Posted on 08/25/2007 2:57:22 AM PDT by kronos77
In his op-ed, "Another Kosovo Crisis" (Aug. 8), Matthew Kaminski argues that "Belgrade should be given a stark choice: a future in league with Russia or the EU and NATO" with giving up Kosovo as the test. He repeats the familiar argument that if Kosovo is not given independence, there could be violence, mostly by Albanians, like in 2004, so that the West should recognize Kosovo unilaterally, if the new negotiations fail.
The position of Serbia is very clear; it offers Kosovo the broadest possible autonomy within Serbia, over and above European standards. It wants negotiations in good faith and not predetermined ones that take away the meaning of the word. It wants the process to move forward under the umbrella of the U.N., as it is the body that has defined Kosovo's current status by its Security Council Resolution 1244. Serbia demands respect for its sovereignty and territorial integrity under international law and is strongly against creating new borders in the Balkans. While we all agree that there should not be a division of Kosovo, seems that some fail to see that the independence of Kosovo (a province of Serbia, that did not have the status of a republic in the former Yugoslavia), would really be a division of Serbia.
Mr. Kaminski should know that Serbia has been a democratic state since the overthrow of Milosevic in the year 2000 and that it is aspiring to a European future. Why should it be faced with the stark choice, or should I say blackmail, that he is proposing? What would he be saying if someone was putting the same choice before the Albanians in Kosovo -- the EU or independence? What kind of answer would he be expecting to get?
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Ping!
Either choice will not produce a good ending. If Serbia were to take back full control then there would be huge bloodshed between the Albanians and Serbs trying to return, resulting in the Serbian Army going back in. At this point with the Serbs being run out of Kosovo by the Albanian terror campaign. I would say give it independence, Serbia can always get it back later. The only problem is “is this the end point of what the Albanians are wanting?” or is this just a first step in greater agitation.
Yes I have seen that before and it pisses me off that nobody in the Western Governments get that. It’s like the damn Palestinian State BS. An independent state isn’t the end goal. I ask the question in the previous post, because the politicians don’t recognize it to be an issue. Thus it takes it off the table of discussion.
You know, we have been working off "the model" that "Western Governments (and the MSM) don't get that" for the last fifteen years. I think that it is time to chuck that "model".
If they didn't "get it", they would make the right moves toward peace & fairness once in a while, even if by accident, but they don't. Every single move that they have claimed would "bring peace to the Balkans" has been a move toward more war, death and destruction. It has really settled nothing, only occasionally delayed the fighting for another time, but more often empowered a new group to continue the fighting. We empower terrorists and then claim to be "fighting a war on terror".
Without wars, "the war machine" (the Halliburtons, the MMPI's) can't survive. If the world was at peace, these business would go the way of the tobacco industry and start to disappear. And I am sure that they convince themselves that they "provide a necessary service to America" and have a right to survive and thrive (even if they survive on drinking blood).
I think that most Western politicians know exactly what they are doing -- they are supporting "their own" elite and using the people of the Balkans to make war and make money off the American taxpayers.
In all honesty, I am really beginning to fear for our country and our people, because we are so disconnected from what our leadership has been doing for the last 20 years, and what's worse -- we just accept that as "normal". That's what scares the hell out of me -- we have a populace that is totally oblivious and disconnected from the idea of "We, the people..." -- except as an empty slogan.
Every four years, we vent our rage at whoever we think "got us into this mess" and really vote more against an opposing candidate, than we do for anyone -- without ever really wondering if all of the career politicians in both parties are more alike and "for each other"(and themselves) than they are for us. The people who don't vote at all are the ones who just refuse to play the elite's "game" -- but there really can be no "conscientious objectors" in this fight.
I can only say that I am glad that I that I have a good life behind me, because what's in front of us may well be one hell of a hard fight to keep the dream of "real America" alive. And in all honesty, I am beginning to think that there may be too few of us to even win.
25 August 2007 | 11:54 -> 18:47 | Source: Beta, Tanjug
PRIŠTINA, WASHINGTON, BRUSSELS -- A Priština daily says Wolfgang Ischinger has told ethnic Albanian leaders the province's status will not be settled this year.
Express daily reports in its Saturday edition that the EU envoy to the Contact Group mediating Troika told Albanian representatives in Priština Friday not to expect the status issue to be solved by the end of 2007.
Ischinger, however, did not address the press, nor commented on the meetings he had with the Kosovo leaders during his visit to the province.
According to the daily, this is the first time an international diplomat directly suggested to the Albanians not to have high hopes the status settlement would be finalized this year, after Russia objected to a UN plan envisaging supervised independence, blocking a number of draft resolutions from reaching the UN Security Council.
Ischinger met with Kosovo president Fatmir Sejdiu, prime minister Agim Ceku, assembly president Kol Berisha and opposition leaders Veton Surroi and Hashim Thaci during his two-day stay in Priština that ended Friday.
“Ahtisaari plan no longer on table”
Ahtisaari’s plan has de facto been rejected and partitioning Kosovo should be considered more seriously, an analyst says.
Steven Meyer, professor at the U.S. government's National Defense University and Balkans expert, said in an interview with Voice of America that, “with sensible approach from Belgrade and Priština concerning the partition of the province, satisfactory territorial solution might be found.”
In his words, in light of Contact Group envoys' statements that all options will be on the table during a new round of negotiations, the Kosovo issue "has been distanced from the U.S. sphere of influence and shifted to the EU."
According to him, European envoy to the Troika Wolfgang Ischinger and Russia made it clear that partition was one of the possible options, together with any other solution both sides find acceptable.
ICG, EU stands on Kosovo differ: EU source
The proposal of the International Crisis Group (ICG) that the European Union (EU) should take advantage of the period of new negotiations on the future status of Kosovo to set up a so-called coalition of willing states that would, at the end of the year, be ready to recognize a unilateral proclamation of Kosovo's independence does not coincide with the intentions and stands of the EU, a European official said in a statement for Tanjug in Brussels on Friday.
The source said they sincerely wanted a solution and would do everything for the negotiations to succeed, and not to condemn them to failure from the very beginning.
"The Group stands are being followed and studied, but this lobbying organization is prone to arbitrary interpretations and wrong evaluations, such as the negative predictions about the possibility of the forming of the new Serbian government just days before it was agreed in May," Tanjug quoted its anonymous source as saying.
Nevertheless, the EU, as a serious organization, is naturally looking into every possible scenario for the development of the situation, including one in which certain EU countries could agree to recognize the independence of Kosovo, the European diplomat said.
Such a scenario exists, but there are too many negative consequences, including, among other things, for the unity of the EU, something that is of key importance, the diplomat said.
This week's visits to the region by Portuguese Foreign Minister Luis Amado and EU representative in the mediating troika Wolfgang Ischinger are proof that the EU is stepping up the search for an acceptable solution, and not one that could generate a new crisis, the official said.
They are all talking out of both sides of their mouth. Just yesterday there was a quote from a US source saying that the “Ahtisaari Plan” is alive.
Reminds me of the Truman quote, “If you can’t convince them, confuse them”.
This reminds me of the Rambouillet Accords. NATO will create a situation where war is the only option because the offer that is made is simply ridiculous.
So, why is giving up Kosovo so important to NATO as a condition for Serbia joining the EU? NATO is asking Serbia to do something that is inconsistent with the UN Charter and the NATO Charter as well.
This especially when Kosovo is the centerpiece of Orthodoxy for the Serbs.
You can bet that when NATO speaks it’s pretty much the exact opposite that is true. Their MO is transparent to those who don’t have a short memory and know their history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.