European Tribune

Europe's Kosovo mistakes

by euamerican
Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 06:08:15 AM EST

EUobserver article: [Comment] We shall all pay for Kosovo's independence

First of all, let me put a couple of things out front here. There should first be some outrage at the way the Serbian people and the Serbian government are portrayed in Western media. Publications, including the EUobserver, but also the BBC and others, appear to have the tendency to paint "Serbs" as antisocial, criminal throwbacks. The Serbian government is being portrayed as irresponsible and that the inability to control vandalizing mobs is somehow the direct fault of the Serbian government. Second, the "Americans" in Europe's national capitals need to drop their anti-Serb bias and this most especially includes Germany's defense chief Franz Josef Jung's and his irresponsible call to send more troops to "protect Kosovo." The anti-Serb bias and casting the pro-Europe, Serbian government in the image of "Milosevic" could be big part of the problem in the current crisis.

Diary rescue by Migeru


[editor's note, by Migeru] Fold inserted here.
The recognition of the "republic of Kosovo" may, in the end, create numerous costs and burdens to the European Union than if the status quo would have remained until the region was ready to join the Union:

"...encouraging Kosovo down the independence path has split the EU, damagingly, between those countries that recognise Kosovo and those that do not. It has also opened a chasm in relations between a majority of states and Serbia, and a minority and Kosovo. To claim that the EU is united in its approach to Kosovo is blatantly untrue.


The apologists claim that Kosovo was a unique case. That its previous sufferings and its UN Protectorate status made it different. But every case is unique when it comes to that. I have still to hear a convincing reason why the status quo could not have been maintained until such time as the whole region joined the European Union."

Since the Kosovo mistake will be costing the European Union for sometime to come, Serbia should become a special project for the European Union. The Union should be moving to repair the damage that this US-led "independence declaration" has caused in Europe. There should be noticeable Union gestures toward the Serbian government in support and not just waiting until "things calm down." What the Romanian government has done in its advocacy of the pro-Europe government of President Tadic is a step in the right direction.

The main order of business should be the dropping of the war criminal obsession and the European Union entering into Stabilization and Association Agreement with Serbia. If the SAA were entered into today, it could have an immediate effect on the situation in Serbia in favor of the pro-Europe government.

The next order of business should be the opening of the border between Serbia and Kosovo and visa-free travel. This would also require the beefing up of police security that does not (forget what Germany suggests) have a bias against any community.

What lead to this mistake was the misreading of the factor murderous nationalism plays in Serbian politics and the importance the Holyland of Kosovo holds for Serbian identity. The current actions and inactions of the Union are only empowering the nationalists and pushing Serbia back to its dark past. Europe must bring Serbia out of the darkness and the European Union and supportive governments should do this task. Last, but important of all, the ghost of Milosevic must be exorcised from Europe's relations with Serbia.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
Since the Kosovo mistake will be costing the European Union for sometime to come, Serbia should become a special project for the European Union.
And cost it will too! Wonder how on earth the UK is gonna help foot the bill for the Kosovo "mistake?"...

UK government reveals financial costs of Iraq and Afghanistan

Official UK government figures released on 19 February show that the cost of fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is expected to reach GBP3.37 billion (USD6.61 billion) for Fiscal Year (FY07); an increase of GBP1.57 billion on 2006. According to the UK Ministry of Defence's (MoD's) Spring Supplementary Estimate, the department is asking the Treasury for an additional GBP1.37 billion war funding to pay for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through to the end of March 2008 Janes Defence News

by The3rdColumn on Fri Feb 22nd, 2008 at 02:13:55 PM EST
"And cost it will too! Wonder how on earth the UK is gonna help foot the bill for the Kosovo "mistake?"..."

Well, you know the feeling is that those nations that gave "recognition" to the "republic of kosovo" should be the ones to shoulder the costs. This is not just about costs. It's also about what Europe claims as "its values." Did you read the EUobserver article? The status quo with Kosovo whould have been much cheaper if you are concerned about euros and eurocents.

by euamerican on Fri Feb 22nd, 2008 at 06:14:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
but I vehemently disagree with this:


The main order of business should be the dropping of the war criminal obsession and the European Union entering into Stabilization and Association Agreement with Serbia.

Giving up on trying to bring the war criminals to task would make a mockery of what the EU stands for. Granted, we now have additional workk at home, so to speak, but we'll never bring Blair to the ICC if we don't even stand firm on the Serbian - and other former Yugoslav - war criminals.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (jeromeguillet@yahoo.fr) on Fri Feb 22nd, 2008 at 03:45:52 PM EST
Agreed, plus if we stop going after the Balkan war criminals, the potential exists for them to worm their way into current governments. Not to mention all the Nazis who get deported from countries would then have a claim to avoid deportation and possible trial.

"You can't be a successful crook with a dishonest face, now, can you?" -The Fourth Doctor
by lychee (lychee9393 A yahoo D com) on Fri Feb 22nd, 2008 at 03:50:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I really don't see how people indicted by the ICTY could "worm their way" into governments. Some might be getting protection from local police that are believe they are "heroes."

That's why opening up Serbia and Croatia to further European integration is important to finding war criminals. This would include the prospect of police and intelligence cooperation with Balkans' nations and European structures.

At one time, Serbia asked for help in locating war criminals from the Germany...so why should such cooperation be cut off?

by euamerican on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 11:34:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The integration of Serbia, and Croatia and other Balkans' nations that might hide indicted war criminals is vastly more important now. True about the Union's values, strongly agreed, but the opening of borders can mean less places for wanted criminals to hide. We can and will catch these bad guys once the places they hide are exposed to the light of day.

I can't speak for the other Balkans' governments, but Serbia has done all it reasonably can to cooperate on this issue. The whole region cannot be punished after progress for want of a couple of criminals. I believe that Serbia once asked for outside help in catching the war criminals, including the German services.

The nationalism in Serbia waxes and wane according to the progress being demonstrated toward European integration. The demands for inductees just empowers the Milosevic throwbacks - and they are still a factor is Serbian politics, as we see in the current crisis...

Also, the European project should not be ground to a halt but needs to make compromises, some rather painful.

by euamerican on Fri Feb 22nd, 2008 at 05:59:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I can't speak for the other Balkans' governments, but Serbia has done all it reasonably can to cooperate on this issue

Really ? Ratko Mladic remains at large despite apprently being a regular visitor to his mother's grave in Belgrade. Photos of him would appear in the western press now and again to highlight the foot-dragging of the serbians on this subject.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 11:47:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have to agree: entering into a Stabilization and Association Agreement should not be contingent on the rendition of war criminals, but on the other hand the EU should not drop its efforts to bring all alleged war criminals to justice. It is quite likely that entering into a more constructive relation with Serbia would improve the chances of apprehending the criminals still at large.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 06:11:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Now, if the big guys in the EU would decide to move their sweet little American asses to integrate Serbia in to Europe as fast as they shoved an 'independent Kosova' down everyone else's throat at the behest of a slick coterie in Washington headed by one George Bush (including a Clinton contingent), the world would become a wondrous place. Kosovo is now an EU protectorate. The EU has assimilated a good slice of drugs and gangsterism. Good joke: the Kosovars have got the euro even before Bulgalrians and Romanians. Not only have I not seen why the former status quo could not be maintained in Kosovo, I have not heard whose interests are being served by this move---apart from the Greater Albanians. May the EU finally put its money where it's mouth is and go out of its way now to encourage the positive forces in Belgrade.

P.S. Tony Blair before the ICC? Now I've heard everything.

by Quentin on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:25:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Quentin:
Not only have I not seen why the former status quo could not be maintained in Kosovo, I have not heard whose interests are being served by this move---apart from the Greater Albanians.
The question is how Kosovo's independence serves American interests. I have a theory that it is easiest to run CIA operations from a failed state - no rule of law or public outcries to worry about.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:28:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In telegraph style, the basic US interests include: divide and rule tactics, military bases, indebted client states, as much real estate as possible as close to the Middle East as possible. The US will never let Kosovo forget that it can never repay the debt it owes it. The next major question: how is the EU going to decide on its own about Turkey's final relation to the EU? There's little sense in mystifying the CIA: it is, after all, a branch of the US government, despite the widely held romantic image of it as a rogue element within the government. The CIA tortures, practices extraordinary rendition, sets up black sites and does all the rest with the consent and cooperation of the rest of the US government: the CIA is the US.
by Quentin on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:50:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
with riling the Russians - probably just to keep another issue boiling between, say, Russian and Germany.

Then there's Bondsteel with 50 (?) Blackhawk helicopters - among other things.

paul spencer

by paul spencer (spencerinthegorge AT yahoo DOT com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 11:28:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Those who understand Danish may find this take on the Kosova situation interesting. It certainly dovetails nicely with much of the speculation here on ET.

I may do a translation of it if there is major popular demand.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 08:06:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
How about a rough outline, so we can then clamour for a translation.

Life should consist in at least fifty percent pure waste of time, and the rest doing what you please.
by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 12:15:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
They interview a guy from a - well, not a think tank exactly, but something like it. A guy who's been following the disintegration of Yugoslavia. From what I recall off the top of my head, he makes the following points, among others:

  1. There used to be a moderate Kosovan leadership. But The West(TM) sabotaged said leadership so comprehensively that it's hard to believe that it wasn't deliberate.

  2. There used to be negotiations about a peaceful secession of Kosova, and/or a high degree of home rule. Belgrade used to be fairly receptive to the notion of an independent Kosova (at least as receptive as any state being asked to surrender territory can reasonably be expected to be), because they wanted a peaceful solution. Then NATO started bombing, and everything went to Hell.

  3. The bombing of Serbia in the late 90s - without UNSC backing - served as precedent for the invasion of Vietraq (I'm not sure I buy that point, though - I don't think Cheney needed a precedent).

  4. While it is undisputed (at least in the reality-based community) that Milosevic was a criminal and authoritarian ruler, it is simply wrong to paint him as a nationalist - his project was to hold the Yugoslav union together, which is exactly the opposite.

  5. Related to pt. 4), Western media are crap. If you want to know the real history, fire up your internet connection, because the traditional, Western media don't put a lot of stock in that research thing you hear so much about.

  6. Related to pt. 5), Western media like to portray the KLA as white knights in shiny armour that came out of nowhere in the late 90s as a natural response to Serbian repression. That is bullshit; the KLA has in fact existed for a long time, they were part of the extremist fraction that the US supported against the moderate Kosovars, and by the late 90s they had already fought out several serious wars in the region. They were, according to him, rabid nationalists and they really don't care all that much about human rights either.

  7. Unilaterally recognising Kosova is stupid and high-handed and is going to come back to bite us on the ass in a number of different ways.

  8. Claiming that Kosova is a unique case due to the brutality against the Kosovars is bullshit. The atrocities in former Yugoslavia - bad as they were - are small potatoes compared to what's going on in other parts of the world. So if brutality against Kosovars justify unilateral secession... well, then you could justify almost any secessionist claim. There are about two hundred states in the world... And about 2000 nationalities. You do the math.

  9. The high-minded talk from the US about human rights and war crimes is bullshit. They supported Kosovo-Albanian extremists over the Kosovo-Albanian moderates when there was a chance for peace. They supported and armed the KLA, despite the fact that the KLA really doesn't have all that shiny a human rights record. They then smashed the chance for peace by trying to bomb Serbia back to the stone age.

  10. The US interest in the region is to create a client state that won't make noises about Camp Bondsteel. Thinking that their interest is about anything else is naïve to the point of hilarity.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam
by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:32:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
#8 is scary. It means the world is run by those with guns, and if you're not friends with the big boys, you better make allies fast. It's kind of like being in prison. The Serbs chose the Russians, and look where that got them.

# 5, During the war there were plenty of places you could go for balanced reporting even in the West. Der Spiegel had some fantastic reports from Kosovo, as does some French news stations. The Greek papers were all over it. Robert Fisk in the UK, Scheer writing fo the LA Times, and ever Steven Erlanger for the NY Times (though he later went on to head the Arts section, and he proceeded to get rid of fiction reviews). The decent reports were few and far between however. Even back then there were the Linda Millers of the world, Carlotta Gall and Georgie Geyer. My best source of news during the 90s was the listserv of a rather even-keeled monk in Kosovo who disseminated news accounts from both Albanian and Serbian sources. What a hoot. I realized quickly on that their propaganda methods were very, um, unsubtle, made worse by very poor translations.

#10, It goes beyond a simply base in Kosovo. It has lots to do with transporting resources from the Caspian through Turkey. Gas especially needs to be piped out to the Adriatic. Every time you cross through national territory, you have to pay the tollkeeper.

#4, We are all run by criminals. I would say Bush pretty much proved that he's very willing to kill for his strategic objectives. How many had Milosevic killed prior to the ethnic tensions in the early 90s? Criminal? As criminal as our guys. A murderer? Genocidal lunatic? Yes. In sheer numbers however, he's responsible for a lot less than those killed elsewhere under our agency. Milosevics are made, not born. Well, maybe part of them is born.

by Upstate NY on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 08:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: #5: Well, while some Greek papers did a reasonably good job, the whole tone and tenor erred in the other direction, portraying Serbs as the innocent victims and hosting such eminent serb luminaries as Arkan (whose knowledge of passable Greek was the result of an extended stay in a Greek jail in Salonika during the 1980s (or the 1970s I'm not sure any more). In other words  Greek nationalist wingnuts created an alliance with Serb nationalist wingnuts - portrayed as our "Orthodox borthers" who were victimized by the evil west / New World Order / Freemasonry / the Pope / the Islamic Arc Led By Turkey etc. So balanced is not a word I would use for the overall coverage.

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake
by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 06:28:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Right. I just meant getting the other point of view. I'm of the firm belief that the best information comes from between the lines espoused by the most ardent supporters.

If I saw, "Kosovo should be independent. In no way should it serve as a precedent for other countries because..." then what I am really saying is, "Holy shit, this is going to serve as a precedent for other countries!!!"

That's why I love propaganda. Liars always acknowledge the truth because they don't have enough of an imagination to kill it. For them, the opposite of the truth is good enough.

And speaking of Kosovo precedents, the fun has already begun: http://en.rian.ru/world/20080228/100260773.html

Georgian nationalists, eh? This has all the hallmarks of a breadline massacre.
 

by Upstate NY on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 10:37:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's quite true that part of the problem is the "Serbian argument" revolves around events of 1389 and historical narratives. There is also the notion of victimhood as part of national identity, by the Turks, Nazis, NATO and now the European Union. Also, there are the conspiracy theories that are part of some Serbs notion of national victimhood.

A "European perspective" must now compete with the above...

by euamerican on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 11:41:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A few nitpicks:

#1: True but so did Milosevic
#2: Belgrade was never receptive to the idea of an independent Kosova (a few Serbs were receptive to an independent partitioned Kosova, but they were few and the partition suggested was well beyond the Mitrovica area). It could be said however that the reassertion of Kosovar autonomy was always in the cards. Indeed had the Albanian Kosovars voted in the 1992 elections for Panic rather than abstain, it is quite possible that autonomy would have been offered. Instead they chose to abstain. [.See here - 1992, Oct 15, and Dec. 20]
#4 It is indeed wrong to paint Milosevic as a nationalist, but not because he gave a damn about the Yugoslav project but because he was looking out for himself only (I've blogged about this here and here). And he was indeed an authoritarian strong-man guilty of many crimes, but he used (and also abused of course) the existing democratic and federal structures to do so. Were he to lose (big) electorally, or be betrayed by some of his allies, he would have fallen.
#6: the KLA...fought out several serious wars in the region Eh? outside of Kosovo? As the UCK/KLA? Where? That they had little to do with human rights is undisputable, that they were financed by drug money also - but none of that is too far beyond par for National Liberation movements. However they are rabid nationalists and their appetite hasn't been sated.
#10: The US interest in the region is to create a client state that won't make noises about Camp Bondsteel
Now that, I/m not sure I buy, firstly because preserving Kosovo in legal limbo and/or pressing the Albanians to concede Mitrovica at least, could have done the job just as nicely. And second because there are many states and statelets in the area that would jump at the chance of hosting a new Bondsteel. And building the whole thing over would mean extra $$$$ for KBR and Cheney's other friends.

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake

by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 09:21:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. I'm sure the analyst being interviewed drew the lines a bit sharp to get his point across.

  2. I don't recall exactly what he said on that point. I'd have to go back to the interview itself.

  3. I'm not entirely convinced of that point either.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam
by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 10:03:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
talos:
Now that, I/m not sure I buy, firstly because preserving Kosovo in legal limbo and/or pressing the Albanians to concede Mitrovica at least, could have done the job just as nicely.

Of course it could have. But this outcome was the most humiliating for Serbia and Russia. Also it further damages international law.
And humiliating possible rivals as well as flaunting its ability to break all rules at will is really what the Bush administration is all about.

The plural of anecdote is bullshit.

by generic on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 10:22:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru, That was supposed to be a 4!
by Quentin on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 12:12:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hmm, I see I got 7 scores... If 6 people give me a 3 I'll get a Pi rating.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 06:46:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I had to figure that out with my calculator. Yes. Next time Pi. It took me a while to understand the comment.
by Quentin on Mon Mar 3rd, 2008 at 07:08:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I would actually suggest they go even much further than that.

i.e. Don't arrest some of the war criminals, arrest all of them. All the Serbs who committed war crimes in Bosnia and Kosovo, all the Croats too. In fact, Agim Ceku committed a massive war crime at Operation Storm. As well as some others.

Carla del Ponte's hands have been tied at the court. If you look up the name Ramush Haradinaj, you'll find that people inside the uN went out of their way to sabotage del Ponte's investigation. In other words, the ICTY plays favorites which isn't a good thing for putting war criminals in the dock or for international justice.

by Upstate NY on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 08:37:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In other words, the ICTY plays favorites which isn't a good thing for putting war criminals in the dock or for international justice.

Yes indeed, and besides the name Haradinaj (a man blessed with immense luck), one should also check out a man called Nasser Oric, who, for the "Reign of Terror" described here, was sentenced to two whole years in jail.

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake

by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 09:45:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I missed your fine diary on Harudinaj.

I was appalled by the fight del Ponte had to put up for him.

Here is the background:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/08/news/kosovo.php

When you couple this with Agim Ceku's acts, it's really hard to convince the Serbs of anything.

This is enough really to show how NATO, the US and a majority of the EU is complicit in all of this.

I'll never forget Bernard Kouchner's words when he ran Kosovo and he made allowance for the anger of Albanians who were killing Serbs on retreat. Granted, anyone may have made those allowances in private. It was understood. But for a politician to speak them openly is to countenance and even encourage. If you compare the portrayal of "angry" Albanians to that of angry Serbs setting the US consulate alight, you very well might suspect that people are less valuable than curtains.

by Upstate NY on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 11:12:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And Kouchner is now the Foreign Minister of France. Just like Javier Solana was the NATO civilian chief in 1999 and after that he moved to "Mr. CFSP".

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 06:43:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Question: Was (West) Germany's rehabilitation held up and was it kept out of NATO and other structures because many Nazi war criminals were on the run?!

NO!

The Nazis behind the Holocaust were hunted down as they  scattered to the four corners of the Earth. There was no talk about keeping (West) Germany from Euro-Atlantic integration because notorious Nazis criminals were not located.

See:
In South America, a 'Last Chance' to Hunt Down Nazi War Criminals
Hunt for Nazi war criminal focuses on Spain

Granted, it is fair to point out that one of the purposes of integrating West Germany into NATO had to do with addressing the Soviet threat. However, the European project and stability of the region is vastly more important that a few wanted bad guys.

Now I never wrote that the charges should be dropped and the search for any of the indictees stopped. A nation may also prosecute its own for war crimes. What should be the standard for all the nations with indictees on the run are good faith efforts to search and find indictees, and cooperate with the ICTY. Good faith efforts does not imply that the charges against the wanted criminals be dropped and horrible crime excused.

See:
Del Ponte Praises Serbia's Cooperation With Tribunal

by euamerican on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:16:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Here is where the USA's reasoning breaks down on Kosovo's unique independence. This is one of the USA mediators, Wisner:

Frank Wisner, the US diplomat who worked nine months with envoys from Moscow and Brussels trying in vain to bring Kosovo's Albanians and Serbia together, said Kosovo's declaration of independence, on February 17 closes the matter. Wisner says he is mystified as to why Russia remains so opposed to Kosovo's independence. He rejects the suggestion that Kosovo sets a precedent.

"Kosovo resulted from a particularly ghastly event of ethnic cleansing, of repression and killing," said Wisner. "It resulted from a NATO intervention. The problem resulted from the agreement of the Security Council to bring resolution 1244."

Wisner also rejects the assertion that Washington and Brussels have violated international law. After nine years of waiting, he said, it was time to choose. The options were either returning Kosovo to Serbian rule, continuing the UN administration, or independence. The latter choice, he argues, was the only viable choice, one that not only closes the matter but promotes stability in the Balkans and in Europe.

By emphasizing constantly Kosovo's uniqueness, Wisner and his like actually raise up the province into a great example.

For those that know our history, Kosovo did not "result" from ethnic cleansing and killing. He is right that it resulted from NATO intervention. Then he says it resulted from UN res. 1244. He should read it someday if he thinks that.

Kosovo happened as a result of a Serbian brutal counter-insurgency crackdown on armed KLA guerrillas. It also happened because the Serbs had stripped the Kosovo Albanians of autonomy since the early 1990s. Those two factors lit the flames.

Now, you compare those facts to what's happening elsewhere in the world, and you see how similar Kosovo is. Oppression elsewhere? Yes. Counter-insurgency crackdown? Yes.

You don't even have to look very far.

by Upstate NY on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 08:44:32 AM EST
The anti-Serb bias and casting the pro-Europe, Serbian government in the image of "Milosevic" could be big part of the problem in the current crisis.

Lemme see now ;-

Nikolic, current stand-in leader of the radical party, was Milosevic's deputy. He is standing in for indicted war criminal Vojislav Seselj. He himself is suspected by the Humanitarian Law Centre of having participated in criminal actions during the war in Croatia.

The acting orthodox patriarch who officiated the religious service on February 21 (the "peaceful one")is Bishop Amfilohije, an outspoken supporter of Milosevic who once praised Karadzic for his defiance of the Dayton accord.

A rumour in Belgrade attributes the fiery but lyrical speech delivered by Kostunica to the poet Matija Beckovic. It could easily be true. Another enthusiastic supporter of Milosevic, Beckovic wrote in a 1987 poem, "where to walk away with the Visoki Decani? Where to Shift the Pec Monastery?" and last Thursday Kostunica cried out, "Never will anyone hear from us that the Patriarchate of Pec does not belong to us, that Visoki Decani and Gracanica are not ours!"

As to Kosovo being part of Serbia : I have noted elsewhere that I have read three essays on Kosovo's relationships with its neighbours and all significantly disagree. Serbians may be emotionally attached to Serbia, but it is unlikely that this feeling has ever been reciprocated. The historical precedents seem much more open to political interpretation than is desireable in such circumstances as these.

Still, your point is that the US-sponsored partition is a problem for Europe. That is significantly understating the case, but what alternatives were there ? Nationalist fuckwits on both sides have been shit-stirring for the best part of two decades and thousands of people have already died as a consequence. Instead of damping down the rhetoric after a peace-of-sorts was established, they had to keep on because their own base demanded it. The bully-boys in Mitrovica had to keep pissing on the other side of the bridge.

This situation was going to happen sooner or later, simply because the idiots on both side demanded it to further their self-interests. Now we're here. And they're blaming the EU for it and demanding NATO keep them from each other's throats.

God save us from children with kalashnikovs. Find a grown-up and then we'll talk.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 12:03:33 PM EST
I disagree still. It is wrong to cast Serbia as "Milosevic." Serbia struggles with nationalism and to continue with the "milosevic" image of Serbia is just plain wrong! In fact, it probably embolden the nationalists...

Those that want to bring Serbia into the European Union have worked hard and even risk their lives to build  "European Serbia." The nationalism waxes and wains according to events, but most people in Serbia want to join the EU. The EU also funded the democratic opposition while Milosevic was still in power. Serbia is not an enemy of the EU and integration into Europe, especially the SAA would help curb the nationalists. nationalis can be drummed out of Serbia, but it will require outside help from especially the European Union.

"Milosevic" is not Serbia - and Serbia is not "milosevic!"

by euamerican on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:25:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That depends on precisely what you mean by "integrating into Europe" and "putting on a fast track towards Union membership." While I think that there could be some merit to the idea of paying Serbia some form of compensation, I think that Union membership is the wrong currency for the payment.

I would be adamantly opposed to any suggestion of accepting a new Union member country that does not have a stable, secular democracy and/or is not in compliance with international law. Once accepted into the Union, we not only give a country veto power over a lot of issues, we also effectively remove our best carrot (and our most powerful stick) from our arsenal. We tried admitting Poland despite the fact that they have a banana-republic political culture, on the hope that things would improve as a result of their membership... and I think we all know how that worked out (or not, as the case is).

The flip side of that coin, however, is that it is imperative that the Union extends a credible standing invitation for any country to join the Union as long as they are within the Union's sphere of interest, are in compliance with international law and have a stable, secular democracy. As long as countries know that they will be able to join once those conditions are fulfilled, they will have an incentive to work towards them, thus tending to align themselves with European interests and goals.

This is our greatest source of soft power - bar none - but at the moment it is being undermined both by those who argue that we should let Serbia in as compensation for the crimes we have perpetrated against Serbia and by those who want to keep Serbia (and Turkey) out no matter what, in order to toe the American line (and, in the case of Turkey, to play up anti-islamism and/or xenophobia for domestic political consumption).

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:55:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
God save us from children with kalashnikovs. Find a grown-up and then we'll talk.

Opinions from the Guardian are fine, but reseacrh papers are even better. Research project from summer 2006 class on Serbia's intergration efforts into the EU. I had to keep this under 20 pages as required for the course rules: The building of European Serbia: How the European Union is winning in the Balkans - July 2006

Now - go get your daddy and we'll talk!

by euamerican on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 at 07:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
De Lillio: First of all Ms De Lillio is hardly a neutral observer:
...recently, she has been political adviser to the prime minister of Kosovo.

She currently teaches at the Kosovo Institute of Journalism and Communication and the New School University in New York.

I'm becoming ever more the hardened cynic on the type of moral outrage that overlooks the fact that Kosovo is now almost perfectly cleansed of any minorities. The more charitable commentary about her points that I can think of here was provided by Rebecca West in the 1930s:

"English persons... of humanitarian and reformist disposition constantly went out to the Balkan Peninsula to see who was in fact ill-treating whom, and, being by the very nature of their perfectionist faith unable to accept the horrid hypothesis that everybody was ill-treating everybody else, all came back with a pet Balkan people established in their hearts as suffering and innocent, eternally the massacree and never the massacrer.
Rebecca West,  Black Lamb and Grey Falcon

Nikolic, current stand-in leader of the radical party, was Milosevic's deputy
Well, yes but a. he lost b. he lost despite nearly a decade of the EU and the US doing almost everything in their power to bring the Radicals to power c. he wasn't Milosevic's deputy but the vice president in a coalition government between Milosevic and the Radicals, a government of "National Unity" as the Kosovo crisis began the course that would lead in a year's time to NATO's aggression. But that was not the average state of relationships between the Radicals and Slobo's Socialists, indeed most of the 1990s the Radicals were sworn enemies of Milosevic (and nearly everybody else) to the point that Seselj and Nikolic served a couple of months prison time in 1995 (for a demonstration in Kosovo actually). To claim that the Radicals were some sort of "natural" allies of the Socialists is insincere. The Socialists (who weren't socialist of course) needed them to show the world that there are plenty of lunatics ready to take their place should they be ousted. The Socialists were basically driven by their desire to remain in power. It seemed to me (at quite a distance and through the distorted views of the coverage of events in Yugoslavia in both the Greek and the English speaking press) at the time that Milosevic would declare himself a new Ghandi had he believed that it would keep him in power. The Radicals, in contrast, were driven especially under Seselj, by pure and unadulterated nationalist/neofascist wingnuttery and dementia.

The acting orthodox Patriarch replacing Patriarch Pavle who is ill, is not a permanent position and anyway Amfilohije is a very versatile type of guy that backed Djuganovic, IIRC in Montenegro.

As for the rest:

Kosovo was part of Serbia in the simple legal sense that it was part of its territory. Nationalist historical claims are diverse and always dubious, but one fact seems incontestable: that for over a century there was a murderous tug of war between the competing nationalisms.

There were a number of options available as to the final status of Kosovo. Realistically in none of them Serbia would get to keep but a small part of Kosovo in the long term, but the negotiations were a farce, since the Albanian side had the international "referee" on its side: it didn't need to budge or engage in anything. It didn't. Serbia was presented with a fait accompli and was told that regardless of whether it signed or not, it would lose national territory by Western fiat, something that in much bloodier seccesionist struggles the world over was never an option for the minority - as it certainly wasn't for the Kraijna Serbs who weren't even offered reasonably limited autonomy (and Babic IMMHO was generally a result of not the reason for Croat intransigence).

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake

by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 09:34:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have few questions:
  1. Why nobody is discussing illegality of recognizing Kosovo by some EU states (without UN recommendation)?
  2. How is that different when US have disregard for UN (Iraq invasion)?
  3. Why nobody is asking the questions of failure of common EU foreign policy (at least 6 countries will never recognize Kosovo)?
  4. And why other separatist regions are not on EU agenda (Kurdistan, Turkish republic of Cyprus)
  5. And Why now? (Balkan region was doing actually very well in the last 6-7 years)
by 011bg on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 12:51:52 AM EST
Welcome to ET, 011bg and thank you for the sharp questions to consider.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. --Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 11:15:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks metavison
by 011bg on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 12:50:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Another really good question is why isn't the European Union doing more in an outreach to Serbia, especially Serbia's pro-EU leaders?

What is needed are for the forces of good and Europeanism to be supported in Serbia, so that Serbia can get back on the path to Europe. Again, the EU gave support to democratic opposition when Milosevic was still in power - and the Union has too much invested and too much at stake in Serbia.

The why now is good, as the timing of this "independence declaration" is bad, given that nationalism is still a factor in Serbian politics. The pro-Europe Boris Tadic just squeaked out a victory over the nationalist candidate. If Kosovo was to ever get independence, this was never the right time.

There is something else to this, and perhaps the US is vastly more powerful and intimidating for the rest of the international community. I'd like to see the UN address this more, as well as the EU provide more support for pro-EU Serbian leaders.

by euamerican on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 11:28:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
euamerican:
What is needed are for the forces of good and Europeanism to be supported in Serbia

We really shouldn't claim "goodness" as European.
But I agree we should give Serbia more support.

The plural of anecdote is bullshit.

by generic on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 11:54:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Euamerican I very much agree in your observations in general but I would like to point two things that I noticed:

  1. When you say "nationalism in Serbia is still a factor", would you agree then if the EU decides to recognize Basque region or Catalonia from Spain and half million people decide to protest on the streets of Madrid would you say then that "nationalism is still a factor in Spain"?

  2. When you say: "US is vastly more powerful and intimidating for the rest of the international community" do you assume that EU present itself as international community? I would not agree on that because every single BRIC country (Brazil, Russia, India and China) decided against recognition of Kosovo and explicitly said it is illegal. Of course they will not start a war over Kosovo but they did not follow US line.

What I see is that US, as you pointed out, "vastly more powerful and intimidating for" Germany and France when they allowed itself to be hypocritical about UN laws.

The problem of EU giving pro-EU parties in Serbia support (and there are majority of them now) is because the EU does not have anything to offer. They lost credibility in this process. They have already presented to the Serbian government some kind of document that was rejected because it was meaningless document. EU could not or didn't want to offer even student exchange program at the university level.

by 011bg on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 01:01:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There is a lot the EU could (and should) offer Serbia if it just wanted to. Easier Visas come to mind.

The plural of anecdote is bullshit.
by generic on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 01:54:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And would be helpful, if only to make the Serb youth more "cosmopolitan".

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 06:11:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
First, Serbia is a nation-state and has been working on EU membership. I doubt that the "republic of kosovo" will be regarded as a real nation in the international community anytime soon.

The EU is a part of the "international community." The EU itself did not recognize Kosovo, but left it up to the Member States.

We should note that the "American" European governments  that were quick to recognize Kosovo, Merkel's Germany and Sarkozy's France, and Germany already has an "embassy" in Pristina. My view is that both Frau Merkel and Monsieur Sarkozy would place the interests of the United States before their own nations. These two would sell their bodies and souls to Uncle Sam!

by euamerican on Fri Feb 29th, 2008 at 08:16:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
011bg:
When you say "nationalism in Serbia is still a factor", would you agree then if the EU decides to recognize Basque region or Catalonia from Spain and half million people decide to protest on the streets of Madrid would you say then that "nationalism is still a factor in Spain"?
Look, the second largest party in Spain, the extreme-right PP, has been waging a relentless anti-Catalan campaign since about 2003. Examples: they advocated a boycott of Catalan products. When Gas Natural (whose majority stockholders are Catalan) tried to take over the electrical utility Endesa, the talking point was "better for Endesa to be German rather than Catalan". Go figure. This kind of anticatalanism plays relatively well also among the base of the currently ruling socialist party PSOE.

The PP has between 9 and 10 million very faithful voters, out of 30 million eligible voters in a country of 45 million.

So nationalism in Spain is a still a factor not to be taken lightly.

I also won't go into how the Basque regional government is on the level of the German Länder in terms of self-government, and how it includes its own police, taxation regime, health system, and educational system. Still, violent Basque independentism is another factor not to be taken lightly.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Mar 4th, 2008 at 06:31:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This article describes an egregious act of EU madness:

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41393

Now imagine. The Serb police have left the Kosovo forces.

No KPC forces go into the north to enforce laws.

In 120 days, UNMIK leaves and behind we have a new Euro contingent, backed by NATO soldiers.

OK, so let's say a few former KPC cops show up in the street one day in new uniforms.

Will someone be there to arrest them? If not, then essentially you have a de facto force controlling the north.

It gets even stickier, however, if they are arrested. Under what authority will they be arrested? Can they appeal to the Council of Europe? The UN? The OSCE? Human Rights centers? How does the rule of law enter into a situation like that?

Seems to me the Balkans has now boiled down into a  legal quagmire whose primary logic seems to be that people can be compelled somehow to behave as you think they should.

What hubris.

by Upstate NY on Thu Feb 28th, 2008 at 04:36:12 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]