Germany to apologize to Serbia For Zoebels Remarks

[AK-Lover]

2 April 2007 | 09:33 -> 17:13 | Source: B92, Beta, Tanjug
BELGRADE -- Germany's ambassador to Serbia Andreas Zobel has apologized for making "possibly unclear remarks".

Weathering diplomatic storm: Ambassador Zobel (FoNet)


Ambassador Zobel decided to address the brewing diplomatic scandal in a news conference called Thursday. Zobel told journalists he apologized for the possible impression that he had no understanding for his host country, Serbia.

Zobel added all his statements, whether true or misconstrued, could only be assigned to him personally, and not to the state of Germany or the European Union. He added that he “at no point” said Hungary had any territorial pretensions toward the province of Vojvodina.

The German ambassador told the brief news conference that his personal position was that Kosovo was a unique case.

On Wednesday, media reported Zobel told a Forum for International Relations of the European Movement in Serbia that if the solution for Kosovo fell short of independence, “problems in Vojvodina and Sandžak might flare up”.

Zobel said that insisting on Kosovo remaining an integral part of Serbia, based on the claim that it officially became Serbian land in 1912, meant that Hungary could try to claim Vojvodina, a Serbian province since 1918.

Zobel was also quoted as saying “it was untrue that Kosovo had always belonged to Serbia, since it officially became Serbia’s in 1912, along with Vojvodina, which joined in 1918.”

“This is not a threat, but a mere analysis,” he said adding that Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica’s insistence that Kosovo is Serbia’s land “led to stagnation and a situation Serbia couldn’t win.”

He stated his belief that Serbs and Albanians could never reach an agreement, explaining that the push for the continuation of the talks was only meant to postpone the final status settlement.

According to Zobel, the UN fact-finding mission set to determine the implementation of the standards “could only come to one conclusion – Serbs and Albanians cannot live together.”

“Such a mission will postpone the solution for two more months,” the German Ambassador said.

He commented on UN envoy Martti Ahtisaari’s proposal which envisions supervised independence for the province, deeming it “not good, but better than all other possible solutions.”

“During the 15-month long negotiations that came eight years after the international community took over the administration over the province, Serbia never offered a concept for the reintegration of Kosovo. Ethnic Albanians want independence, and Serbia cannot incorporate them into its ranks,” Zobel was reported as saying.

“Many people in Serbia are satisfied with the fact that Albanians live separate lives, but they wish to keep Kosovo within Serbia’s borders,” he added.

The German Ambassador also noted that neither prime minister Koštunica, president Tadić, nor their advisors could explain the exact meaning of the formula “more than autonomy, less than independence,” adding that, in his opinion, Serbia “deserved better political elite.”

“Instead of insisting on keeping Kosovo within Serbia, it would be wise to work on enabling Serbia and Kosovo join the European Union in the next 20 to 25 years,” Zobel maintained.

Zobel also said that Kosovo was indeed Serbia’s land according to international law.

“However, Serbia cannot regain control over the province, as its Albanian majority no longer wishes to live in Serbia. That’s why Kosovo is a unique case,” Zobel said.

“There are those in Serbia who hope to see Albanians rioting in Kosovo so that they can say they were right all along when they warned the international community of terrorism threats in Kosovo,” Zobel said.

“Most impertinent meddling”

Meanwhile, the Serbian government reported on its website it would send “a most severe protest to the German government regarding Ambassador Zobel’s statements”.

In a meeting convened Thursday, the government described Zobel’s remarks as “the most impertinent meddling into Serbia’s affairs”

“Ambassador Zobel has in many ways brought up the issue of Serbia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, as well as the issue of the inviolability of its internationally recognized borders,” a statement from the session said.

“Despite the hospitality he was shown in Serbia, Ambassador Zobel has demonstrated disrespect for the dignity of state institutions in this country,” it continues.

“The Serbian government rightfully awaits an explanation from the German government on whether Ambassador Zobel stated the German government’s official position and points out that in all previous contacts between Serbia and Germany at the highest state level the countries showed and confirmed the willingness to maintain satisfactory relations,” the statement says.

“We hope to receive a clear explanation from the German government on Ambassador Zobel’s statements as soon as possible,” the statement concludes.

German embassy denies Vojvodina remarks

Earlier today, the German embassy in Belgrade reacted to what it says was incorrect interpretation of Ambassador Andreas Zobel’s words.

“Ambassador Zobel’s statements during the meeting of the Forum for International Relations of the European Movement in Serbia have been taken out of context and do not represent the truth. Not at any point did Ambassador Zobel claim that Hungary could open up the Vojvodina issue, as was reported in the media,” the statement said.

“On the contrary, the Forum participants asked Ambassador Zobel whether he was worried about possible instability in Vojvodina and other parts of Serbia, to which the ambassador answered that the EU integration was the best guarantee for Serbia’s stability. The Ambassador also pointed to the need to be careful when making historic claims and parallels.”

The statement also addressed the interpretation of part of his statement concerning Serbia’s political elite.

“Ambassador Zobel did not generalize to say that Serbia needed a better political elite, instead he warned that, in his opinion, Serbia’s political leadership needed to take on the responsibility to form a new government as soon as possible,” the statement ends.

[AK-Lover]

Pardon me, but looking at history and how much death and suffering Germans have caused to the Serbian people on several occasions. They have absolutely NO RIGHT to be making any remarks pertaining the our national sovereignity and even less right to think they can teach us our own history. I think a official apology should be demanded from Germany.

[R.D.]

And here comes the funny part...



“Many people in Serbia are satisfied with the fact that Albanians live separate lives, but they wish to keep Kosovo within Serbia’s borders,”


or is it just stupid?

[AK-Lover]

And here comes the funny part...



or is it just stupid?

His view, which I don't care much for.

[R.D.]

His view, which I don't care much for.
So why did you post it then? :bash:

[AK-Lover]

So why did you post it then? :bash:

I am talking about his statements threatening instability if we don't do this and that, not talking about Kosovo this time. Calm yourself down.

[muck]

I think a official apology should be demanded from Germany.

That is an overreaction. I do not intend to start a flameware here, but for what should Germany apologize? For writing down Freedom of Speech in the constitution? If the ambassador hurt Serbian Feelings, it is enough if he expresses his excuse.

And judging countries from the past will not bring any advantages for anyone. Imagine which diplomatic 'Maginot'-Line the French and the Germans would need in view of their nearly thousand years taking history of wars...in my humble opinion that attitude is the reason why the Balkan is still far away from peace.

There will never be an arrangement because one side is only ready for concessions if the other one admits it's faults. And the concerned party would only do this if it received concessions therefor - a real vicious circle.

[Kitsune]

Contrary to the your headline, it is not Germany that apoligizes. Says so in the text. But I also fail to see what Zobel should apologize for. What he said is largely true and it has nothing to do with what death and suffering Germany inflicted on the Serbian people in WWII.

From a pragmatical point of view, Kosovo should become largely independent, with some measures so that the Serbia saves as much face as possible. Simply because the overwhelming majority of Kosovos population are of Albanian descent and do not want to be ruled by Serbia - understandably after the death and suffering Serbians inflicted on them very recently.

I sometimes wonder wether this is discussed in Serbia at all: Suppose it would be accepted that Kosovo is a part of Serbia like any other - how do you guys imagine the future? You know that there would be constant violence, terror and insurrection among those almost two million people in Kosovo, don't you? Are there any plans made already how to supress them effectively? The whole situation would be like the Westbank, only in Europe. Another constant bloody conflict, lasting for decades and decades, like the one with the Basques or Northern Ireland, probably worse. Great. And many of the victims would be Serbians. Is that really what you want?

At the same time, even with all the power of the Serbian state bearing down on the Kosovars, no Serb could stand anywhere on the field of blackbirds without fearing for his life. But if the Kosovars would be allowed autonomy, peace could be possible. And possibly, in a few decades, it may even come to it that a Serbian family could again live among Kosovars without needing constant protection and fearing for their lives.

But whatever. As far as this ambassador is concerned, Serbia can accept his apology, uncalled for as it was, and send him back to Germany. He can easily been replaced with somebody else. If Serbia is interested in ongoing diplomatic relations, that is.

[Vuk1389]

Zobel also said that Kosovo was indeed Serbia’s land according to international law.

Still is....

[Kilgor]

Germany should adopt Otto von Bismarck's wise attitude to the balkans.

[Rictor]

This is the diplomatic equivalent of "It's a nice store you've got here. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it. Not that I would want that, of course, but certain circumstances might come about which would make it impossible for you to continue running your fine business, much to my dismay."

Bravo Germany. I am in awe of the civilized manner in which you treat your peers.

[Danik]

What were the demographics in Kosovo pre WWII?

What is a good book to read on the subject of Kosovo?

[Freibier]

Germany should adopt ze Kaisers wise attitude to ze balkans

[zg18]

Contrary to the your headline, it is not Germany that apoligizes. Says so in the text. But I also fail to see what Zobel should apologize for. What he said is largely true and it has nothing to do with what death and suffering Germany inflicted on the Serbian people in WWII.

From a pragmatical point of view, Kosovo should become largely independent, with some measures so that the Serbia saves as much face as possible. Simply because the overwhelming majority of Kosovos population are of Albanian descent and do not want to be ruled by Serbia - understandably after the death and suffering Serbians inflicted on them very recently.

I sometimes wonder wether this is discussed in Serbia at all: Suppose it would be accepted that Kosovo is a part of Serbia like any other - how do you guys imagine the future? You know that there would be constant violence, terror and insurrection among those almost two million people in Kosovo, don't you? Are there any plans made already how to supress them effectively? The whole situation would be like the Westbank, only in Europe. Another constant bloody conflict, lasting for decades and decades, like the one with the Basques or Northern Ireland, probably worse. Great. And many of the victims would be Serbians. Is that really what you want?

At the same time, even with all the power of the Serbian state bearing down on the Kosovars, no Serb could stand anywhere on the field of blackbirds without fearing for his life. But if the Kosovars would be allowed autonomy, peace could be possible. And possibly, in a few decades, it may even come to it that a Serbian family could again live among Kosovars without needing constant protection and fearing for their lives.

But whatever. As far as this ambassador is concerned, Serbia can accept his apology, uncalled for as it was, and send him back to Germany. He can easily been replaced with somebody else. If Serbia is interested in ongoing diplomatic relations, that is.


I coundn`t agreee more x2

[Monte]

You are aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall talking soooo much bull****.

[muck]

You are aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall talking soooo much bull****.

Said the bull. Better explain why - share your wisdom!

[AK-Lover]

Contrary to the your headline, it is not Germany that apoligizes. Says so in the text. But I also fail to see what Zobel should apologize for. What he said is largely true and it has nothing to do with what death and suffering Germany inflicted on the Serbian people in WWII.

From a pragmatical point of view, Kosovo should become largely independent, with some measures so that the Serbia saves as much face as possible. Simply because the overwhelming majority of Kosovos population are of Albanian descent and do not want to be ruled by Serbia - understandably after the death and suffering Serbians inflicted on them very recently.

I sometimes wonder wether this is discussed in Serbia at all: Suppose it would be accepted that Kosovo is a part of Serbia like any other - how do you guys imagine the future? You know that there would be constant violence, terror and insurrection among those almost two million people in Kosovo, don't you? Are there any plans made already how to supress them effectively? The whole situation would be like the Westbank, only in Europe. Another constant bloody conflict, lasting for decades and decades, like the one with the Basques or Northern Ireland, probably worse. Great. And many of the victims would be Serbians. Is that really what you want?

At the same time, even with all the power of the Serbian state bearing down on the Kosovars, no Serb could stand anywhere on the field of blackbirds without fearing for his life. But if the Kosovars would be allowed autonomy, peace could be possible. And possibly, in a few decades, it may even come to it that a Serbian family could again live among Kosovars without needing constant protection and fearing for their lives.

But whatever. As far as this ambassador is concerned, Serbia can accept his apology, uncalled for as it was, and send him back to Germany. He can easily been replaced with somebody else. If Serbia is interested in ongoing diplomatic relations, that is.

Yes I realize it is not Germany that apologizes, thats the problem. So far they have remained silent. And it has alot of things to do with what Germany did in the past, alot of the memories are still very fresh (ex. The massacre of more than 7000 in one day in Kragujevac by the Werhmacht or Germanies support of the Croatian Ustashe puppet state which resulted in more thand 500,000 dead)
Germany wants influence in the balkans, it always has. Just look at the begginging of the seccessionist wars in Yugoslavia, when Germany was showing it's strongest support for Slovenia and Croatia and was practically responsible for pushing things over the brink. Serbs in general have a very bad view of Germany on a historical and political terms, of course not economically but thats a different story. So that means if Germany wants to change peoples perception here of Germany and open the way for our co-operation it's going to need to put alot more effort into how it conducts it self towards Serbia and Serbs. Even now it has worsened because of German Army occupying part of our country in the south and bombing us in 1999 just as in 1941.


Addressing Kosovo, it's not an argument of who did what to whom even anymore because in even that direction we have much more stronger arguments than the Albanians, yet another puppet of Germany in WW2, with their Skenderberg SS Division responsible for mass killings and ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Kosovo during WW2, paving the way along with Tito after the war for a Albanian majority in Kosovo and Metohija, which never was a region with border like Tito invented it but was always a region in Serbia, the most important one.

International law must stand, if Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia were not allowed to get their own independance why should a violent minority (Because Albanians are a minority in Serbia, since Kosovo is part of Serbia) get independance, why should they be rewarded with a state they couldn't run properly anyway, for having conducted a terrorist insurrection, murdered police and army, murdered civilians (Serbs, Roma, Albanians and other minorities), destroyed ancient monuments and centuries old Christian monasteries, desecrated graveyards, dug up graves and a list of other speechless acts. You (US and NATO) promised them something you weren't allowed to promise them back in 1999, and now when your stuck in the ****e, and they want what you promised them or else, you have to break international law. You are almost forcing the creation of another fake state carved up from a sovereign countries most precious land to give to a violent ethnic group which has it's own country next door. This will have very serious repurcussions. It's too bad you don't understand the Serbian national pysche and it's power. Take Kosovo and Metohija from us now, thats fine. But if it takes 1000 more years of bloodshed to get it back that's what it will be. At all costs.

[Vandervahn]

Yes I realize it is not Germany that apologizes, thats the problem. So far they have remained silent. ...

(Here be a lot of Blabla)

You´re quite persistent with your claim that Germany should "apologize". And I agree that there might be a lot of things for what the country arguably could apologize to Serbia, and for some of it they did. But why, oh WHY should the country or government of Germany apologize for what its ambassador said in a speech that was purely his opinion? Not to forget an opinion which is fact-based DEPENDING on the interpretation of these facts.

Had he said this on official behalf of the german government, now that is a different thing. Yes, hes the german envoy. No, that doesnt mean that germany is to be held accountable for everything the man does. And still you want Germany to apologize simply because it has been such mean brute towards the glorious nation of Serbia. Big deal, but where´s the relevance to the case of an ambassador holding a controversial speech of his own making?

[muck]

@AK Lover
For what should Germany apologise? For the fact that it's ambassador has hurt the Serbian national pride in with a personal statement that does not reflect the official policy of Germany?

Apart from the second world war, in which Nazi-Germany land has struck every nation in Europe with it's possession striving, I would not know which interests Germany has in the Balkans, especially which historically based interests. Maybe economical interets, but like you said, that is another story.

The world should stop judging the presence with the past. As I already mentioned, Germany and France are the best example of that. Centuries of hatred and mutual humiliation dominated the relations between those countries, but after WW2 was the will on both sides to reconcile without any pride-dominated conditions.

In addition, it is an insolence, and I say this to everybody who wants to hear it, that criticism is smashed with these grounds.It must be allowed to criticize Serbia without that Serbians mention the past to declare a statement invalid or incorrect.

And just one sentence to the political situation on the Balkans now...After the breakdown of Tito's imperium, more exactly after the first declarations of independence in the early 90's, it was Serbia and Serbian nationals who started bloody wars against the renegades with results that cannot be denied, so to pacify the Balkans it was the logical consequence to decide to the disadvantage of Serbia - just as, for example, many decisions after WW2 ware made to the disadvantage of Germany because it was the aggressor - and you must realize that any other attitude had never ever brought peace. But maybe you are right - we cannot understand Serbians mentality.

A compromise-willing, free and easy friendship without any conditions - to speak figurative, like the handshake between Adenauer and de Gaulle, not even after twenty years of devastating war - will never be possible between countries on the Balkans.

You know why it worked after WW2? Because of the lack of national pride. Despite the economic boom, Germany had lost a war and was exposed in front of the world, confrontated with it's guilt for the war, and France, the proud Grande Nation, had not been able to defeat the enemy without massive help - after the country was four years under the rule of the archenemy. Both nations were abashed, hence they were ready for compromises.

Transfer that parable on the Balkans now.

[cbreedon]

Germany should adopt Otto von Bismarck's wise attitude to the balkans.


Which was?

[Indiana Jones]

Which was?
"Der Balkan ist nicht die Knochen eines einzigen pommerschen Grenadiers wert..."
A loose translation would be:
"The Balkans ain´t worth the wellbeing of a single Pommerian grenadier"

[Mamont]

"Der Balkan ist nicht die Knochen eines einzigen pommerschen Grenadiers wert..."
A loose translation would be:
"The Balkans ain´t worth the wellbeing of a single Pommerian grenadier"

He lived in a much different political world than it is now. Interesting what he would've said now...

[Zerodivider]

Yes I realize it is not Germany that apologizes, thats the problem. So far they have remained silent. And it has alot of things to do with what Germany did in the past, alot of the memories are still very fresh

Fresh? It was 60 years ago, get over it. If any country has dealt with its past then it is Germany... I wish the same could be said about others...

[cbreedon]

"Der Balkan ist nicht die Knochen eines einzigen pommerschen Grenadiers wert..."
A loose translation would be:
"The Balkans ain´t worth the wellbeing of a single Pommerian grenadier"

Wasn't that German policy for most of the early 90's Balkan wars?

[Freibier]

Yes I realize it is not Germany that apologizes, thats the problem. So far they have remained silent.
blablablablablablabla
NUTS!?!
Go cry me a ****ing river!

[muck]

Wasn't that German policy for most of the early 90's Balkan wars?
May I ask what you mean with this statement?

[Kitsune]

Serbia made a lot of effort to keep the memories as fresh as possible. There was a lot of Nazi related propaganda back in 98, the NATO in the role of the evil Fascists of course. (At the same time, NATO countries compared what the Serbians did to the Nazis. Typical in these time. Everyones opponent is always like Hitler.)
It cannot be helped now, but it should be said that this attitude isn't very helpful.


AK-lover wrote:
It's too bad you don't understand the Serbian national pysche and it's power. Take Kosovo and Metohija from us now, thats fine. But if it takes 1000 more years of bloodshed to get it back that's what it will be. At all costs.
Perhaps I understand the Serbian psyche better than you think. And I believe that you mean it. The real problem is however, that Kosovars think exactly the same: exchange the word "Serbian" above and this sentence could come from one of them. They are every bit as fanatical as you are, believe me. And, in addition, they live there. You have to understand that to us other Europeans the idea that you two hotheaded people actually shed each others blood for the next 1000 years is not very fascinating. And neither should it to you.

[cbreedon]

May I ask what you mean with this statement?
from what I remember most of the world including Germany just sat on their hands and did nothing... It took a couple of years before anyone did a thing and then I don't recall German troops being sent... maybe I am wrong. I remember British and Dutch troops being sent into the so called safe zones.

[mountainbear]

from what I remember most of the world including Germany just sat on their hands and did nothing... It took a couple of years before anyone did a thing and then I don't recall German troops being sent... maybe I am wrong. I remember British and Dutch troops being sent into the so called safe zones.

The United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), was the first UN peacekeeping force in Croatia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Yugoslav wars. It existed between the beginning of UN involvement in February 1992, and its restructuring into other forces in March 1995. In French, its name was FOR****U (Force de Protection des Nations Unies).

The UNPROFOR was composed of nearly 39,000 personnel, 320 of whom were killed on duty. It was composed of troops from Argentina, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States and Venezuela.

From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Protection_Force

[Kitsune]

Back then, in 1992, it was still out of the question for Germany to send troops abroad for intervention or peacekeeping missions. By now, this attitude has changed to a certain degree, but our politicians still like sitting on their hands when it comes to questions regarding the military.

[Rictor]

Perhaps I understand the Serbian psyche better than you think. And I believe that you mean it. The real problem is however, that Kosovars think exactly the same: exchange the word "Serbian" above and this sentence could come from one of them. They are every bit as fanatical as you are, believe me. And, in addition, they live there. You have to understand that to us other Europeans the idea that you two hotheaded people actually shed each others blood for the next 1000 years is not very fascinating. And neither should it to you.

Ok, here's a question for you: why shouldn't the Serbs and Kosovo Albanians be allowed to go at each other if they so wish. You're right in thinking that both factions are as zealous about their cause, so I say may the best man win. The same rule that applies to individuals ought to apply to nations - what goes on between consenting adults is no one's business but their own. You may not particularly like that your neighbors are feuding, but you have no right to sit them down like children and order them to play nice.

When Britain and the IRA were at each other's throats, I don't recall hearing any particular outcry from NATO, the UN or anyone else. They were allowed to resolve their differences on their own terms, and eventually they did. Since they hammered out a deal on their own, the ensuing peace was more stable. The fact that France and Germany (and many others) have been able to reconcile after centuries or hatred is great, but it was ultimately a mutual decision. Peace can not be gained through allowing old hatreds to simmer just under the surface.

As well, don't you consider it ever so slightly hypocritical that nations which have been at war for literally centuries have suddenly decreed an arbitrary date past which no conflict is permissible? Wars, wherever they might be, are regarded by the right-thinking nations of Europe as some barbarous, horrific atrocities that needs to be stopped at any cost, when these same nations have for 9/10 of their existance never once put down the sword.

[Indiana Jones]

Wasn't that German policy for most of the early 90's Balkan wars?
It is my impression that a large majority of the German population is fundamentally averse to military action if not downright pacifist; The decision to participate in the air campaign in `99 caused several major political disturbances and very nearly caused the end of the ruling coalition. This mindset is reflected in the old Bundeswehr doctrinal fixation on static defence and conventional warfare and the fact that Germany has severely limited means of force projection relative to its total military strength.
As it has been pointed out, this is slowly changing.

[muck]

from what I remember most of the world including Germany just sat on their hands and did nothing... It took a couple of years before anyone did a thing and then I don't recall German troops being sent... maybe I am wrong. I remember British and Dutch troops being sent into the so called safe zones.

Wrong, because twelve reasons below, but also right, because the results are questionable...

I have to admit I might have been wrong regarding German interests on the Balkans. p-) Just kidding.

Just a generalized background...German Operations on the Balkans with UN, EU and NATO with maximum troops

Operation Sky Monitor 1992 250+
Operation Deny Flight 1993-1995 250+
UNPROFOR Rapid deployment assistance 1995, a few
Operation Deliberation Force 1995, 200+
IFOR 1995-1996, 2600
Operation Sharp Guard 1992-1996, 1000+
SFOR 1996-2004, 1500
Operation Allied Force 1999, 250+
KFOR since 1999, 6100
Operation Essential Harvest, 2001, 500+
Operation Concordia 2003, a few
Operation Althea since 2004, 810+

[cbreedon]

Wrong, because twelve reasons below, but also right, because the results are questionable...

I have to admit I might have been wrong regarding German interests on the Balkans. p-) Just kidding.

Just a generalized background...German Operations on the Balkans with UN, EU and NATO with maximum troops

Operation Sky Monitor 1992 250+
Operation Deny Flight 1993-1995 250+
UNPROFOR Rapid deployment assistance 1995, a few
Operation Deliberation Force 1995, 200+
IFOR 1995-1996, 2600
Operation Sharp Guard 1992-1996, 1000+
SFOR 1996-2004, 1500
Operation Allied Force 1999, 250+
KFOR since 1999, 6100
Operation Essential Harvest, 2001, 500+
Operation Concordia 2003, a few
Operation Althea since 2004, 810+


Thanks for the info.. I hadn't heard of the pre-IFOR deployments

[AK-Lover]

Serbia made a lot of effort to keep the memories as fresh as possible. There was a lot of Nazi related propaganda back in 98, the NATO in the role of the evil Fascists of course. (At the same time, NATO countries compared what the Serbians did to the Nazis. Typical in these time. Everyones opponent is always like Hitler.)
It cannot be helped now, but it should be said that this attitude isn't very helpful.


AK-lover wrote:
Perhaps I understand the Serbian psyche better than you think. And I believe that you mean it. The real problem is however, that Kosovars think exactly the same: exchange the word "Serbian" above and this sentence could come from one of them. They are every bit as fanatical as you are, believe me. And, in addition, they live there. You have to understand that to us other Europeans the idea that you two hotheaded people actually shed each others blood for the next 1000 years is not very fascinating. And neither should it to you.
Their is no such thing as Kosovars, yet another fake term invented by the west to push an Kosovo break-away agenda. There is Serbs and Albanians. No Kosovars. I know they are fanatical you don't have to tell me that, I saw it for my self and have alot more experience and years spent in this region than you. They live in our country and our land, alot of where they live has been stolen or simply occupied by them when the Serbian inhabitants left from the constant threats and pressure of their neighbours. This is all relevant and at the same time it is not. In the end this situation will be a massive precedent as to whether a violent minority which pursued a terroristic insurgent campaign and very well co-ordinated propaganda effort abroad should be allowed to steal a piece of a sovereign nations territory recognised by the UN and by the same nations that brought about this situation ie. NATO countries. If their violence is repayed, have no doubt in your mind that other minorities will want their freedom and independance as well (Basque Region, Republika Srpska, Tamils to name a few around the world). It must be put to them and clearly, that they (Albanians) will be given the outmust autonomy and self-determination allowed to a large minorty under the constitution of the nation they live in. That their violence and outrageous attempts to erase the symbols of ancient Serbian and Christian culture in Kosovo and Metohija will not be repayed by the international community heeding to their demands. And if they decide to pursue violence because their illegal demands have not been met, they will meet force. The rule of law it seems has and is being applied selectively by the powers to be, this in of it's self is the current cause of many of the continuing turmoils around the world.

[AK-Lover]

Ok, here's a question for you: why shouldn't the Serbs and Kosovo Albanians be allowed to go at each other if they so wish. You're right in thinking that both factions are as zealous about their cause, so I say may the best man win. The same rule that applies to individuals ought to apply to nations - what goes on between consenting adults is no one's business but their own. You may not particularly like that your neighbors are feuding, but you have no right to sit them down like children and order them to play nice.

When Britain and the IRA were at each other's throats, I don't recall hearing any particular outcry from NATO, the UN or anyone else. They were allowed to resolve their differences on their own terms, and eventually they did. Since they hammered out a deal on their own, the ensuing peace was more stable. The fact that France and Germany (and many others) have been able to reconcile after centuries or hatred is great, but it was ultimately a mutual decision. Peace can not be gained through allowing old hatreds to simmer just under the surface.

As well, don't you consider it ever so slightly hypocritical that nations which have been at war for literally centuries have suddenly decreed an arbitrary date past which no conflict is permissible? Wars, wherever they might be, are regarded by the right-thinking nations of Europe as some barbarous, horrific atrocities that needs to be stopped at any cost, when these same nations have for 9/10 of their existance never once put down the sword.

Excellent post.

[muck]

Not really excellent, but only war-mongering. Faults and omissions of the world community cannot be the grounds for someone to demand that two opponents should be allowed to start a war for determining who is right and who is wrong!

If it was only about an honest battle... But the Albanians do not have enough strength and would form underground forces again, well and the Serbians would drop the military sledgehammer - again. The wars in the Balkans of the nineties were exceedingly crude and cruel, why should that be the solution?

[AK-Lover]

Not really excellent, but only war-mongering. Faults and omissions of the world community cannot be the grounds for someone to demand that two opponents should be allowed to start a war for determining who is right and who is wrong!

If it was only about an honest battle... But the Albanians do not have enough strength and would form underground forces again, well and the Serbians would drop the military sledgehammer - again. The wars in the Balkans of the nineties were exceedingly crude and cruel, why should that be the solution?

Yes like wars aren't in general, those Western "freedom spreading" and "humanitarian intervention" wars are so nice, with all those minimal causaulties and very little blood spilt. Nothing to spoil your tv dinners while your watching CNN world right? Please get a grip.

[muck]

Please read what I wrote!


Faults and omissions of the world community cannot be the grounds for someone to demand that two opponents should be allowed to start a war for determining who is right and who is wrong!

There is no perfect, clean, surgical and good war! But until we have found a measure better than war, there is sometimes one which is a little cleaner than another. I am not speaking about the United States of World Police, but if you ask me now if my logic would allow a war, used to stop a humanitarian disaster or the prevent a war party from committing genocide, I'd say yes.

[Rictor]

Not really excellent, but only war-mongering. Faults and omissions of the world community cannot be the grounds for someone to demand that two opponents should be allowed to start a war for determining who is right and who is wrong!

If it was only about an honest battle... But the Albanians do not have enough strength and would form underground forces again, well and the Serbians would drop the military sledgehammer - again. The wars in the Balkans of the nineties were exceedingly crude and cruel, why should that be the solution?

Because every nation currently in existance was created through centuries of war, political intrigue and genocide. Every nation was created and sustained with a nearly never-ending series of crimes. C'est la vie.

I'm not a war-monger in that I don't actively support it. I much prefer other, more peaceful solutions. But often-times that's just not possible. Territory belongs to one nation and not another because of one side was more powerful. There is nothing exceptional in this. But if you would prefer to live by the rule of law, I'm fine with that too. Only the law must be applied uniformly. Which means that any ethnic minority must be allowed to seperate if they so choose. Are you fine with re-drawing three dozen major national borders overnight?

[muck]

The matter is that you cannot generalise this situation. Every case must be investigated separately.

[AK-Lover]

The matter is that you cannot generalise this situation. Every case must be investigated separately.

No this is pretty clear cut. You sound like the State Department and Eurocrats, "Kosovo is a unique case and cannot be considered a precedent for seccessionist movements elsewhere in the world" HAHAHAHA!
Yeah tell that to the dozen or so large, armed independance movements around the world just waiting for the west to give the Albanians what they want.
The irony and biggest hipocracy is that wars waged by the "West" are perfectly legal, humanitarian and always for the benefit of the people of on the receiving end, while those countries not in the west are not allowed to wage wars on their own soil to suppress insurrections and independance movements or they are if their in the "proper sphere of influence."
An ex. (US and Germanies friend in the Balkans, Croatia, was allowed to conduct the single biggest act of ethnic cleansing in the Balkan Wars, Operation Storm, in which over 250,000 Serbs were forced to flee and no one in the west bateted an eye, in fact they even helped them carry this out, BND and CIA funding and connecting Croatia to arms sources and MPRI training Croatian military)

[Switek]

Their is no such thing as Kosovars, yet another fake term invented by the west to push an Kosovo break-away agenda. ..

:cantbeli:

So you deny that there is a place on earth where live:

Albanians (between 2,272,000 and 2,400,000)
Serbs (between 126,000 and 140,000)
Bosniaks (between 20,200 and 28,000)
Roma (between 30,600 and 34,000) (see also Roma in Mitrovica Camps)
Turks (between 18,000 and 25,000)
Gorani (approx. 12,000)

called now Kosovo/Kosova?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Kosovo_ethnic_2005.png/270px-Kosovo_ethnic_2005.png

As long as you can try to use ethnic/national argument you're going to fail... Time to grow up...

[zg18]

:cantbeli:

So you deny that there is a place on earth where live:

Albanians (between 2,272,000 and 2,400,000)
Serbs (between 126,000 and 140,000)
Bosniaks (between 20,200 and 28,000)
Roma (between 30,600 and 34,000) (see also Roma in Mitrovica Camps)
Turks (between 18,000 and 25,000)
Gorani (approx. 12,000)

called now Kosovo/Kosova?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Kosovo_ethnic_2005.png/270px-Kosovo_ethnic_2005.png

As long as you can try to use ethnic/national argument you're going to fail... Time to grow up...

Well, "Kosovar" term does not exist in Serbian language,in Serbian(Croatian,Bosnian...) language a man from Kosovo is called Kosovac,that`s the proper term,well i could agree with AK-lover that in Kosovo dispute there is no Kosovo side but Albanian and Serbian side,Kosovo is still not a nation,i belive that you didn`t understand AK-lover .He`s right,fom Serbian point of view term "Kosovar" is fake term.

BTW,i think that numbers of Serbs and Albanians is over exegerated

Albanians (between 2,272,000 and 2,400,000)-the real number is about 1.800.000
Serbs (between 126,000 and 140,000)-the real number is about 100.000

[R.D.]

There is Serbs and Albanians. No Kosovars. I know they are fanatical you don't have to tell me that, I saw it for my self and have alot more experience and years spent in this region than you. They live in our country and our land, alot of where they live has been stolen or simply occupied by them when the Serbian inhabitants left from the constant threats and pressure of their neighbours.


No Kosovar? Well in Albania proper we call them Kosovar since they are Albanian but they're different, and sometimes we call them Kosova Albanians (but that's too long lol). Concerning the "fact" that Albanians live in Serbian land? I had a good laugh. I supose you don't want me to teach you the History of Kosova and Dardhania, Illyria and all that stuff. Dude if you wanna start with historical evidence you are going to lose anyway because you know who came in 6th century in the Balkans and it sure wasn't the Albanians soo that bs about "your" land is not gonna work. I admire the dog logics though. Just because you piss on something you automatically think it belongs to you. Sorry it doesn't work that way in the real world.

[zg18]

R.D.-AK-Lover,there is no point in disccusion for who Kosovo belongs to,both nations have right to to live on Kosovo and both have historical and cultural rights to claim Kosovo.I think that`s clear enough.

[muck]

No this is pretty clear cut. You sound like the State Department and Eurocrats, "Kosovo is a unique case and cannot be considered a precedent for seccessionist movements elsewhere in the world" HAHAHAHA!
Yeah tell that to the dozen or so large, armed independance movements around the world just waiting for the west to give the Albanians what they want.

Rictor argumented as I understand it if Kosovo was permitted to split up from Serbia we had to allow this to everywhere on the world and would have tomorrow hundreds of smaller of new states. I merely said that this is not the case, and that the situation of the Kosovo cannot be generalised on all crisis areas worldwide. The "whether"s and the "how"s must be individually decided from case to case.


The irony and biggest hipocracy is that wars waged by the "West" are perfectly legal, humanitarian and always for the benefit of the people of on the receiving end, while those countries not in the west are not allowed to wage wars on their own soil** to suppress insurrections and independance movements or they are if their in the "proper sphere of influence."*

*It is just stupid to deny any intervention just on that grounds. Because you are so keen on putting your country into the victim's role with presentation of historical facts, here is one more: Srebrenica, any bells ringing? Good reasons do exist to react quickly and maybe even without asking anyone if the Balkans crumble, and a massmurder like **Srebenica is not a interior matter of Balkanes states if there is none with the will to stop it. I know that both sides committed war crimes, but to stay on historical grounds again, it's just like with Germany after WW2. Who did the most terrible things is the bad guy, and facing the shadows of Holocaust I can easily understand that nobody in Poland is interested in compensations for the millions of Germans who were forced away from the locations where they lived for centuries. A expulsion is a war crime, but so is genocide.

Additionally, we should not pretend that the people in Western countries are happy with the wars their governments fight - millions protested against the War in Iraq. That none stops the United States is another thing, but maybe you'll find volunteers.




An ex. (US and Germanies friend in the Balkans, Croatia, was allowed to conduct the single biggest act of ethnic cleansing in the Balkan Wars, Operation Storm, in which over 250,000 Serbs were forced to flee and no one in the west bateted an eye, in fact they even helped them carry this out, BND and CIA funding and connecting Croatia to arms sources and MPRI training Croatian military)


Source...? p-) And please none with Serbian origins. After all what I heard from you, I must assume that you guys got indocrinated very well.

[R.D.]

Just adding some humor to this topic



And please none with Serbian origins.


Why not?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/rinasattack01.htm



A similar operation (http://www.aeronautics.ru/tuzlaattack01.htm) was carried out by Yugoslav AF on April 18 against the airport in Tuzla, Bosnia, used as an emergency landing site for NATO aircraft. As the result of this attack some fifteen NATO aircraft have been destroyed on the ground. The Foreign Military Review writes: "Despite the fact that American aircraft dominated NATO operations, they weren't the only aircraft shot down by Yugoslav air defenses. Among the destroyed aircraft were five German "Tornadoes," several British "Harriers'" two French "Mirages (http://www.aeronautics.ru/img001/yusamphotos.htm)," Belgian, Dutch, and Canadian aircraft. On June 7 the USAF lost a B-52 (http://www.aeronautics.ru/natodown0524present.htm) strategic bomber, while on May 20 a B-2A "Spirit" was shot down (http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/b2down001.htm)."

[muck]

I hope that this really was sarcasm.

It is a fact proven in countless interviews with the participating pilots (please nobody tell me now that they got money for saying this) that no German plane, also no plane on the ground, was lost. Some drones were shot down, but no aircraft. And I can hardly believe that the Serbs managed it to bring a "Spirit" down.

[Freibier]

A similar operation (http://www.aeronautics.ru/tuzlaattack01.htm) was carried out by Yugoslav AF on April 18 against the airport in Tuzla, Bosnia, used as an emergency landing site for NATO aircraft. As the result of this attack some fifteen NATO aircraft have been destroyed on the ground. The Foreign Military Review writes: "Despite the fact that American aircraft dominated NATO operations, they weren't the only aircraft shot down by Yugoslav air defenses. Among the destroyed aircraft were five German "Tornadoes," several British "Harriers'" two French "Mirages (http://www.aeronautics.ru/img001/yusamphotos.htm)," Belgian, Dutch, and Canadian aircraft. On June 7 the USAF lost a B-52 (http://www.aeronautics.ru/natodown0524present.htm) strategic bomber, while on May 20 a B-2A "Spirit" was shot down (http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/b2down001.htm)." roflroflrofl

[Kilgor]

Just adding some humor to this topic



Why not?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/rinasattack01.htm

Aeronautics RU is garbage, with no evidence. None of debris or markings of these "planes" that were claimed to have been shot down have been produced.

[Macs.]

roflroflrofl

This is really hilarious... Oh god...

[muck]

Puh, false alarm.

[AK-Lover]

No Kosovar? Well in Albania proper we call them Kosovar since they are Albanian but they're different, and sometimes we call them Kosova Albanians (but that's too long lol). Concerning the "fact" that Albanians live in Serbian land? I had a good laugh. I supose you don't want me to teach you the History of Kosova and Dardhania, Illyria and all that stuff. Dude if you wanna start with historical evidence you are going to lose anyway because you know who came in 6th century in the Balkans and it sure wasn't the Albanians soo that bs about "your" land is not gonna work. I admire the dog logics though. Just because you piss on something you automatically think it belongs to you. Sorry it doesn't work that way in the real world.

No I actually don't want you to teach me anything because you have nothing to teach me. I suggest you go back to school and learn some real history kiddo and stop trying to flame every discussion on this topic.

[AK-Lover]

Just adding some humor to this topic



Why not?

http://www.aeronautics.ru/rinasattack01.htm

More intelligent input huh? I've contacted the mods, watch what you post.

[muck]

Now you clearly proved your statement that Westerners cannot understand the psyche of Serbians. No offence meant, but I wonder how you can feel insulted through his post.

[R.D.]

More intelligent input huh? I've contacted the mods, watch what you post.

Just trying to brighten up everyone's day. No need to cry, but if that offended you in any way... well then... just like Germany I could care less. As far as my historical knowledge goes, and considering what you said before, you're in no position to tell me to read a "real" history book, and I won't tell you to read a history book because I know all you believe is the same old stories your grandpa told you before you went to bed. Chill out dude, and laugh once in a while, it doesn't hurt.

[Kitsune]

@Rictor:



To begin with, let me quote one of your sentences:
"The same rule that applies to individuals ought to apply to nations - what goes on between consenting adults is no one's business but their own."
While that sounds nice, I know of no civilized state that still accepts the dueling of two consenting individuals as a manner of solving conflicts. So if we take your statement literally, the same should go for nations and I have already won this discussion.

Since that was too easy, I just pretent that I need some more arguments. There is for example the matter of the great disparity in strength between Serbia and the Albanian majority in Kosovo as we saw in 1998. Since the Albanians know that, they would most probably not agree to any outright war with Serbia, so again there would be no consent here. And I have won again. Damn.

With this "consent" you demanded, you really made it too easy. So let's just drop it, shall we? Why not let a conflict fight itself out, with or without consent?

There is actually a foreign political school of thought that sees things like this: if there is a war, simply let the combatants fight it out. Outside interventions often make things worse since they leave the conflict unresolved, which later only leads to another, possibly more violent outbreak. So let the free interplay of forces work it out.
This is not completeley wrong. Quite a few times, military interventions by outsiders have indeed done more harm than good, while thorough violence sometimes has settled a matter once and for all.

But can or should this approach really be used to the last consequence? Imagine: it would mean the complete and utter stop of any interventions anywhere. Whoever attacks whomever else: don't do anything. Let force prevail, that will result in a balanced outcome. Complete free interplay of forces shall reign everywhere, even in a case of a genocid. But would it really be right to sit back and watch in such a case?

The ultimate consequence of a complete laissez faire approach to the Kosovo conflict would mean for the Western world to accept it should the Serbians start with ethnic cleansing or would attempt an even...uh...more final solution. While this would indeed solve the problem in a way, there is simply no chance that this would be accepted by the nations of Europe or even by the far away US. Not since WWII, how many other wars these nations may have fought in their past.

This means that there will be an intervention of sorts, the conflict will not be allowed to escalate to any degree it "wants". But even with such a partial intervention, why not let Serbian police and military enter Kosovo again and let them try to control this region in so far as that it accepts a larger amount of control by Belgrad? So that the rule of law could prevail as AK-Lover wants to? The Albanians in Kosovo might feel humiliated and enraged, but let them try to rebel if they want. They would mainly target Serbians after all, so why should the US or Europe even care? They have largely ignored the English-Irish conflict out of some reason, so why did the one in Kosovo receive their attention?

It all comes down to it that the powers-that-be sometimes choose to intervene and sometimes do not. Wether they do is largely a matter of their interests and mood. This smacks of hypocrisy or as Ak-Lover put it:
"The rule of law it seems has and is being applied selectively by the powers to be, this in of it's self is the current cause of many of the continuing turmoils around the world."
And well, he is right. It is hypocrisy. That is how the powers-that-be conducted themselves all though history, how the victors of virtually every war have behaved towards the defeated and how the strong treated the weak since the dawn of time. It is thus, because there exists no greater power than the powerful nations and empires that could control them (except perhaps God, but He, it seems, is an adherent of the laissez faire approach) and therefore what happens on Earth is a free interplay of forces: the mighty ones prevail and set the rules. Any rule they want. They can even set the rule that the mighty ones should not always prevail just because they are mightier.

That is more or less what was done inside the EU. The idea is that in this union of nations the strong are not allowed to oppress the weak. And, alas, it seems that now neighbouring Serbia gets oppressed to follow this rule as well. One really has to appreciate the irony here.

[Lt. James Anderson]

What were the demographics in Kosovo pre WWII?

What is a good book to read on the subject of Kosovo?

THE SERBS: THe Guardians of the Gate by R.G.D. Laffan
Not about Kosovo per se, but covers is a bit.
Very good book.

[Lt. James Anderson]

He lived in a much different political world than it is now. Interesting what he would've said now...

The same thing.

[Vuk1389]

All i have to say is blame Tito and his communist party for everything they have done....

[Vuk1389]

No but seriously, USA/NATO didn't even apologize for the killing of civilians in the 1999 bombings. All i got to say, the same people who stole land from the Indians, who slaved/discriminated/killed people for thier diffrence in color, made concentration camps for jews, fought with the NAZI's during WW2 (Croatians, Bosniaks, and Albanians), the same people who killed 100's thousands with the Atomic bomb, Killed civilians in Vietnam....ect Are the ones today who are trying to teach us about Human rights, and sh1t. Maybe you guys should think of changing yourselves instead of changing Serbias border for the 28928020980 time.

If the Albos in Kosovo dont like the rules/laws...ect. Then get the hell out, no ones asking you to be there.

There is one more thing(perhaps the most important thing im going to say) RESPECT BORDERS OF SOVIERGN NATIONS! Cause you all find it hard to do that with Serbia for some reason:roll:

[Monte]

Said the bull. Better explain why - share your wisdom!

Im tired of such discussions...

[Rictor]

edit: everyone calm down. Act civil, because the last thing we need is the mods again deciding that Balkan dicussions, the the members who participate in them, are not worth the hassle. Ozbiljno.


-snip-

Ah, now we're getting into the thick of it.

The fact is that none of the NATO nations entered on the side of the Kosovo Albanians for simple self-gain. They've done so under the cloak of moral and legal legitimacy, and this is what annoys me. If Italy had simply annexed Kosovo, I would say "Screw it, you won fair and square. Now prepare for a few decades of insurgency until the territory is regained." You see, some people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to act in ways which are neither legally nor ethically justified, and yet claim that their actions are driven purely by enlightened principles and so that they alone posses the moral high ground.

I'm a stickler for the moral arguement because I believe it's not justified. Mere conquest I have no problem with, because that would be a blatantly imperisalist action which would be avenged in time. The central basis of the rule of law is equal law for everyone. Can you recall NATO bombing Russia any time within the past, say, fifty years? No? Neither can I. And yet what they have done in Chechnya is no less harsh than what Serbia attempted to do in Kosovo - put down a separatist insurgency. I have nothing against the Russians, but why the double standard? Could it be because their size, wealth and power affords them exemption from the law? Well then the law is meaningless is certain parties are allowed to break it at will. Enforcing it against some but not others is not called justice, it's selective repression. Until a law can be enforced universally, applying it at a whim creates too much of an opportunity for abuse.

I also take issue with the fact that you make me out to be some craven supporter of war genocide. But there is a stark difference between endorsing something and accepting it as reality of the imperfect relations between people. Think of a libertarian. He doesn't support charity for the poor, but does that mean he hates the poor? No, he merely believes that they will ultimately be better off if they figure things out for themselves. Western countries are stable exactly BECAUSE they've been through two bloody world wars in the past century. They've not decided it's not worth it to fight any more. If some higher power had intervened to stop the fight between Germany and Britain or the Soviet Union, these hatred would still be alive today. Can you really deny this? Many, maybe even most, of the wars in Africa over the past 60 years have been because certain European nations decided that they would force people to live together who hated each other and wanted nothing to do with the other parties. I could quote fifty more examples where allowing events to take their natural course proved to be better for both sides.

Lastly, by recognizing the legitimate right of the NATO to act against Serbia, when it clearly wasn't a threat to it, you de-legitimize the notion of political sovereignty. You give your moral consent for one nation, or group of nations, to interfere in the affairs of another, and have it be lawful. This is a great, wonderful thing for the powerful and a terrible thing for the powerless. Not to sound cliched, but I think you simply can't grasp what it is not to live in a nation which is the the one who dictates, not the one being dictated to. For the vast majority of people, those who live in countries which are not political, economic and military heavywights, the idea of someone policing them like children is insulting and repulsive. Those who happen to be doing the policing will, of course, defend this right, because it suits them. But can you even consider what it would be like to be on the other end?

[Redmen]

The thing i hate about the whole Kosovo/Metohija problem is the hypocrisy of many nations that in this case support the independence of Kosovo but in similar situation at home they dont. Like Turkey for example--- yes for Kosovo and no for Kurdistan. Even though Albanians became the majority in Kosovo during the Ottoman era (18,19 century). But the Kurds have been living in areas of what is now Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria since before the rise of ancient Greece, Persian empire, Roman empire...(and i wont even start with some EU countrys that support Kosovo independence but when it comes to their own problems they just shut down their hearing capability).

[Kitsune]

@Rictor:





The fact is that none of the NATO nations entered on the side of the Kosovo Albanians for simple self-gain. They've done so under the cloak of moral and legal legitimacy, and this is what annoys me.

Kosovo, is small, economically unimportant region with no raw materials. The reason for NATO to intervene was that everyone was annoyed about what was happening there and that something like this was happening not in Africa but in Europe. The motives may not have been entirely honorable, there was a lot of moral snobbery involved ("not in Africa but in Europe"), but one cannot say that self-gain was the primary reason for intervention. There is simply not much to gain there.
That everything was done under a cloak of moral and legal legitimacy is true, and it is also true that there was a lot of lies and mendacity involved on the part of the western nations. I must admit that I am not particular proud of the way the Kosovo crisis was handled by NATO in general or how Germany bahaved in particular.






The central basis of the rule of law is equal law for everyone. Can you recall NATO bombing Russia any time within the past, say, fifty years? No? Neither can I. And yet what they have done in Chechnya is no less harsh than what Serbia attempted to do in Kosovo - put down a separatist insurgency. I have nothing against the Russians, but why the double standard? Could it be because their size, wealth and power affords them exemption from the law? Well then the law is meaningless is certain parties are allowed to break it at will.
It would be nice if the rule of law could be applied to everyone on this world, equally. But for that we would need some all-powerful World Government which will not exist in the foreseeable future. As long as this world is ruled by nation states of varying power it will not be just. Russia is more powerful than Serbia, that is the reason why Serbia/Kosovo and Russia/Chechenia are treated differently. The powerful simply are treated differently.
"Could it be because their size, wealth and power affords them exemption from the law?" Yes, that is it exactly.
"Well then the law is meaningless if certain parties are allowed to break it at will." No, the law is not meaningless, since it still applies to the weak.






I also take issue with the fact that you make me out to be some craven supporter of war genocide.
I do not, I just wanted to point out the ultimate consequences of the laissez-faire approach to show that it, while having its merits, also has its limits.






Western countries are stable exactly BECAUSE they've been through two bloody world wars in the past century. They've not decided it's not worth it to fight any more. If some higher power had intervened to stop the fight between Germany and Britain or the Soviet Union, these hatred would still be alive today. Can you really deny this?
Yes I can and I do. World WarI is a good example: there was not much hatred for the British before WWI in Germany, and everybody was shocked when they declared war on Germany. But then, many started to hate the British because they chose to make on war on us, because of the methods they used and because of the ways they treated us afterwards. Anyway, I can't see that WWI was in any way unavoidable or necessary for a good future relationship between Germany and Britain.
It is true that wars can lead to exhaustion and reconcilitation. Sometimes they actually seem to resolve conflicts. But sometimes they do not and just plant the seeds of the next one. In any case, even those that do resolve something do so in the most horrible fashion possible.

Take the analogy of how strife is resolved inside a state: problems are settled by a court, no party (except the state) is allowed to use violence. According to your logic this should lead to an ever increasing build-up of aggression since a court cannot really dispel the bad feelings or the hatred (and that is true, after the judgment has been made, the two parties usually still dislike each other every bit as before). But does this mean that the system cannot function in the long run, because the build-up anger will inevitably lead to an uprising and the destruction of the artifical orders imposed by the state? Is direct violence between the feuding parties inevitably necessary for peaceful world? This is not the case, as experience shows. Rulings of a court indeed do often not resolve the most basic reason for the problem and do not necessarily lead to reconcilitation but they prevent bloodshed and violence. And while bloodshed and violence can indeed prevent future bloodshed and violence by resolving a conflict once and for all they still are bloodshed and violence and as such a tragedy we want to prevent.

A fire may destroy especially those things that burn well, it may, in a way, reduce the probability of future fires. Some fires are bigger than others, some are even so big that they can't be extinguished. And sometimes it can even be that, for pragmatical reasons, the best way is indeed to let it burn. But nonetheless, it isn't a good thing if a fire breaks out and should that happen, the general approach that still makes the most sense is to try to put it out.

[muck]

Good post, nothing to add.

[AK-Lover]

@Rictor:






Kosovo, is small, economically unimportant region with no raw materials. The reason for NATO to intervene was that everyone was annoyed about what was happening there and that something like this was happening not in Africa but in Europe. The motives may not have been entirely honorable, there was a lot of moral snobbery involved ("not in Africa but in Europe"), but one cannot say that self-gain was the primary reason for intervention. There is simply not much to gain there.
That everything was done under a cloak of moral and legal legitimacy is true, and it is also true that there was a lot of lies and mendacity involved on the part of the western nations. I must admit that I am not particular proud of the way the Kosovo crisis was handled by NATO in general or how Germany bahaved in particular.






It would be nice if the rule of law could be applied to everyone on this world, equally. But for that we would need some all-powerful World Government which will not exist in the foreseeable future. As long as this world is ruled by nation states of varying power it will not be just. Russia is more powerful than Serbia, that is the reason why Serbia/Kosovo and Russia/Chechenia are treated differently. The powerful simply are treated differently.
"Could it be because their size, wealth and power affords them exemption from the law?" Yes, that is it exactly.
"Well then the law is meaningless if certain parties are allowed to break it at will." No, the law is not meaningless, since it still applies to the weak.






I do not, I just wanted to point out the ultimate consequences of the laissez-faire approach to show that it, while having its merits, also has its limits.






Yes I can and I do. World WarI is a good example: there was not much hatred for the British before WWI in Germany, and everybody was shocked when they declared war on Germany. But then, many started to hate the British because they chose to make on war on us, because of the methods they used and because of the ways they treated us afterwards. Anyway, I can't see that WWI was in any way unavoidable or necessary for a good future relationship between Germany and Britain.
It is true that wars can lead to exhaustion and reconcilitation. Sometimes they actually seem to resolve conflicts. But sometimes they do not and just plant the seeds of the next one. In any case, even those that do resolve something do so in the most horrible fashion possible.

Take the analogy of how strife is resolved inside a state: problems are settled by a court, no party (except the state) is allowed to use violence. According to your logic this should lead to an ever increasing build-up of aggression since a court cannot really dispel the bad feelings or the hatred (and that is true, after the judgment has been made, the two parties usually still dislike each other every bit as before). But does this mean that the system cannot function in the long run, because the build-up anger will inevitably lead to an uprising and the destruction of the artifical orders imposed by the state? Is direct violence between the feuding parties inevitably necessary for peaceful world? This is not the case, as experience shows. Rulings of a court indeed do often not resolve the most basic reason for the problem and do not necessarily lead to reconcilitation but they prevent bloodshed and violence. And while bloodshed and violence can indeed prevent future bloodshed and violence by resolving a conflict once and for all they still are bloodshed and violence and as such a tragedy we want to prevent.

A fire may destroy especially those things that burn well, it may, in a way, reduce the probability of future fires. Some fires are bigger than others, some are even so big that they can't be extinguished. And sometimes it can even be that, for pragmatical reasons, the best way is indeed to let it burn. But nonetheless, it isn't a good thing if a fire breaks out and should that happen, the general approach that still makes the most sense is to try to put it out.
I will have to disagree with your post that Kosovo Conflict was unimportant to NATO. War is not something you commit to on whim just because you are "annoyed." Kosovo was the point where America, England and Germany decided to test out their strength on the world stage, to "flex their muscles." Their was no one to prevent them. To show that the political-military machinery of the Western nations can and will subjugate any real and imagined enemy or threat. That a genocidal bombing campaigns and illegal interventions can and will be masked as "Humanitiarian Wars" and will go down in history as such. I think almost the whole point of Kosovo was just to show Russia, China and the rest of the world how quickly a small domestic problem can be turned into a massive media propaganda campaign and used as a pretext to engage in warfare which will not be viewed as illegal or immoral and will be accepted by people at home in those countries as justified and neccessary. Unfortunately for NATO and the Capitol Hill and Brussels, the situation in Kosovo has not changed, except maybe more Serbs have been forced out, and those that remain in Kosovo defiant are nuisance to UMNIK and NATO who have to keep up a certain PR show of protecting the Serbs that are left and their cultural and religious sites. In reality they wish that the Serbs would just leave and the monasteries disappear so they can say "Look their is no trace of the Serbian people of culture here, it is 100 percent Albanian and is therefore theirs."

[AK-Lover]

Now you clearly proved your statement that Westerners cannot understand the psyche of Serbians. No offence meant, but I wonder how you can feel insulted through his post.

I don't feel insulted, far from it. He is trolling.

[muck]

Maybe he was, but it did not cause any damage.

Concerning your reply I fear I must admit that you are right in one point. I do not at all question the reasons NATO had for starting operations against Serbia. But in 1999 NATO faced it's 50th anniversary, only sad that the pact had never seen a war. The Kosovo war was an appreciated occasion to prove that NATO had the military supremacy and was still needed.

[Switek]

I will have to disagree with your post that Kosovo Conflict was unimportant to NATO. War is not something you commit to on whim just because you are "annoyed." Kosovo was the point where America, England and Germany decided to test out their strength on the world stage, to "flex their muscles." Their was no one to prevent them. To show that the political-military machinery of the Western nations can and will subjugate any real and imagined enemy or threat. That a genocidal bombing campaigns and illegal interventions can and will be masked as "Humanitiarian Wars" and will go down in history as such. I think almost the whole point of Kosovo was just to show Russia, China and the rest of the world how quickly a small domestic problem can be turned into a massive media propaganda campaign and used as a pretext to engage in warfare which will not be viewed as illegal or immoral and will be accepted by people at home in those countries as justified and neccessary. Unfortunately for NATO and the Capitol Hill and Brussels, the situation in Kosovo has not changed, except maybe more Serbs have been forced out, and those that remain in Kosovo defiant are nuisance to UMNIK and NATO who have to keep up a certain PR show of protecting the Serbs that are left and their cultural and religious sites. In reality they wish that the Serbs would just leave and the monasteries disappear so they can say "Look their is no trace of the Serbian people of culture here, it is 100 percent Albanian and is therefore theirs."


wrong point...

the real lack of activity by EU and NATO (and Russia, of course) to stop post Yugoslavian butchery between Croats, Bosnian Muslims and Serbs during Balkan wars in 1990's was an obvious failrue of those institutions. Democratic governments which rely on citizen's votes had to stop another slaughtery this time in Kosovo, made by both sides (no Albanians must take responsibility for their crimes too)...

There was not other option but pure military action in that moment... You must realize one thing. Attitude performed by crimnal Milosevic was a pure way to "palestinisation" or "kurdinistation" of this region (and infiltration by different kinds of muslim "freedom fighters" and simple terrorists from mostly Asian countries). Sorry, there is no place for such mess in Europe. You can spend another 20 oor 50 years of developing different conspiracy theories. Before UCK (I really do not like this organization) Albanians in Kosovo were citizens of second class, if they were lucky or collaborated with Milosevic. The here is only way to stop this wishful thinking: Serbs must take responsibility of failrue such rowdy military policy and obvious crimes, as well, in Kosovo

[R.D.]

I think almost the whole point of Kosovo was just to show Russia, China and the rest of the world how quickly a small domestic problem can be turned into a massive media propaganda campaign and used as a pretext to engage in warfare which will not be viewed as illegal or immoral and will be accepted by people at home in those countries as justified and neccessary.


Small domestic problem? So is that what they use in Serbia in place of Genocide? You really amaze me.

[Kilgor]

Small domestic problem? So is that what they use in Serbia in place of Genocide? You really amaze me.

Id have to agree, its a disgusting euphemism for genocide and ethnic cleansing.

"We aren't rounding up German jews, its just a small domestic problem" - adolf.

[Kitsune]

@AK-Lover


I will have to disagree with your post that Kosovo Conflict was unimportant to NATO. War is not something you commit to on whim just because you are "annoyed." Kosovo was the point where America, England and Germany decided to test out their strength on the world stage, to "flex their muscles."

Hmmm...perhaps there was a hint of willingness from Blair's Britain "to save the world from evil" etc. But did you really get the impression that, back in 1998, Clinton's America intervened joyfully in Kosovo, happy about the chance to bully someone? They appeared rather unwilling to me, more annoyed that the Europeans couldn't handle the problem themselves. Once again, after Bosnia. The whole American military campaign that followed was executed with the notorious "no dead" motto in mind (that referred to American dead of course), hence the concentration on aerial attacks. I know that this did a lot of harm to Serbia (the word "genocidal" is an exaggeration, though), but it essentially came from the unwillingness to undertake any larger military operation like a ground offensive would have been.
As far as Germany is concerned, I can assure you that there was absolutely no willingsness to flex ones muscles here (and I say that with regret, I really hope that I live to see the day when this country finally dares to flex only so much as one muscle again). What Germany, which was under a very new red-green government back then in 1998, did was a twitch at best, and even that was done very unwillingly with lots of hesitation. Admittedly, the ammount of gear with which Bundeswehr finally rolled into Kosovo looked impressive, but there was no imperialist interests behind it. Believe it or not, but there is no interest here in Germany to have any soldiers at all in Kosovo.

[zg18]

Small domestic problem? So is that what they use in Serbia in place of Genocide? You really amaze me.


I must be honest,there were certainly war crimes on Kosovo made by Serbian army but it definatly wasn`t genocide,i mean a province with population 2 million had 10,000 dead in 2 year conflict of which 2,200 deads are non-Albanians.

[muck]

I must be honest,there were certainly war crimes on Kosovo made by Serbian army but it definatly wasn`t genocide,i mean a province with population 2 million had 10,000 dead in 2 year conflict of which 2,200 deads are non-Albanians.

I wonder how many people do the encyclopedia need to label it a genocide...



Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Resolution 260

Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
What did we learn today? The will counts! It's not necessary to erase a nation if you want to commit genocide...Ok, now seriously. It shall not matter here if a genocide happened in the Kosovo, but crimes occured that need to be stopped. Both sides committed crimes, but above all criticizing it should not be forgotten that the intention of the Western Troops and UN Administration is to treat everyone equal and to protect everyone without asking a person about it's felt nationality.

[Cpl Steiner]

Ok, here's a question for you: why shouldn't the Serbs and Kosovo Albanians be allowed to go at each other if they so wish. You're right in thinking that both factions are as zealous about their cause, so I say may the best man win. The same rule that applies to individuals ought to apply to nations - what goes on between consenting adults is no one's business but their own. You may not particularly like that your neighbors are feuding, but you have no right to sit them down like children and order them to play nice.

When Britain and the IRA were at each other's throats, I don't recall hearing any particular outcry from NATO, the UN or anyone else. They were allowed to resolve their differences on their own terms, and eventually they did. Since they hammered out a deal on their own, the ensuing peace was more stable. The fact that France and Germany (and many others) have been able to reconcile after centuries or hatred is great, but it was ultimately a mutual decision. Peace can not be gained through allowing old hatreds to simmer just under the surface.

As well, don't you consider it ever so slightly hypocritical that nations which have been at war for literally centuries have suddenly decreed an arbitrary date past which no conflict is permissible? Wars, wherever they might be, are regarded by the right-thinking nations of Europe as some barbarous, horrific atrocities that needs to be stopped at any cost, when these same nations have for 9/10 of their existance never once put down the sword.


Good post.

The Serbians were bombed and massacred by Clinton for carrying out their 'war on terror' against the shiptars and the whole world was whipped up into a bloodlust against the Serbian people.

Europe is the most hypocritical and corrupt continent on the planet,freedom of speech my arse.

Serbia was punished because their war on terror wasn't sanctioned by the NWO.


I will never forget entering a village and seeing Serbian heads on a fence,unlike most twelve year olds on this forum i have witnessed first hand the joys of our allies the UCK.

Murdering muslim pigs!

Kosovo was my moment of clarity and next time my services will be offered to Serbia.

[muck]

Good post.

The Serbians were bombed and massacred by Clinton for carrying out their 'war on terror' against the shiptars and the whole world was whipped up into a bloodlust against the Serbian people.

Europe is the most hypocritical and corrupt continent on the planet,freedom of speech my arse.

Serbia was punished because their war on terror wasn't sanctioned by the NWO.


I will never forget entering a village and seeing Serbian heads on a fence,unlike most twelve year olds on this forum i have witnessed first hand the joys of our allies the UCK.

Murdering muslim pigs!

Kosovo was my moment of clarity and next time my services will be offered to Serbia.

Thanks for explain to me what a troll is, Ak-Lover. Now that must be one.

[AK-Lover]

I wonder how many people do the encyclopedia need to label it a genocide...


What did we learn today? The will counts! It's not necessary to erase a nation if you want to commit genocide...Ok, now seriously. It shall not matter here if a genocide happened in the Kosovo, but crimes occured that need to be stopped. Both sides committed crimes, but above all criticizing it should not be forgotten that the intention of the Western Troops and UN Administration is to treat everyone equal and to protect everyone without asking a person about it's felt nationality.
*sarcasm on*
Yeah I see they have done a very good job since 1999.
*sarcasm off*

[AK-Lover]

Thanks for explain to me what a troll is, Ak-Lover. Now that must be one.

If his experiences are authentic, I wouldn't call it trolling.

[AK-Lover]

Kosovo war the beggining, the "American Version" from Discovery channel program, also takes a hint at the Racak "Massacre" farse. Just listen to what Holbrooke is saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PmG8dRq2gg

[R.D.]

Kosovo war the beggining, the "American Version" from Discovery channel program, also takes a hint at the Racak "Massacre" farse. Just listen to what Holbrooke is saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PmG8dRq2gg
That proves nothing besides the fact that even the Serbian general or whatever he is admits that the Serbian forces conducted the massacre beacuse they were "scared" (yeah right). He even smiles when he says it. How do these people live knowing that they killed innocent civilians and whats more disgusting they laugh about it. Simply sick.

[Pidyon Shevuyim]

That proves nothing besides the fact that even the Serbian general or whatever he is admits that the Serbian forces conducted the massacre beacuse they were "scared" (yeah right). He even smiles when he says it. How do these people live knowing that they killed innocent civilians and whats more disgusting they laugh about it. Simply sick.

WTF are you talking about kid? the only time he remotely smirks/laughs is when he is talking about his own SF's running away.... Stop trying to twist things around.

[R.D.]

WTF are you talking about kid? the only time he remotely smirks/laughs is when he is talking about his own SF's running away.... Stop trying to twist things around.
What are YOU talking about? He says they were scared to justify their actions. You should watch the video more carefully before opening your mouth and saying something stupid.

[Pidyon Shevuyim]

What are YOU talking about? He says they were scared to justify their actions. You should watch the video more carefully before opening your mouth and saying something stupid.

Oh yeah....NOT.

[AK-Lover]

What are YOU talking about? He says they were scared to justify their actions. You should watch the video more carefully before opening your mouth and saying something stupid.

What in the **** are YOU talking about? He doesn't even say anything except they left their positions in the middle of the night because they were scared, that was 4-5 men in the night with no NVG's conducting a massacre huh? Are you high? The bodies of the dead had fresh clothes on them, clothes with no bullet holes. Their was a span of time when the MUP pulled out and when the terrorist forced re-took control of the village, after this the "massacre" was discovered.

[R.D.]

What in the **** are YOU talking about? He doesn't even say anything except they left their positions in the middle of the night because they were scared, that was 4-5 men in the night with no NVG's conducting a massacre huh? Are you high? The bodies of the dead had fresh clothes on them, clothes with no bullet holes. Their was a span of time when the MUP pulled out and when the terrorist forced re-took control of the village, after this the "massacre" was discovered.
LOL I guess I'll have to wear the tinfoil hat now. You and these conspiracy theories that never end.

[AK-Lover]

LOL I guess I'll have to wear the tinfoil hat now. You and these conspiracy theories that never end.

You and your trolling never ends. This discussion was going well until you put your input into it with smartass remarks and irrelevant sidetracking.

[DeltaWhisky58]

This flame war has gone on long enough.