Kosovo
by http://wvwnews.net/story.php?id=3338
The http://wvwnews.net/story.php?id=3496’s July 1914 ultimatum to Serbia. The fruits will be equally bitter. While their exact size and taste are hard to predict right now, that in the fullness of time America will come to regret the criminal folly of her current leaders is certain. Their Balkan policy is worse than a crime: It is a mistake.
I have little to add to the sordid story of Western deceit, allied with http://wvwnews.net/story.php?id=2936 and South Ossetia.
NOT IN THE AMERICAN INTEREST—“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.” While my friends and I have expressed this view many a time, it was recently stated with greater prominence by John R. Bolton, Peter W. Rodman and Lawrence Eagleburger. Writing in the Washington Times, the three heavyweights called for urgent re-examination of U.S. policy on Kosovo and urged the Bush administration to make it clear that, pending the results of such re-examination, it would withhold recognition of any independence declaration:
“Current U.S. policy relies on the unconvincing claim that Kosovo is “unique” and would set no precedent for other troublespots… [Ethnic and religious minorities in other countries already are signaling their intention to follow a Kosovo example. This includes sizeable Albanian communities in adjoining areas of southern Serbia, Montenegro, and especially Macedonia, as well as the Serbian portion of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Recognition … would set a precedent with far-reaching and unpredictable consequences for many other regions of the world. The Kosovo model already has been cited by supporters of the Basque separatist movement in Spain and the Turkish-controlled area of northern Cyprus. Neither the Security Council nor any other international body has the power or authority to impose a change of any country’s borders.”
The trio further warned that the current U.S. policy is marked by a dismissive attitude toward Russia’s objections: The United States should not prompt an unnecessary crisis in U.S.-Russia relations, lest Russia withdraws her support on issues such as Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear intentions. Such cooperation would be undercut by American action calculated to neutralize Moscow’s legitimate concerns regarding Kosovo. On an issue of minor importance to the U.S., they ask, “is this a useful expenditure of significant political capital with Russia?”
Bolton, Rodman and Eagleburger predict that a self-proclaimed “independent state” of Kosovo will be “a dysfunctional one and a ward of the international community for the indefinite future.” It is plagued by rampant corruption and organized crime and a nonviable economy, they point out. Its law enforcement, integrity of the courts, protection of persons and property, and other prerequisites for statehood are “practically nonexistent.” Unilateral declaration of independence recognized by some countries and rejected by many others would only make matters worse by turning Kosovo into yet another “frozen conflict.”
The authors conclude by predicting that, “faced with a choice between Western partnership and defense of their sovereign territory and constitution,” Serbia would opt for the latter and inevitably move closer to Russia as its only protector.
“WHO LOST SERBIA?”—That Serbia is lost to the West is now certain. President Boris Tadic’s narrow victory (51 percent) in the second round of the presidential election in Serbia on February 3 was entirely due to his claim that, as an enthusiastically pro-Western reformist, he could obtain less brutal treatment for Serbia from Brussels and Washington than his “ultra-nationalist” opponent.
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=515#more-515