yugoslavia.

2. The resilience of the Serbian people and the worldliness and intelligence of the Serbian young people despite their relative isolation.

Q [Tony]: Where does Serbia need the most work? What kind of investment is the USA providing them?

A: In your economy, of course, to create more and better jobs for all. We are investing in virtually all sectors of your economy, from manufacturing to services. But you also need a new approach to the future. You can honor the past, but make for a better future.

Q [Tony]: When would you guess that Serbia would get into EU? NATO?

A: As soon as you are ready. Your future development is in your hands, not outsiders, as so many seem to believe. Of course, both NATO and the EU have membership criteria. I know you can meet all of them if you choose to.

Q [Guest]: Do you think it's still possible to reach Kosovo future status agreement by the end of this year?

A: Yes. Neither Serbians nor Albanians nor any other group, in any part of Serbia, including Kosovo, are helped by any further delay. Once a resolution is reached, all of the people of this country and this region can get on with building a brighter future.

Q [Guest]: Postovani Mr. Michael C.Polt,

Ja sam decko sa Kosova i Metohije, iz grada Prizrena i zelim znati da li postoji sansa da se vratim na Kosovo...

A: I really believe there is and my country is doing all it can to help create the right conditions for all who wish to live and work in any part of Kosovo can do so. In the end result, much will depend on the good will of all who live there. These people of good will do exist.

Q [Guest]: Postovani gospodine Polt,

Da li ce Amerika moci nesto da nauci iz situacije na Balkanu i u Srbiji, ili cemo uvek mi dobijati lekcije od Zapada?

A: Americans are always learning and we know that we don't have all the answers. All we can do is try and do our best. It is not our intention or in our interest to lecture. But at the same time, we are not willing to accept things that are not right, just because some argue that it has always been that way. The world -- our world -- can be a better place.

Q [Guest]: Dear Mr. Michael C. Polt, Is Manhattan the best and the prettiest city in the world?

Sincerely, Draga Duric

A: The people of Manhattan think so. They may be right. But then I like Tennessee...

 

Q [Guest]: Dear Michael C. Polt. Will the US Embassy start to give easier visas to students that were already accepted in some high school, college or university?

Sincerely, Anjelka Blagojevic

A: We want as many students from Serbia as possible to come and study in the U.S. I can promise you that we will work with all prospective students to make our visa process as easy as possible. I can also promise that we will always treat you with the utmost courtesy and respect when you come to our Embassy.

Q [Book Fair]:

INSPARED BY THE TODAY'S VERY HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR THE END OF OCTOBER, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. AMBASSADOR IF USA GOVERMENT IS GOING TO SIGN FOR THE KIOTO PROTOCOL, AND TO FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. NIKOLA NIKACEVIC, UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE

A: The United States of America shares the concerns of our globe on all issues, including on global warming. We have proposed many ways to deal with the potential threats of global warming and will work hard with all other nations interested in the most effective way to deal with this issue.

Q [Guest]: How does the independence of Montenegro affect the possibility of independence for Kosovo?

A: Kosovo is an issue on to itself. Under a United Nations mandate, the international community is dedicated to finding a solution to the real life concerns of the people of Kosovo. We are counting on support for that in Belgrade as well as in Pristina.

Q [Guest]: Dear Mr. Michael C. Polt,

My daughter has pictures of US presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan.

My question is, is there any way possible to get picture of George W. Bush? Can Mr. Bush put his signature on a picture, because those presidents put his autograph on their pictures?

Thank you,

Dragan Lazovic

P.S. If you are able to send the picture please send it on:
[Personal information has been removed to protect individual’s privacy.]

A: I will be glad to send your daughter a picture of the President. Look for it in the mail soon.

Q [Guest]: What is the best book you have ever read?

A: It is too hard for me to choose among all the books I have read to say which is the best. I can tell you that one of the ones I read some years ago that impressed me deeply was "The Hope" by Herman Wouk, a novel about the struggle of the first decades of the State of Israel.

Q [dvj]: Dear Sir, David Vujanovic here from AFP...

Do you think the proposed new Serbian constitution would be a positive step for the country, or do you think that it could complicate issues in the region?

Thanks

A: The real answer to that can really only be given by the Serbian citizens. If passed, it will be their constitution. A document that is viewed by Serbia as a way to identify itself as a democratic, open-minded, confident, forward looking and diverse country would be a good thing.

WEBCHAT MODERATOR: We would like to thank Ambassador Polt for all of his time today as well as all of the wonderful participants in Serbia.

You will be able to find the transcript of this chat later today at our Webchat Station http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Products/Webchats.html.

Thank you


Created:27 Oct 2006 Updated: 27 Oct 2006



U.S. Ambassador Answers Questions on Serbia http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Archive/2006/Oct/27-158475.html




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


Kosovo falls hostage to big power rivalry

Kosovo falls hostage to big power rivalry



Kosovo falls hostage to big power rivalry

By Guy Dinmore in Washington

Published: October 27 2006 18:44 | Last updated: October 27 2006 18:44

The US has sent a special envoy to Kosovo and Serbia to press both sides to keep the peace as the international community prepares to decide the status of the United Nations-run province.

Diplomats and politicians on all sides expect a messy and inconclusive outcome, and fear further ethnic ­violence in Kosovo with peacekeepers from Nato caught in the middle.

Few believe that Martti Ahtisaari, the former Finnish president acting as UN mediator, can broker a compromise. This weekend Serbian voters are likely to approve by referendum a new constitution reaffirming Kosovo as part of Serbia, while the province’s ethnic Albanian majority overwhelmingly aspires to, and expects, full independence.

The fate of Kosovo – run by the UN and protected by Nato since the 1999 air campaign stopped ethnic cleansing by Serbia – is also hostage to the deteriorating state of relations between the US and Russia. These are complicated by rising tensions in the southern Caucasus and competing interests over Iran and energy resources.

As Russia reasserts itself on the world stage, the US and Europe are wondering what price President Vladimir Putin will exact at the UN Security Council in exchange for consenting to Kosovo’s independence, or whether he will simply block the process completely.

Mr Putin warns that independence for Kosovo would set a precedent for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the Russian-backed, separatist enclaves in Georgia. The US insists Kosovo is a “unique” case, thereby also seeking to assuage Chinese concerns over Taiwan and Tibet.

Diplomats expect Mr Ahtisaari will recommend a form of “managed” or “conditional” independence that falls short of full sovereignty, keeping Kosovo under international protection and guidance, possibly for three years.

Should Russia deprive Kosovo of the UN’s blessing for a path to independence, then the Kosovo Albanian government under Agim Ceku, prime minister, may be encouraged by the US to consider making a unilateral declaration of independence.

This heightens the risk that the Serb minority in Kosovo, mostly concentrated in Nato-protected enclaves, would follow suit and declare their own independence or allegiance to ­Belgrade.

Frank Wisner, the special US envoy, is expected to urge Belgrade to prevent any such breakaway move. Diplomats say his mission is to tell ­Kosovo and Serbia that they must accept Mr Ahtisaari’s “compromise imposed solution”.

Dimitri Simes, head of the Nixon Center think-tank which has close contact with Moscow, says Russia’s position on Kosovo is hardening but it may not have decided how it will vote at the UN.

“That depends on the overall status of the US-Russia relationship, the results of World Trade Organisation negotiations and the forthcoming meetings in November between Presidents Bush and Putin, first in Moscow and then in Hanoi,” he said.

But he warned that it might be difficult for Mr Putin to back down over Kosovo.

“The Russian leadership, including President Putin personally, is making it increasingly clear to the Bush administration that Georgia is becoming a defining issue in the US-Russia relationship the way Iran and North Korea are on the American side.”

Glen Howard, president of the Jamestown Foundation security think-tank, said Mr Putin had “let the genie out of the bottle with nationalism” and warned of the dangers posed by a Russia seeking to regain its Soviet-era domination of the Caucasus and its strategic oil and gas pipelines.

Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, kept making concessions only for Russia to keep “upping the ante”, Mr Howard said.

It was possible the Bush administration would seek to delay Kosovo’s bid for independence and Georgia’s bid for Nato membership to keep Russia on board over Iran and North Korea, he added.

Speaking of the deadlock facing Mr Ahtisaari, one Kosovo Albanian politician commented: “We are waiting for the real talks to begin – between the US and Russia.”




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


EU Stance on Kosovo Could Backfire With Serbia, Say Analysts

EU Stance on Kosovo Could Backfire With Serbia, Say Analysts 



 
 
Posted 10/27/06 13:01
 
Print this story
 
EU Stance on Kosovo Could Backfire With Serbia, Say Analysts

 


Serbia’s new soon-to-be-adopted constitution remains fixated on Kosovo “as an integral part” of its territory, showing high political tension and a deep public malaise in the country, say experts.
The international community’s goal of finalizing an independence timetable for Kosovo ahead of Serbia’s parliamentary elections in December could backfire by tempting hardline nationalist leaders in Belgrade to stoke up ethnic tensions in the ever-volatile Balkan region, according to security analysts and European Union (EU) officials.
“Serbia is in no position to make war, but it could stir up trouble across the region if it wants to — in the Republic of Srpska [the ethnic Serbian component of the tri-state Bosnia-Herzegovina federation], in Kosovo and in Macedonia and Montenegro,” Judy Batt, research fellow on Balkan issues at the EU Institute of Security Studies, Paris, told an Oct. 18 conference here on Serbia’s democratic future.
Milan Pajevic agreed. His reformist liberal party, G17 Plus, is a junior member of Serbia’s coalition government and is threatening to withdraw from it over constitutional issues.
“There has been no clear and resolute break with our past. Some of the biggest profiteers and rabble rousers from the [Slobodan] Milosevic era have been absorbed into our current economic and political structures,” said Pajevic, referring to the late Serbian strongman who was indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for war crimes during the 1991-1995 Balkan conflicts.
Serbia will hold a popular referendum Oct. 28-29 on the new constitution and its controversial reference to Kosovo. As for Serbia’s dialogue with Kosovo leaders in U.N.-sponsored negotiations to orchestrate the province’s independence, Belgrade has refused to yield an inch of ground. “Those talks have gone nowhere since they were launched in February,” Batt said.
The question now remains whether the Kosovo issue will play into Serbia’s parliamentary election in December, for which an exact date is still unknown.
Despite the international community’s mounting frustration with Belgrade’s intransigence, Batt advised against any premature move by the six-nation Contact Group. The group — comprising Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and the United States — is responsible for organizing Kosovo’s political detachment from Serbia.
“The Contact Group wants to end these talks by the end of this year, with recommendations delivered to the U.N.,” said Batt. “This would fall right in the middle of Serbia’s election. I don’t think that would be a good thing. It would be better to delay the release of those recommendations [until after the election].”
Pajevic warned that “what we now have [in the attitude of Serbia’s leadership toward Kosovo] is a direct result of Milosevic’s deranged politics of the 1990s.”
“It will be very bad if that leadership exploits [the loss of] Kosovo to distort our relationship with the European Union.”
Whether Serbia uses its December election to rise above its past is, indeed, an open question. The country’s prospects for closer ties to the European Union have been frozen by the latter since May, due to Belgrade’s failure to deliver the last of its war criminals to the ICTY, such as the notorious former warlord Ratko Mladic.
“The status quo of Kosovo is intolerable for everyone — including Serbia — but we want the Serbian people to look to their European future rather than dwelling on their past,” said Heather Grabbe, an adviser to Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for enlargement policy. “But this means dealing with the ICTY and [the forthcoming loss of] Kosovo.”
All three speakers said defense reform would help Serbia achieve the democratic legitimacy and transparency it lacks today.
“Serbia does not have a proper rule of law or democratic control of its military. Why is it Belgrade cannot achieve full cooperation with the ICTY? Because it is linked to these two very real problems,” said Grabbe.
NATO could have had a role there but, like the EU, it excluded Serbia from joining its Partnership for Peace (PfP) program until the country resolves its ICTY problems. In Pajevic’s view, that was a mistake.
“It would be much better to have Serbia as a PfP member. Then it could work hand-in-hand with NATO allies to shape Serbia’s military forces and use them to find Mladic and other war criminals,” he said.
Batt seconded that view, arguing that Serbia’s PfP eligibility “should not have been linked to the ICTY—precisely because PfP addresses security and defense reform issues.”

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2307506&C=europe


Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)


Serbia and the Referendum on the new Constitution - Public opinion polling






Serbia and the Referendum on the new Constitution - Public opinion polling




Serbia and the Referendum on the new Constitution - Public opinion polling

The referendum on the adoption of the new Serbian constitution will be held on 28 and 29 October 2006. There are in total 6,639,385 voters who will have the right to vote at the referendum.

The wording of the new constitution which was approved by the Serbian National Assembly on 30 September 2006 differs in many aspects from the Milošević's 1990 constitution which is presently still in force.

The current constitution was adopted in the former Yugoslavia (SFRY) when Serbia was one of its federal units, while the draft new constitution points to the need to define formally and legally the statehood of the Republic of Serbia and to finally deal away with the remnants of Milošević's regime.

For quite some time this was generally understood as the main reason for the political consensus regarding the adoption of the new constitution. However, the referendum campaign is marked by the pre-election race for winning political points in view of the parliamentary and presidential elections which are to follow soon should the new constitution be adopted. For a positive result of the referendum 50% plus one vote of the total voting body is required.

When a few months ago the State Union Serbia and Montenegro was "buried", Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica and his DSS (Democratic Party of Serbia) had to find a way out of the crisis into which they fell after they advocated the common state union with Montenegro. Koštunica's government was facing a collapse especially after the G17 plus ministers threatened to leave the government by 1 October unless the talks with the EU continue until 1 October.

Since constitution is Koštunica's "boy's dream" as the boss of the governing coalition he managed quite quickly to achieve a consensus which he wanted to capitalise on and present to the voters as his own political success. The opposition parties were ready to co-operate solely for own party interest in the early parliamentary elections.

However, the marginal, non-parliamentary parties – LDP (Liberal Democratic Party), LSDV (League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina), GSS (Civil Alliance of Serbia) and SDU (Social Democratic Union) – are openly calling for a boycott of the referendum under the slogan "YES to citizen constitution, No to party constitution".

There are some justified reasons for opposing the new constitution, for example the absence of a public debate on the draft constitution which is the usual practice in the west European states, since the aim of the public debate is, among other, to define the problematic issues and find ideas on how to correct or amend them.

The IFIMES International Institute is of the opinion that minor political parliamentary and non-parliamentary parties in Serbia will not be able to influence the results of the referendum since the present Serbian authorities have already prepared the scenario according to which the referendum will be pronounced as successful regardless of what will the citizens are going to express or the opposition of minor political parties.

http://www.balkanpeace.org/index.php?index=article&articleid=14059




Brought to you by Attensa for Outlook (download it here)