07 April 2008

Bosnia animosities worsen in wake ok Kosovo

Bosnia animosities worsen in wake ok Kosovo
Apostolis Fotiadis
April 07, 2008 7:00 PM

SARAJEVO, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Apr. 7, 2008 (IPS/GIN) -- Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence has provoked new divisions in Bosnia and Herzegovina to emerge over the past few weeks.

Demonstrations organized by ethnic Serbs since the proclamation of Kosovo independence on Feb. 17 have continued to occur, and they have occasionally resulted in small riots.

Bosnian-Serb politicians, including Milorad Dodik, the prime minister of the Republica Srpska, the autonomous Serbian entity, have threatened to hold a referendum on Serbian independence within Bosnia.

Since the Dayton agreement of November 1995, which brought an end to the war in Bosnia, the country has remained deeply divided along ethnic lines.

Bosnia is today separated into two political entities: the federation, which is mostly inhabited by Croats and Muslim Bosniaks, and Republica Srpska, which hosts the majority of Serbs in the country.

The three ethnic groups are separated even when they live in the same environment, as they do in Mostar, southwest of Sarajevo, where Croats and Bosniaks live next to one another without sharing anything.

The chair of the presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina rotates among three members who originate from the three ethnic groups, each elected for an eight-month term within their four-year terms as members. Members of the presidency are elected directly by the people.

Political representatives meet in the council of the ministers, which runs the central governmental institutions.

Political and legislative processes in Bosnia are supervised by the international community’s higher representative, who has the power to block or impose legislation and to dismiss elected or non-elected officials.

People speak of the higher representative as the "little god of Bosnia."

This arrangement has brought Catholic Croatians, Muslim Bosniaks and Orthodox Christian Serbs to live in the same country -- but to nonetheless stay in separate worlds within it.

Complicated institutional arrangements have been put in place in order to preserve the sensitive balance necessary for this coexistence. Today the country hosts three telecommunication systems, three transportation networks and three educational systems. But the entities accept the local Mark as common currency.

About 60 percent of Bosnia’s budget is spent on preserving its complicated administrative system. But the arrangements, as the recent turbulence shows, may not necessarily be proof against Bosnia’s partition.

"By associating their politics with what happens in Kosovo, radicals in Republica Srpska stress that if Kosovo becomes independent, then they could become independent," said Jovan Divjak, the highest-ranking ethnic Serb officer in the Bosnian army who fought against his ethnic kin during the war in Bosnia.

"After Dayton I thought there would be some kind of agreement among the people who suffered. But people are not less separated now than they were just after the war. The fact is that people who were responsible for the wars here still have power in their hands.

"Many of them have not given up their ideas of Greater Serbia, and I can’t see any intention among them to establish relations of tolerance. They have no hesitation about it; step by step they are moving toward their target. On the other hand the idea of a 100 percent Bosnia and Herzegovina [with limited or without ethnic autonomy for Serbs] promoted by Muslim politicians indicates that not everyone is on good terms with the idea of ]Republica Srpska]’s existence."

Recent attempts to centralize power by transferring authority, especially over uniformed officials, from the ethnic entities to the state level have become a new source of tension.

Serbian politicians are resisting the pressure. Dodik has refused any centralization of police forces and has asked for the demilitarization of Bosnia in order to effectively cancel any role for the newborn centralized Bosnian army.

"Serbs are happy with what they have and can live with current divisions," said Sasa Bizic, deputy editor of "New Reporter," the political magazine published in Banja Luka. Banja Luka is the capital of Republica Srpska.

"They are aware that Muslim politicians promote unification because they want to control everything," Bizic added. "But Republica Srpska is not going to melt into Bosnia. It can only stay as it is, with its own separate institutions. Serbs will not peacefully accept anything else."

But Bizic said talk of partition of Bosnia is not realistic: "Another five to 10 years are necessary before the situation clears. Serbs’ desire for independence is not a result of ethnic hatred but of tiredness with unification pressures."

Spanish paper suggests EU, US got into a Kosovo trap.

Georgia to recognize Kosovo

April 7, 2008 SERBIANNA

An Estonian paper writes that the Georgian President Lado Gurgenidze said that his country will recognize independence of Kosovo.

"Of course we will recognize Kosovo at a certain time as did all our allies," Gurgenidze says.

Georgia has its own separatist provinces and is pleading with the world bodies not to have them recognized.

Montenegro's newly elected President, Filip Vujanovic, says that he will not rush to recognize Kosovo as he seeks to preserve good neighborly relations with Belgrade, peace in the region, as well as internal stability.

Spanish daily ABC says that EU and US have gotten themselves into a trap of their own making because by recognizing Kosovo's independence they will never find a legal justification for such a decision.

Western countries have encouraged the recognition of independence of Kosovo claiming that this was a special case, but it has become clear rapidly that a precedent has been set which will not stop encouraging separatist movements in Europe and throughout the world, writes the paper.

Kosovo Albanian leadership is currently preparing new maps that will demarcate the border with Macedonia because it claims Sopje unjustly confiscated land from Kosovo.

"We are now in the process of understanding documents and agreements that were reached at that time between Serbia and Montenegro and Macedonia, and we are also consolidating all the topographic maps, then we are analyzing the Ahtisaari plan regarding this issue. We hope that the next meeting will take place by middle of this month," Kosovo Albanian "General" Behar Selimi said.

Albanian PM warns of war in Macedonia

Albanian PM warns of war in Macedonia

LLAZAR SEMINI
April 07, 2008 10:36 AM

TIRANA, Albania-A dispute between Greece and Macedonia that blocked the former Yugoslav republic from being invited to join NATO last week could lead to instability unless the issue is resolved, Albania’s prime minister said Monday.

Last week NATO leaders agreed at a summit in Romania to invite Albania and Croatia to join the alliance. But Greece blocked Macedonia’s invitation. Athens says the country’s name implies a territorial claim to a northern Greek province called Macedonia, and says it cannot allow its northern neighbor to join until the name issue is resolved.

U.N.-mediated talks have failed to resolve the 17-year dispute.

The continued lack of a solution could encourage radical ethnic groups in Macedonia, and that would "become a problem for the region," Albanian Prime Minister Sali Berisha told The Associated Press in an interview.

Ethnic Albanians make up between a quarter and a third of Macedonia’s population, and ethnic Albanian rebels fought a brief war against government forces in 2001. Relations between the two communities are still tense.

"If there is a deadlock, then there is a real possibility of encouraging radical groups of all ethnic communities," he said. He did not elaborate on the reasons why he thought the issue of NATO membership might inflame ethnic tensions within the country.

"I don’t believe that such a very important country (Macedonia) for peace and stability in the region will remain an unintegrated island," he said.

Berisha urged both Macedonia and Greece to reach consensus on the name issue.

"I don’t believe Greece will abuse its veto and also do not believe that the Macedonian side will be intransigent to an acceptable consensus solution," Berisha told the AP.

Albania has long sought to shake off its reputation as one of Europe’s poorest countries and join NATO. Berisha said that after last week’s invitation to join the alliance, his country would send an additional two army units to Afghanistan to help train the Afghan army, and it would also send an army unit to Darfur.

Albania already has a total of 350 troops in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Iraq, and discussions are under way to increase that by 100, Berisha said.

He was reluctant to say whether he believed Albania would meet all the criteria to become a fully fledged NATO member by the alliance’s summit next year, but said the country would do all it could. Necessary reforms include changes to the electoral system, justice system and army.

"NATO membership ... means a free and safe future to Albania, precisely what it has lacked during all its history," said Berisha.

Here’s hoping world comes to its senses on Kosovo

Here’s hoping world comes to its senses on Kosovo


By SCOTT TAYLOR On Target
Mon. Apr 7 - 5:44 AM


WHEN TRAVELLING through Kosovo. it would be easy to mistakenly believe it has just become the 51st U.S. state rather than a self-proclaimed independent country. On most homes, the American Stars and Stripes are fluttering alongside the Albanian flag — even on many public institutions.


Prior to Kosovo’s Feb. 17 unilateral declaration of independence, the U.S. had designed a new yellow-on-blue Kosovo flag. Thousands of these flags were produced and distributed for free in the hope that they would be a proud visual symbol of the new and distinct state of Kosovo.


Unfortunately, for the planners in the U.S. State Department, the Albanians living in Kosovo do not regard themselves as a separate Kosovar nation. Instead of flying the new flag, they continue to display the black double headed eagle on a red background — the official flag of the neighbouring Republic of Albania. They are unrepentant, proud Albanians, and they fly the American flag in recognition of the fact that only through a decade of U.S. military aid and political pressure, have they taken control of a province that is Serbian sovereign territory and proclaimed it as their own.


In addition to the flags, the Albanians pay fawning tribute to former U.S. president Bill Clinton in the form of 20-metre-high posters of him hanging in Pristina, the capital. It was Clinton who pressured NATO into supporting the separatist Albanian guerrilla force known as the Kosovo Liberation Army in its struggle against Serbian security forces in 1999. Ironically, it was only the year before that the U.S. State Department listed the KLA as a terrorist organization because of its tactic of targeting innocent Serb civilians in order to provoke retaliation from Serbian troops.


However, once NATO air power entered the equation, the tables were turned firmly in favour of the Albanians, and they now have no qualms about publicly showing their appreciation.


At the southern end of Pristina, a scale-model Statue of Liberty sits atop the Victory Hotel, and Hillary Clinton even has a street in the Kosovo capital named in her honour. Strangely enough, the U.S. scheme to create an independent Kosovo has not garnered much support from Muslim countries. With the exception of Turkey and Afghanistan, the Islamic republics have refused to recognize Kosovo because they see it as an American puppet state. Go figure.


Although the 1998 U.S. assessment of KLA fighters as terrorists was an accurate one, that’s not how they are depicted in Kosovo these days.


In the course of the 18-month-long insurgency and NATO offensive, the KLA did not win a single standup engagement with the Serbs. Their dubious martial accomplishments include the widespread murder of Serbian civilians and Albanian collaborators after NATO entered the province and became responsible for security.


Nevertheless, there are innumerable monuments all over Kosovo to honour these "heroes" and "martyrs." Given that this conflict in Kosovo was a bloody inter-ethnic civil war, and the fact that the original NATO mandate was to provide a safe environment for all Kovoso minorities, many international observers recognize that these monuments to KLA fighters only serve to intimidate non-Albanians.


Kosovo was admittedly dependent on the U.S. for its creation, remains dependent upon NATO troops for security and protection and requires massive amounts of foreign aid to survive, and the Albanian majority openly rejoice in the fact they now live in greater Albania. One has to wonder just what the hell Prime Minister Stephen Harper was thinking when he decided to include Canada among the handful of countries that recognize this "independent" Kosovo.


One can only hope that at the UN General Assembly meeting in September, Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence is declared illegal. Canada can then use the opportunity to reverse Harper’s decision and uphold the UN Charter.


( staylor@herald.ca)


Scott Taylor is editor-in-chief of Espirit de Corps magazine.

06 April 2008

The Eagleburger has Landed. Much Too Late.

April 06th 2008 06:04:48 PM


But given that his name does mean something to Republicans — who know and care about this issue as much as the janitor at my gym does — it’s worth sharing what Eaglesandwich — I mean burger — had to say about the direction of our pan-Albanian policies over the past nine years:


2000: zzzzzzzzzz
2001: zzzzzzzzz
2002: zzzzzzzz
2003: zzzzzzz
2004: zzzzzz
2005: zzzzz
2006: zzzz
2007: zzz


January 8, 2008:



I have really very serious problems with the international community and part of that being the United States, advocating grabbing a hunk of territory from one country and making it independent. I don’t think that’s a tradition that we want to establish very substantially. There are perfectly good reasons for objecting to international efforts to hive Kosovo off from Serbia…[the] issue involved here [is]…all of a sudden establishing the right of the international community to order or pressure the taking of a particular territory and telling the nominal host country that it’s no longer a part of their territory.


January 29:



We believe an imposed settlement of the Kosovo question and seeking to partition Serbia’s sovereign territory without its consent is not in the interest of the United States…Neither the Security Council nor any other international body has the power or authority to impose a change of any country’s borders.


Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the current policy is the dismissive attitude displayed toward Russia’s objections. Whatever disagreements the United States may have with Moscow on other issues, and there are many, the United States should not prompt an unnecessary crisis in U.S.-Russia relations. There are urgent matters regarding which the United States must work with Russia, including Iran’s nuclear intentions and North Korea’s nuclear capability. Such cooperation would be undercut by American action to neutralize Moscow’s legitimate concerns regarding Kosovo.

While some European countries, notably members of the EU, may feel themselves obligated to join us in recognizing Kosovo’s independence, a number of those countries would do so reluctantly because of Washington’s inflexibility and insistence. No more than the United States, Europe would not benefit from an avoidable confrontation with Russia.


Even if Kosovo declared itself an independent state, it would be a dysfunctional one and a ward of the international community for the indefinite future. Corruption and organized crime are rampant. The economy, aside from international largesse and criminal activities, is nonviable. Law enforcement, integrity of the courts, protection of persons and property, and other prerequisites for statehood are practically nonexistent…


The result would be a new "frozen conflict," with Kosovo’s status still unresolved. The risk of renewed violence would further impede Kosovo’s development. Moreover, heightened tensions might require reinforcing the U.S. presence in Kosovo when we can least afford it due to other commitments.


Serbia has made great strides in democratic development and economic revitalization since the fall of the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. Current policy with respect to Kosovo risks complete reversal of these gains. Faced with a choice between Western partnership and defense of their sovereign territory and constitution, there is little doubt what Serbia would decide…Serbia would inevitably move closer to Russia as its only protector.

Viable and enduring settlements should result from negotiation and compromise. Such an outcome has been undermined by a U.S. promise to the Kosovo Albanians that their demands will be satisfied if they remain adamant and no agreement is reached with Belgrade. Such a promise cannot be justified by the claim, often heard from proponents of independence, that the Albanians’ "patience" is running out, so independence must be granted without delay. This is nothing less than appeasing a threat of violence.


Within a month of the above writings, the free world’s fate was sealed, and Eaglesandwich got busier:


Eagleburger: Independent Kosovo introduction to new war



BELGRADE, March 21 (Tanjug) - Former U.S. Secretary of State and Ambassador to Belgrade Lawrence Eagleburger has evaluated that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo was a mistake and that independent Kosovo is an introduction to a new war.


Kosovo will never be able to provide for economic survival alone, it will try to attract Albanians from Macedonia and Greece, which will result in conflicts with those countries, Eagleburger said in an interview published by Glas Javnosti.


He underscored that the movement for Great Albania will be activated at some point and that serious problems in that part of the world will be created….Eagleburger said that he does not believe that independence of Kosovo was the only solution to the problem of Serbia’s province, but that some countries had decided it was so due to the relations that had developed between Serbia and Kosovo, whose Albanian population grew bigger while the Serbian population was getting smaller, and because of Milosevic on whose account serious preconceptions about Serbs were created.


I agree that Milosevic and Serbia did some horrible things then, but I don’t believe that you will find a solution to that if you proclaim independence of Kosovo, because we now see that it will not stop the fighting but it will only make it worse, said Eagleburger.


Eagleburger: Macedonia’s NATO entry to prevent attacks from Kosovo, Albania (March 21)



It’s important NATO to admit Macedonia to thwart all aggressive attacks from Kosovo or Albania, said Lawrence Eagleburger, a former senior US diplomat.


Eagleburger told Serbian media that Kosovo independence was a mistake speaking from the point of the international law. Furthermore, Kosovo can never survive economically.


"Kosovo will try to attract Albanians from Macedonia and Greece, which will result in conflict with these countries. The project Greater Albania is likely to emerge later on," Eagleburger said.


The best option to solve the situation in the region is Serbia to recognize Kosovo independence, and Kosovo to focus on establishing peaceful relations with Serbia and not to try to pressure Macedonia and Greece as regards annexation of Albanians of these countries toward Kosovo.


And that’s where he’s wrong (assuming the last paragraph was meant to be attributed to Eagleburger). Given that he warns of Greater Albania moving on to Macedonia and Greece, the man seems to comprehend that if you give Albanians a hand, they’ll take your whole arm, leg, torso and head. And yet he suggests Serbia give them that hand — after previously writing what a mistake this is. But then, how much can we really expect from a man whose record on the Balkans includes the following, starting with Srdja Trifkovic from 2006:



The involvement of the Clinton administration in the wars of Yugoslav succession was a good example of the failed expectation that pandering to Muslim ambitions in a secondary theater will improve the U.S. standing in the Muslim world as a whole. The notion germinated in the final months of George H.W. Bush’s presidency, when his Acting Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger said that a goal in Bosnia was to mollify the Muslim world and to counter any perception of an anti-Muslim bias regarding American policies in Iraq in the period leading up to Gulf War I. The result of years of policies thus inspired is a terrorist base [in] the heart of Europe, a moral debacle, and the absence of any positive payoff to the United States.


Now from director of the Jerusalem Institute for Western Defense, Yohanan Ramati writing in 1994:



The civil war in Yugoslavia continues, with untold suffering on all sides. The media report the suffering of the Muslims in gruesome detail. The suffering of Croats at Muslim hands gets little attention. The suffering of Serbs is ignored. So it will surprise large sections of the American public that some 600,000 refugees from Croatia and Bosnia have saught refuge in beliguered Serbia deprived of food and fuel by UN dictate during the deadly winter.


The media in the Western world, the Muslim world and Israel treats us to a regular dose of tearjacking hate propaganda. We see women and children in Sarajevo - the Muslim quarters of Sarajevo - with terrible wounds seeping blood and shattered limbs, to the accompaniment of shells and small arms fire. We do not see the killing and maiming of Serb women and children by Muslim fire in Bosnia or by Croat fire in Croatia. And when Croat women and children are brutally murdered by Muslims, or vice versa, the media response is sporadic and no conclusions are drawn.


This organized anti-Serb and pro-Muslim propaganda should cause anyone believing in democracy and free speech serious concern. It recalls Hitler’s propaganda against Allies in World War II…The selectivity in reporting and comment is far too blatant to be accidental. The Western governments do not control their media sufficiently to be responsible for it. So who is? Who is bankrolling and masterminding the vast effort to destroy a people the United States, England and France have no reason to hate in order to establish a second Muslim state in a Balkan province where Muslims are minority?


Part of the answer is provided by a revealing interview by Mr. James Harff (director of Ruder & Finn Global Public Affairs) given to Mr. Jacques Merlino in Paris in October 1993. Ruder & Finn are public relations company, currently registered as foreign agents. Here are Harff’s statements, slightly abridged.


Harrf: For 18 months, we have been working for the Republics of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as for the opposition in Kosovo [Albanian nationalists]…


Marlino: How often do you intervene?


Harff: Quantity is not important. You have to intervene at the right time with the right person. From June to September, we organized 30 meetings with the main press agencies, as well as meetings between Bosnian officials and Al Gore, Lawrence Eagleburger and 10 influential senators, among them George Mitchell and Robert Dole. We also sent out 13 exclusive news items, 37 last-minute faxes, 17 official letters and eight official reports. We placed 20 telephone calls to White House staff, 20 senators, and close to 100 to journalists, editors, newscaters and other influenctial people in the media.


From retired NY Times reporter David Binder writing in the South Slav Journal in 1995:



The international impulse came from the early recognition of the secessions of Slovenia and Croatia demanded by Germany and forced upon Germany’s European Community partners by Bonn’s blackmail. All at once Washington, which had sensibly opposed this recognition initiative, found itself out of step with its key European allies on a sensitive issue. This was perceived as a dangerous dysfunction in America’s key Atlantic relationships. With the Bosnian cauldron already bubbling, the Yugoslav conflict suddenly became a priority for Secretary of State Baker.


Few have noted that in 1992, Baker literally created the supposedly independent and supposedly sovereign Bosnia and Hercegovina with its Muslim president, Alija Izetbegovic, thereby provoking Europe’s first protracted war since 1945. He did so with the blessing of President Bush and with considerable input from Larry Eagleburger and Warren Zimmermann — past and contemporary ambassadors to Belgrade. Their design was both complex and devious, but they were so convinced of its efficacy that they supported Izetbegovic in his rejection of the European Community’s Lisbon plan for dividing Bosnia and Hercegovina in a federative scheme.


To get back in step with Germany and the other European powers, the United States would simultaneously recognize Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Hercegovina. Macedonia was also to be in this package, but with elections looming, President Bush bowed to the powerful Greek lobby’s objections and deferred that. Not wishing to step out in front on any Yugoslav issue, the Bush Administration strong-armed the Europeans to make the first move, according recognition to the Sarajevo government on 6 April, while the United States followed 24 hours later with simultaneous recognition of the governments of Sarajevo, Ljubljana [Slovenia capital] and Zagreb. At the time, Eagleburger and Zimmermann argued that international recognition of the Izetbegovic regime, along with United Nations membership, would automatically shield it from Serb predations. Both subsequently acknowledged that they had been disastrously mistaken. But, of course, it was too late.


The Bush Administration had been on record since 1991 as hostile to the Serbs in general and Slobodan Milosevic in particular. That, too, was principally the work of Zimmermann and Eagleburger. Their bias was also evident in the fact that they did nothing to embrace or support any of Milosevic’s Serbian opponents.


From an article by George Jatras, former Senior Air Attache to Moscow:



[I]n his book "The Politics of Diplomacy: Revolution, War and Peace, 1989-1992," Mr. Baker wrote, … "After the meeting [with Bosnian Foreign Minister Haris Silajdzic], I had Larry Eagleburger take Silajdzic to see the EC troika political directors (who happened to be visiting the Department) and asked [Undersecretary] Margaret Tutwiler to talk to the Foreign Minister about the importance of using Western mass media to build support in Europe and North America for the Bosnian cause. I also had her talk to her contacts at the four television networks, The Washington Post, and The New York Times to try to get more attention focused on the story (pg. 643-644)." In other words, we had already taken sides and the Serbs never had a chance.


Then there were Eaglesandwich’s accidentally honest moments, from Andy Wilcoxson in his Feb. 2006 article "Prof. Kostic Testifies That Unilateral Secession Caused Wars":



The trial of Slobodan Milosevic resumed on Wednesday with the continued testimony of Prof. Branko Kostic, the former Montenegrin representative in the Yugoslav (SFRY) presidency.

The prosecution claims that Milosevic provoked the wars in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia. The prosecution alleges that Milosevic was the mastermind of an enormous conspiracy, or "joint criminal enterprise." The prosecution previously claimed that the conspiracy was aimed at the creation of greater Serbia, but recently the prosecution has withdrawn that claim. It is not clear what the prosecution now believes the objective of the alleged conspiracy was supposed to have been.


Milosevic has a much simpler explanation. Milosevic claims that war broke out in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia because secessionist forces illegally seized control of sovereign Yugoslav territory and unilaterally declared their secession, which violated the Yugoslav constitution as well as the rights of Yugoslav citizens (mostly Serbs) who wished to remain living in Yugoslavia.


To prove his case, Milosevic played a videotape of an interview with James Baker, the former U.S. Secretary of State (1989 – 1992). In the interview Baker says unequivocally that civil war broke out in Yugoslavia because secessionists in Bosnia, Croatia, and Slovenia unilaterally declared independence from Yugoslavia. Baker said that their actions violated the Helsinki Final act, and caused the wars to break out.


Milosevic then played videotape of Baker’s successor, Lawrence Eagleburger (U.S. Secretary of State 1992-1993). Eagleburger stated flat out that Bush recognized the secessionists simply because he was trying to win Croatian-American votes in the 1992 presidential election.


Milosevic played videotape of Franjo Tudjman speaking to a crowd of supporters on Ban Jelacic Square in Zagreb. In this videotape Tudjman admitted that there would not have been a war if Croatia had not insisted on secession from Yugoslavia.


Prof. Kostic pointed out that [Bosnian president] Alija Izetbegovic had made similar statements. He made reference to Izetbegovic’s notorious statement that he would "sacrifice peace for a sovereign Bosnia." It is worth noting that Izetbegovic made that statement in February 1991, more than a year before war broke out in Bosnia.


And here is Eaglesandwich capitalizing on the successful efforts by the first Bush administration to convince the Muslim world that Muslims were simply being butchered wholesale in the Balkans as the indifferent world looked on. From an October 6, 1992 broadcast of the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour:


SEC. EAGLEBURGER: There’s no question, we’re very sensitive to the Moslem world’s view that the West is permitting the killing of Moslems in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while acting differently in Iraq. The situation is totally different. So I mean, I think it’s fairly clear you can impose a no-fly zone in Iraq and for totally different reasons but the point, nevertheless, and in this you’re correct, is that the Moslem world looks on aghast more and more as the Moslems in Bosnia and Herzegovina are killed, and that there is no question at all that this has weighed heavily on the President and all of us who’ve had to try to think through this problem. Again, the situation is totally different, but the fact of the matter is Moslems are being killed in Bosnia and Herzegovina and this government has tried to demonstrate to the Moslem world we care about that and want to try to do something about it.


MR. [ROBERT] MacNeil: So President Bush is now prepared to put American warplanes into the sky over Bosnia if the UN asks for them, is that —


SEC. EAGLEBURGER: You know, again, I don’t want to commit the President, but it seems to me to be fairly obvious that if, in fact, the no-fly zone were — were passed with the teeth in it that we want, that the President would be prepared to contribute to the enforcement of that no-fly zone, yes.


MR. MacNeil: And if Serbian planes interfered with them, they would be — U.S. planes would shoot them down?


SEC. EAGLEBURGER: Again, I don’t want to speculate, other than to say that you can assume the U.S. would be prepared to make sure that the no-fly zone was carried out, and I suppose if that required the use of force, we would be prepared to do that.


MR. MacNeil: Moving to the other piece of the situation which has so many people so concerned, particularly with winter advancing, what is the U.S. doing to increase the quantity or proportion of relief supplies actually reaching?


SEC. EAGLEBURGER: …[W]e’re trying to do what we can now working with the - - the [UNPROFOR] and the UN to try to make sure that we can get roads open so that we can transport food in by — food and medicines in by road this winter….


MR. MacNeil: And the U.S. would be prepared to use force in some way in conjunction with other countries to protect those road convoys?


SEC. EAGLEBURGER: Again, you’re asking me to make commitments for the President. The fact of the matter is we have already had the Security Council resolution which says all necessary means to assure that the humanitarian supplies reach there. It is a decision for the Secretary General of the UN and the Unprefor as to what that force might be. Obviously, we would be prepared to support whatever the decision of the UN is.


So here we are. Sixteen years later. Post-9/11. Still pursuing the same pro-Muslim policies in the Balkans at the expense of the Balkans’ Christians in order to keep the charade going. Here we are. Still perpetuating the same lies. And here is Lawrence "Larry" Eagleburger, surprised that one lie led to the next lie and that we are still lying. Eaglesandwich is "distressed" to be witnessing the inevitable next link in the chain of events that he helped set off, stunned that our Frankenstein’s monster — our ’controllable’ Bosnian or Albanian proteges — is out of our control, and we must pursue the program we helped start, to its logical and unending conclusion.

Kobe Curses at Refs in Serbian, French

Kobe Curses at Refs in Serbian, French

Posted Apr 6th 2008 10:35AM by Tom Ziller
Filed under: Lakers, Los Angeles

Kobe Bryant has been sitting on 15 technical fouls -- one short of the automatic suspension -- for a week now. You'd think being forced to suddenly avoid techs would lead to Kobe stopping his practice of yelling at the referees, right? Nope. The Washington Post elucidates.
Bryant has held his tongue, walked the other way or used another, more confusing means to voice his frustrations to officials. "I just cuss them out really bad in Serbian," Bryant joked.

Bryant said he has learned how to swear in the native languages of teammates Vladimir Radmanovic (Serbia), Sasha Vujacic (Slovenia) and Ronny Turiaf (France). "I've been cursing in French. French is really cool, because everything sounds good in French."
Ah, a negative ramification from David Stern's quest of globalization. Damn Euros, making Bob Delaney's job harder.

Kobe has no competition in any most hated star polling. Ever.

04 April 2008

Are we on the eve of the next World War?

Are we on the eve of the next World War?
By Aleksandra Rebic
April 4, 2008

There’s always the watershed moment. That moment that guarantees war in the future and it becomes just a matter of time before it happens. No war is ever caused by the obvious act that triggers it. The Sarajevo bullet fired on June 28, 1914 didn’t cause World War I. Hitler invading Poland on September 1, 1939 didn’t cause World War II.

Because wars are about taking care of "unfinished business", we are faced with the prospect of a third world war. If that comes, the independence of Kosovo will be the watershed moment. Pandora’s box, despite all the warnings issued, has been opened in the Balkans. Whatever may happen to trigger that war if it comes, its precursor will be found in the establishment of the Republic of Kosova as the worlds "newest nation", of that I am sure. It is now up to the leaders of the great powers to make sure that this destiny is never fulfilled. In the coming months, beginning in April of 2008, the leaders will be meeting and talking things over. They will be negotiating and planning and compromising. They will be drawing lines in the sand. They will be making decisions that will affect the future of all their minions. In doing so in these modern times, these leaders cannot, and must not, ignore history, for it is the most reliable predictor of the future. What’s past is never past. Especially in the Balkans.



Signing of the San Stefano Peace Treaty



"Should anything serious happen in the Balkans, and the Serbs follow a policy we do not like, we shall simply strangle Serbia," declared Austro-Hungarian emperor Franz Joseph I to the German ambassador in Vienna in January of 1901. Thus, an empire of 50 million people was threatening a state of little more than 3 million. Now, more than 100 years later, the European Union (EU) is issuing the same warnings to Serbia should she follow a policy it does not like with regards to Kosovo. Her sacred Kosovo.



Isolation, or worse, the EU warns, whether implicitly or directly, will be her fate and since more than 50 percent of Serbia’s trade at the present time is with the countries of the EU, she would be economically strangled. Economic strangulation is not the only prospect that faces Serbia should she exercise her right over territory that was legally hers. Military consequences would loom, just as they always have. Military consequences are the common denominator in the watershed moments that lead to war.

Watershed moment number one: 130 years ago the Congress of Berlin was held in the summer of 1878. The great powers of Austria, Germany and Great Britain didn’t like the Treaty of San Stefano that had been forged in March of that year following Russia’s victorious war with Turkey. Turkey’s Ottoman Empire had enjoyed ruling over its minions for centuries, and this was the empire that in 1878 controlled the Balkans. The San Stefano Treaty would have effectively ended the control of the Ottoman Empire over the Balkans and increased Russian influence over that area. Because this was unacceptable to the British, the Germans, and the Austrians, they demanded a revision of the agreement, threatening to use military force if necessary. Russia was not prepared for another war. As a result, the Congress of Berlin was convened.

This Congress that commenced in Berlin on June 13, 1878 was attended by the major European powers of the time. Germany, Austria-Hungary and Great Britain proposed that Autria-Hungary should occupy the provinces of Bosnia-Hercegovina, making it clear that Serbia must not be allowed to lay claim to those provinces which had been under Turkish occupation for centuries. All had vested interests in not allowing Serbia to lay claim to anything that was rightfully hers and to prevent Serbs scattered throughout the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires to unite. At this meeting in Berlin the British prime minister, Disraeli, issued the following warning: "If the Congress leaves the two provinces in the same state of affairs in which they are at the moment, one would witness the appearance of the domination of the Slav race, a race which is little disposed to do justice to others."

This was the prime minister of a country which would only some years later form the first concentration camp in history into which they would haul 120,000 women and children of Boer farmers, of which 20,000 would die of neglect and hunger. This concentration camp was established in South Africa, however it would later be copied by the Austro-Hungarians who would haul 150,000 Serbs into such a camp. From the British and the Austrians, Adolf Hitler would learn how to handle those who were "undesirable."

At this Congress of 1878, with the Treaty of Berlin, Austria-Hungary was given the mandate to occupy Bosnia and Hercegovina. Russia, intimidated by the western nations, was not able to do anything about it. Austria-Hungary would follow through by annexing the two provinces in 1908, and Russia, who had engaged in yet another war, this time a destructive one with Japan in 1904, was again in no position to help the Serbs, her Slav brothers in the Balkans. With that annexation the hatred between the Germanic (Teutonic) and Slav races intensified. It was just a matter of time before the great, all consuming war that the great powers had already made plans for, would come to fruition.

The Serbs were determined to shake off the Austro-Hungarian stranglehold over their people just as they had finally shaken off the Turkish. They wanted nothing more than any other peoples of the world had striven for. But that was unacceptable to the powers that ruled Europe. When the Serbs rebelled in the summer of 1914, Austria-Hungary exploited the perfect excuse to begin the war they wanted and the Serbs would be the convenient scapegoat.



Congress of Berlin painting by Anton von Werner


World War One began with Austria attacking Serbia with the full verbal and written promise of Germany that she would defend Austria if Russia attacked her. The Germans felt comfortable giving that promise because they were thoroughly convinced that Austria would smash Serbia quickly before Russia or anyone else could react. But it didn’t happen that way. Russia did react this time and so did others. Four years of war was the result, the likes of which had never been seen by the world before. This war would change everything, literally everything.



As a result of that war, empires and dynasties were swept away, splitting into new countries, and there would come to be many more of them than there were in 1914. Many of these would harbor a grudge against the great powers of Europe who had colonized them previously. Some of these grudges would manifest themselves into the separatist, illegal and terrorist activity that we are now dealing with at the beginning of the 21st century and which are likely to haunt us for years to come. Out of that activity, new, artificial countries are being created, regardless of whether they are viable or self-sustainable. Nation building under such circumstances does not bode well for peaceful coexistence in the world.

Watershed moment number two: The entire decade of the 1930s was one instance of appeasement after another with which the great powers enabled Adolf Hitler to throw the world into the Second World War, a war the likes of which the world had never seen, once again. This one would be even more destructive than the first. If one had to pick a single moment, mine would be Hitler’s invasion of the Rhineland in 1936. France did not react, nor did the other European powers. Hitler, who could have been stopped dead in his tracks permanently, because the German army was still weak at that time, learned to his amusement that Germany, once a beaten land, was now well on her way to fulfilling her destiny with the help of the very European nations she intended to conquer. The other European powers, namely Britain and France, did not act, though they were militarily powerful enough to do so. Only a few years later, they would have no choice but to act and at such a cost.

Serbs would be drawn into that war for they had the audacity to stand up the Nazis on March 27, 1941. They rejected a pact with Hitler and Hitler responded with a bombing campaign that commenced on April 6th and a subsequent invasion, occupation, and dismemberment of Yugoslavia. Why does this sound so familiar? Because it is.

We have now come to what I believe is watershed moment number three. A Pandora’s box has been opened in Kosovo even though many warnings, for many different reasons, were issued prior to Kosovo’s declaration of independence on February 17, 2008. Just as Zeus warned Pandora not to open the box but she did anyway, the leaders of nations were warned not to encourage Kosovo to break from Serbia, but some did anyway. Though only a little time has passed since then, I suspect that regrets are being harbored. Are we now only to wait for the consequences to manifest themselves? No, we must not wait. We cannot naively hope that any tensions that have resulted from the establishment of the Albanian Moslem "Republic of Kosova" will pass with time.

It is up to the leaders to now be true leaders and to reverse the mistake they have made. They must.

Here are just some points of the many points that should be considered by anyone evaluating the current situation in the Balkans to see their way forward.

Regardless of what phony ’"humanitarian" pretenses are used to justify military action, a primary reason for war is economic. One essential element of the drive to the First World War was the Berlin-Baghdad rail line, which the German Kaiser dreamed about to expand his empire. This essential rail line was to go through the German-friendly countries of Austria, Bulgaria and Turkey, but 175 miles of it was to run through Serbia which was not under Germany’s sphere of influences and alliances. Serbia either had to be made friendly or be conquered. Hitler intended to fulfill the Kaiser’s dream as part of his agenda for conquering the world in the 20th Century. He would come awfully close to succeeding.

Today, it is not the Berlin-Baghdad rail line but the oil and gas lines that go through Serbian territory which are being coveted, not just by the Europeans, but by the United States as well. One is to come through southern Europe and Serbia and is to be controlled by the Western Powers, and the other one is to come from the northeast and Russia through Serbia and is to be controlled by Russia. Russia has already established a plan for reserves in Bachka (a province in northern Serbia) and Russia’s new president, Dmitry Medvedev, has been in Belgrade to firm up the plan. It appears that the western nations, particularly the United States, have established an independent Kosovo for the same purpose.

Albanian sources have provided "confirmation" of such intentions. On March 3, 2008, Shqiptar Oseku issued the following commentary:

"… Albania and its seaport in Vlore are the final destination of a giant oil pipeline, which will transport the Caspian oil from the Caucasus to the West. This project, which is being carried out by the US company, AMBO [Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria Oil], began in 1993 and the final contracts were signed in 2008. According to the US Department of Energy, this is the most important US project in Southeastern Europe in the 21st century." Source: BBC Monitoring Europe (Political) - March 5, 2008, Text of report by Pristina-based weekly Self-Determination Movement website, on 3 March, 2008.

The Americans have participated in establishing an illegal state in the Balkans to serve their own purposes. Artificially creating such a state sets a precedent, and not a positive one. Other ethnic and national groups are watching and learning.

Are the Americans going to support these other groups when they start asking for or demanding their own independent states? Or are the Americans going to let that be a European or Asian or Canadian or Middle Eastern problem? Kosovo, argued the American policymakers, was and is a "unique" case that required special consideration.

We will see how many other groups will come to see themselves as having a "unique case for special consideration" and just how that’s going to be dealt with.




Aleksandra Rebic - Biography email author

Aleksandra Rebic is an American of Serbian heritage who was born in Chicago, IL, the daughter of parents who immigrated to the United States and made America their home. She is a graduate of Northwestern University in Evanston, IL. with a Bachelor of Science degree in Communication Studies from the School of Speech.

Aleksandra has been an aspiring author and student of history all of her life. While employed at a successful data processing company that has both national and international clientele, she dedicates much of her free time to the freelance writing that she hopes will make a difference. The topics she focuses on cover a wide range, from the simple to the complex, and her hope is that through her writings she moves and inspires people to see things from a different perspective than they might be used to.

Aleksandra has been published in both Serbian and American newspapers and on the internet, and is co-author, with her father, of the book Dragoljub-Draza Mihailovich and the Second World War: The History of a Great Betrayal.