Posted on 03/05/2008 4:08:54 PM PST by Bokababe
BELGRADE, Serbia -- As editor-in-chief of Serbia's oldest and most prestigious daily newspaper, Politika, I am at a loss to explain the West's stubborn support for Kosovo independence to my readers. Only nine years ago, my country was bombed for 78 days by the most powerful military alliance the world has ever seen, and the last thing I want is to pour oil over the fire of anti-Western sentiment. But the truth is, I find myself grappling with the same bitterness and resentment as most of my countrymen.
I was very much part of the democratic upheaveal that rid Serbia of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, and all Serbia has done since was to mend its ways.
We sought to come to terms with the past, put old quarrels behind us, make peace with our neighbors and become friends with the United States and European countries that bombed us in 1999.
We set up war crimes courts and tried suspected war criminals, while extraditing others to the Hague Tribunal, where we sent a score of ex-presidents, including Milosevic himself, and roughly half of the former Army leadership.
We signed peace and cooperation treaties, invited Western companies to invest in Serbia's economy, and NGOs to monitor our progress in democracy and human rights.
We elected democratic rulers with impeccable anti-Milosevic credentials who carried out responsible and moderate policies, to the applause of Washington and Brussels.
We oppressed no ethnic minorities and violated no universal declarations.
In the meantime, a very different storyline unfolded in our southern province of Kosovo. As soon as Serb forces left Kosovo in June 1999, a massive campaign of reverse ethnic cleansing against 200,000 non-Albanians took place under the noses of 50,000 NATO troops.
Rather than the multiethnic democracy U.S. President Bill Clinton invoked on the day he dispatched the bombers, Kosovo is nowadays one of the most ethnically pure regions in Europe. Hundreds of Serb medieval monasteries, churches and cemeteries have been desecrated, dynamited, burned or razed to the ground. The few Serbs left in Albanian-majority areas live in NATO-guarded enclaves, fearful for their lives. Lawlessness is pervasive, crime is rampant, intolerance is the norm. Compared to Kosovo, post-Milosevic Serbia is a multiethnic paradise.
Why, then, the unseemly rush to grant Kosovo independence? Western officials grasp at straws to explain their motives. We are told "Milosevic lost Kosovo", and that we should blame him for the fate of the thousands and thousands of our co-nationals who have been cleansed from the mythical "old Serbia." But Milosevic is six feet under, and in Belgrade we feel as if we're witnessing the resurgence of the notion of "fundamentally evil" groups. If the Serbs' repression of Albanians in the 1990s lost them the right to govern Kosovo, as we were repeatedly told while NATO bombs rained on our heads, surely the Albanians lost political and moral high ground through ruthless discrimination against Serbs, Roma and other minorities?
Whatever Milosevic's transgressions, the Albanians' radical nationalism should neither have been encouraged nor rewarded in Kosovo. I am particularly disappointed by Chancellor Angela Merkel's championing of Kosovo's unilateral independence.
German history shows that radical solutions to the national question cannot be good, even when discontent is justified and minorities have legitimate grievances. It does not do to encourage secession or advocate annexation. Turning Kosovo into an independent state, with its half-terrorist, ultra-chauvinist leadership and its monoethnic population, is a radical event in European history. Of all countries, Germany should have opposed hasty independence for Kosovo.
Intellectually and morally, I do not know how to come to terms with Western democracies' support for Kosovo secessionists. For once, Serbs and their leaders did everything by the book. All they set out to do was to preserve their country's territorial integrity and sovereignty, guaranteed under Security Council Resolution 1244, which ended NATO's bombing. Serbia agreed to permanent international guarantees of Kosovo's political autonomy within the formal territory of Serbia, Kosovo's membership in international financial institutions such as the World Bank and IMF, and Kosovo's right to enter different types of international agreements. Its leaders presented only legal arguments and negotiated peacefully under international auspices.
It did them no good. International law was broken. Under the pretext that Serbia's late dictator had been a terrible person, Serbia's Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt have been denied and scorned, while the leader of Kosovo's brutal guerrilla army, the KLA, is being hailed as a democrat and a statesman.
And no, I am not proud that hundreds of angry demonstrators went on a rampage in Belgrade last Thursday, shouting anti-American slogans, burning embassies and pillaging shops. But just like my fellow countrymen, I cannot help but note the irony in Washington's outrage. The Bush administration angrily denounced Serbia for failing to uphold its responsibility under international law to protect embassies.
The Belgrade rally that turned violent had been called to do the very same thing: chastise countries who conveniently ignore their responsibilites to protect sovereignty guaranteeed under the U.N. Charter. The last time I checked, international law was also supposed to protect small countries.
Ljiljana Smajlovic is the editor in chief of the Belgrade-based daily Politika. Her article "The Story of Kosovo" first appeared in German in the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche.
No because history says so, awaiting claims from you that Serbian Orthodox monasteries are really converted Albanian Roman Catholic Churches.
Now I know you that know sh*t. Congratulations.
How old are you Dio?
Did you ever live in the US?
If you are under 50 years old and the answer to the second question is “No”, then you don’t know what you are talking about.
Albanians are universally hated. Their normal MO is to ensconce themselves in some little corner of the other guy's country, do their super-breeding thing (avg 12 kids per family) for 20 or 25 years, and then try to break the little corner of the other country off into their "Greater Albania"
They were basically pissed at Milosevic because the guy was systematically outlawing every aspect of their culture, drug dealing, poisoning wells, murder, arson, traffic in women and underage girls, traffic in stolen vehicles etc. etc. etc.
Follow the money.
Considering that all it takes is a quick glance at ellisrecords.org, the matter is settled.
Actually, the Magyars had issues with the Serbs, as did the Germans, and the Macedonians, and the Bulgars.
As for siding with the Germans in WW2, that should tell you what life was like under the Serbs for these people to have sided with the Germans against them.
Take a good look, Dio. The Ellis Island Records only go until 1924 and the vast majority of people came through there much earlier.
In 1924, Yugoslavia was only a few years old. Previous to 1918, virtually immigrants who came from today's Croatia, Bosnia and even the Bay of Kotor, were listed as having come from "Austria", "Hungary" or anything that the US official could make out of what the immigrant (who didn't speak English) was saying, because they were all citizens of the Austro-Hungarian Empire back then.
If you actually "did a quick search" as you suggested, you'd know that you can't just search by country, you have to search by an individual name.
And yes, my Croat cousin who grew up in Zadar, told me that most Dalmatians, even those over there, didn't solidify their identities as "Croatians" until the bombing of Dubrovnik in the 1990's -- then they all became "Croats" all the way.
But, we really need to post more things about Croatia, so that the discussion will be topical to the post. Instead, we have a post about Serbia and Kosovo, and here you off on the Croatian history tangent again.
I'm really glad you cleared that up, then go back to goose stepping.
Funnnily enough, the numbers for those declaring themselves "Dalmatians" is less than 0.5%.
If you actually "did a quick search" as you suggested, you'd know that you can't just search by country, you have to search by an individual name.
Exactly, and it shows them to list themselves as Croatian, unless they were listed as Austrian.
The Macedonians had issues with Serbia and the Serbs?? Wow, that’s news to me! What were those issues Diocletian, I would really appreciate some more information on this “issue”.
This chauvinism resulted in the assassination of the Serbian king by a Macedonian revolutionary.
What century was that Diocletian? Some Serbs may have considered Macedonia a part of Serbia (just as Greece considers Macedonia a part of Greece and Bulgaria consider it a part Bulgaria) but my in-laws are Macedonian and they have never had any trouble from Serbs for speaking the Macedonian language. Outlawed? The only place where there has been “problems” for using the Macedonian language is in Greece. I’m sorry but I think you should stick to your info about Croatia and leave Macedonia out of this issue. As for Macedonians today, they have absolutely no problem with Serbs. Their concerns are the Albanians!
The first half of the 20th century. I’m sorry if you were ignorant of this fact.
“The first half of the 20th century. I’m sorry if you were ignorant of this fact.”
Gee, than I should be happy that my in laws are still alive and weren’t persecuted for speaking Macedonian during the first half of the 20th century! Or maybe they were just “ignorant” of the “law against speaking Macedonian” when they were young and should be grateful no one caught them speaking their language. /s
But as Bokababe said in post 90, the issue is Kosovo here and not Macedonia, so maybe we should stick to the issue of the thread!
It wasn’t for speaking the language, but rather for publishing in that language.
They're called municipalities (opshtinas). Bosnia has cantons. You might've meant Bosnia, not Kosovo.
A “Kosovar” is a resident of Kosovo. Most of them are ethnic Albanians, yes. But it's a useful concept if you reject the concept that every ethnic Albanian must be in Albania.
Nope. Again, they can be Albanian-Serbians (just like, say, Irish-Americans, Dutch-Americans...) or, simply, Albanians ("Shiptar",borrowed from the Albanian "Shqipetar", is the name used to refer to those Albanians living in Serbia, so as to differentiate them from those living in Albania).
"Kosovars" thus don't exist as a people or a nation. (Much like "Bosnians" -- you're either Croat, Serb or a mix of the two exhibiting the tendency to use Turcisms in your speech). You can be any of the minorities (well, not any more -- they've all been ethnically cleansed from the Albanian-dominated parts of Kosovo), but that does not make you a "Kosovar." If you meant "Kosovar" as a term describing one's geographic background -- like "Bostonian," "New Yorker," etc -- then you're the rare exception. In the real world, the term is loaded.
I'm sorry you don't like my point of view, but calling me stupid or imply I'm ignorant of the history. I've been watching this area since 1992, sadly.
I apologize if it seemed like it was my intention to insult you. It's not that I don't like your point of view -- it's just plain not based on facts.
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.