Replies

I think that most important is albanian servility to US strategic interests. Milosevic was too stupid to realise that he has to give something more to US, namely, he refused to accept annex B of Rambuillet "proposal", that would give US army camps, bases, legal imunity, rights on transport and movement all across Serbia... If I'm not wrong, Henry Kissinger in his "Does America Need Foreign Policy?" agrees on this.

But there's something more. If you remember Madeleine Albright's confession that she had to place the bet so high that Serbs couldn't answer it, or that she was infuriated by Albanians refusal to sign, helping Serbs that way, you can conclude that she and her team never wanted peaceful solution. They were only interested in seting such demands that would be unacceptable by Milosevic. And they did that. Albright said that she advised Thachi to sign, because Serbs could never sign it. I saw all that in one US or UK tv series "Fall of MIlosevic" if I remember the title. And they were speaking about it infront of cameras, so it can't be no serbian propaganda or lie.

So, why they wanted war? Milosevic didn't want war. Your claims further in your post about "...Serb oppression of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo prior to the 99 conflict... Milosevic was the one constant in the problems of the former Yugoslavia... if Serb leaders are still denying the crimes and atrocities that precipitated NATO intervention to remove Serb rule. " etc. are in line with mainstream propaganda. But look at this, Milosevic and serbian parliament were asking foreign observers to stay on Kosovo in March, before bombing. My brother was artilery officer there and my friend was serving the army there so I know what were they saying before the bombing - We have to risk our lives and be extremely careful not to harm civilians because we know they (NATO) are just waiting for some mistake and few dead civilians to accuse us for deliberate massacres and stuff. And our army and police acted that way. They had to inform intl monitors about their actions, to invite them to go with them, to supervise etc. That's why it was hard to accuse us before the bombing, and Racak had to be invented. Now we have Helena Rantha speaking about not having enough evidence about Racak, but now it's too late.

Serbian government was sending it's high delegation to speak with any albanian leader from Kosovo in 1996 (when Milosevic was praised in the west for Dayton-Paris agreement) 17 times in a row, and nobody turned up. They didn't want to discuss no issues. Only Rugova was trying something stupid about schools, but it was all nothing and unsincere. Imagine government of one country to send it's high delegation to speak with ethnic minority representatives 17 times, one meeting after another, and nobody from that ethnic minority shows up. What humiliation!

If it was better for US to had all the good guys in the Balkans, why didn't US stick to the international law? You just can't break all the relevant international agreements, also Yugoslavian Constitution and claim that you were interested in peace. For instance, now it's no secret that Zimmerman was the key in Izetbegovic's refusal of Kutillero's peace plan for Bosnia. You can't say it was peace effort! I'm surprised with your readiness to accept the official version of the recent history. I have many things against Milosevic, first one because of his stupidity to believe in legal superstructure (I'm certain he didn't read Schwarzenberger's "Power Politics") as instrument in defending Yugoslavia.
Milosevic and his crew were saying to Slovenia - If you wanna secede, go ahead and do it by Constitution of Yugoslavia. But Slovenes didn't do it. That's why James Baker said Slovenia was guilty far violent destruction of Yugoslavia. And Slovenia didn't do it because of the Germany and Austria, it was obvious. Because that way, Croats would stay alone, without Slovenia to help them. And Croats would have to follow the Constitution. And Milosevic would wait them there. But it all went into war with Slovenian violent and anti-constitutional seccession. Can't you believe all this? What would you say if I tell yuo that it was Croat, Ante Markovic, who gave the orders to JNA to take over border crossings, entering in conflict with Slovenian territorial defense? It wasn't Milosevic.

Why didn't US act against neo-fascist Tudjman? That man was anti-semite, who was working closely with UStashi emigration. He was the one to give warm welcome to ustashi emigrants returning to the crime scene. Why supporting that man? His party members were hailing nazi salutes, for God's sake, in the country where Serbs suffered genocide. Now you say Milosevic provoked war in Croatia? No, he was using it, but my relatives took arms in defense of such neo-nazi regime. I know why were they going out on the roads, pulling woods across, setting baricades. Out of fear spread by HDZ and ustashe, not because they loved Milsoevic. It came later. Serbs there, after forming Krajina, forbid by Constitution of Krajina forming of any communist party.
Croats violated Constitution, and by bringing 1990. croatian constitution, and by anti-constitutional referendum for seccession. That was breaking point.

In Bosnia, Bosnian constitution as well as Yugoslavian were breeched. Serbs were overvoted, inspite of Amendment LXX to Constitution. That was breaking point - October 1991. But it was obvious it's going to be awful even before that.

So, we have Serbs defending their fundamental rights, not crazy Milosevic trying to create Great Serbia. These are the facts I use to calm down and these are the facts I'm waiting for someone to break down, so I could calmly accept Serb guilt for agression, and what did we do else.

Why do yuo bring Macedonians into the game? Yes, macedonians didn't follow the Constitution also when they decided to seccede, but there were no problems with Macedonians - we were not afraid for Serbs that will have to stay in Macedonia. That's why there were no problems with macedonians, although Skopje was Serbian 14th century capital and part of serbian medieval state. But that's history. We were dealing in 1990's with security. And serbs didn't feel secure in Croatia and Bosnia, and they had reasons for that, and they had all the rights to defend their rights.

Am I wrong? Why?

I agree Djindjic was a step forward in foreign affairs, because he was smarth enough to realise he shouldn't rely on international law if he wants to spare his people of another beatings. Kostunica is just an asshole, but still he's considered to be "acceptable nationalist" who throw Milosevic out. That's his best. He has no brains and no guts. I don't know how long will he hold on. Radicals are geting stronger.

Our "culture of denial" is based on our unability to accept our guilt for something we didn't do. We didn't start the war in Kosovo, and we didn't opress the Albanians because of who they were, but because of what they did. How come we didn't opress muslims from Sanjak or Hungarians in Voivodina? Milosevic's right hand men were Michal Kertes aka "Braco" (for "brother") who was hungarian, and Franko Simatovic, head of Unit for SpecOps, who was croat! His close colaborator was Rahman Morina, albanian. After, the head of Millitary Intelligence was Gesa Farkash, Hungarian.

Albanians were seccessionists, armed seccessionists, and what do yuo do in USA with such people? What would you do in our place? No, no albanian home was burned before clashes of police with KLA! Nope. So, we have such state opression in Kosovo that led to 1998 over 40% of Kosovo territory in the hands of rebel seccessionists. C mon. Do you see why I have to be in "state of denial"? I just wonder how is it possible that you don't have a bit of suspicion in the official version. You don't seem to be complete ignorant about our affairs here in the Balkans. I guess you know about BND operations in northern Albania in 1998, perhaps even before. And CIA operations at least from before 1997 Albanian riots inside albania. Yes, conspiracy theory :-) I just wonder what do secret services do :-)

What would I do, if I would be Serbian premier? I would realise I was defeated, my country was defeated, and I would act like that. Forget about all the arguments, forget about the truth, speak what they want to hear, collect strength, reorganise, and - wait!

You're realy... :-))) What sort of autonomy did Albanians want before 1998??? Can you please direct me to that? Milosevic was offering all the time autonomy "according to world standards", but Albanians had in memory all that good times under 1974 constitution and all the liberty they had to opress Kosovo Serbs and put veto's on serbian parliament's decisions. Nice position. I sugest you to read Nyrop's 1982 yugoslavia study. He did it for US Millitary.

Mark - "...there was a school of thought at that time that diplomatic assistance and recognition of the constituent Yugoslav Republics that wanted independence would serve peace and stability. The idea was that those republics would fight for independence if they were not able to gain it peacefully. "

But that's the point! If you stick to international law, and you support federal authorities in Yugoslavia against seccessionist republics, it turns out that those republics are the guilty ones. But if you support seccessionist republics to get out regardless of Constitution and intl law, then anyone who defends the constitution has to be an agressor. Don't you get this? It turns out to be completely arbitrary to the great power's will to decide if one will be agressor or not. And it turned out that Germany (and Vatican, for the sake of honesty) chose Croatia and Slovenia (and Bosnia) to be the good ones, victims. Now, why did they do that???
US had no problem with that, and even helped through Zimmerman to start the Bosnian war. Kosovo was continuation. Milosevic was stupid. Serbs were stupid.
Law is nothing, power is everything. We learn slow. :-)

Do you think that national interests of great powers are limited by international law, contracts, agreements?

The law will apply only among the equal ones, with stronger doing what they want, and weaker suffering what they have - Tukididus (spel?), "Pelophonesian wars"

‘’Conception such as State sovereignity and sovereign equality are merely ideological symptoms of a reality which they symbolise or disguise. Terms of this kind are dangerous. They strengthen the illusion that all that is needed to remedy the situation is to deal radically with the legal superstructure to which they belong. Such self-deception is facilitated by the apparent ease with which, in certain circumstances, even world powers are prepared to agree to departures from these principles.’’ in George Schwarzenberger, ‘’Power Politics’’

Hah, no, I was talking about times when Noriega was "ally", before he got on the "black list". Do you realy believe that US officials didn't know back then, and now, that Albanian criminals run the show in albania and even more if possible in Kosovo? That KLA is largely funded by drug money? As well as some US pro-albanian politicians? They know, but it's not oportune to say it now. I know that you know all this, I just ask myself why you speak like you don't know it. I mean, you have more experience then I do, yuo've seen much of the world, you were in the army, you know what are men capable of. I wonder why you pretend to be so naive when yuo're not.

Mark - "U.S. and NATO Intervention in Kosovo was brought on by fear that the conflict and resultant humanitarian catastrophe would spread and destabilize other areas in the Balkans region..."

yeah, nice job they did preventing the mess. Supporting seccessionist terrorists, against legal government. Why they didn't tell albanians to vote with pro-american opposition against Milosevic? I still didn't hear no plausable answer to this! Was that option worse then war? Milosevic couldn't frame up votes in Kosovo no longer if Albanians were cooperative. But no, Kosovo had to be taken from us. I see it now, clear as never!

Sec Council this and that, it's obvious that attack on Yugoslavia in 1999 was clean act of agression. I study law. I know that if nothing else (thanks professor Paunovic!)

1389 isn't last year, you don't have to be cynical. I was speaking about how deep is Kosovo in Serbian tradition and collective memory. I wanted by that to prove that we'll never forget. Maybe we'll suffer what we have to until our time comes. But listen to this what you've said

"In regard to the contention that Albanians are the descendants of Illyrians, the point is that the Albanians believe it and therefore they can counter Serb claims to Kosovo based on ancient historical presence. "

So, Albanian dreams about Ilyrian ancestry, and serbian sacral objects on the ground bear the same weight? Nice. So, I guess ya'll americans should get back to europe, because we serbs know that we're distant cousins of Moheecan tribe! Well we BELIEVE that!

Sorry.

History isn't our argument. It was law. Now we don't have even law. We were stupid and I believe cowards for decades. To win the war and then to try to appease all your neighbors by giving them what they want. republic to them, nationality to them, autonomy (de facto republic) to them, and then you wake up as minority in your own country, as agressor in your own backyard.

Yah, we have deserved this.

Oh, you just give Darko some time, he's young and a bit naive. But he's learning. I've heard Ben Wallace (I guess it was ben Wallace, am I wrong?) was giving him hard time, beating him often so he could gain some strength, learn some dirty tricks... Darko has potential, he'll be very good player. If you know what I mean.

:-)

Sorry, but I do not have time to do justice to every point raised in your post. A couple coments:

Milosevic was too stupid to realise that he has to give something more to US, namely, he refused to accept annex B of Rambuillet "proposal", that would give US army camps, bases, legal imunity, rights on transport and movement all across Serbia...

Annex B provided NATO (not US) right of access, to include basing, inside Serbia proper. It was not necessary to resolve the Kosovo situation and, of note, the Kosovar Albanian negotiators at Rambouillet could not have cared any less about it. However, it was a show-stopper for the Serbs. It is now thought of as the third of the three significant US diplomatic blunders in regard to Kosovo. The first was in not addressing Kosovo in the Dayton process and thus undermining Rugova's peaceful approach while strengthing the Albanians who said that only violence would work. The second was Ambassador Gelbard's statement in Belgrade in early 1998 in which he described the KLA as terrorists. Milosevic took that as a "green light" to launch the military campaign that ended up slaughtering the civilians in Drenica and thereby galvanizing KLA recruitment and activity throughout Kosovo.

With conspiracy theories in such abundance in the Balkans, it is not a wonder that Annex B is considered by many Serbs as simply a way to make Rambouillet unacceptable and therefore trigger the bombing campaign. Personally, I am not so ready to discount that it was simple incompetence by the Clinton State Department.

My brother was artilery officer there [Kosovo] and my friend was serving the army there so I know what were they saying before the bombing - We have to risk our lives and be extremely careful not to harm civilians

A big part of the Serb regular Army did not participate in the atrocities and war crimes in Kosovo. Some of the Albanian refugees even commented on instances of regular Serbian Army soldiers saving them from being killed or robbed by Serb paramilitaries. The major portion of the "personal" type atrocities; i.e. the killings, robberies, rapes, etc in Kosovo are attributed to the paramilitaries, hastily mobilized reservists, and the special police. It is my opinion that the firepower intensive tactics used by the Serb Army against the KLA were both ineffective and served to rally international support for the Kosovar Albanians as well as further alienate the locals. But that is not a warcrime, just a difference over tactics.

The law will apply only among the equal ones, with stronger doing what they want, and weaker suffering what they have - Tukididus (spel?), "Pelophonesian wars"

The American spelling is Thucydides and I recognize the quote from his "Melian Dialogue". I disagree with your implication that the USA plays the role of Athens and Serbia of Melos, but I certainly respect the intellect of any young man who knows such things and can introduce them in a conversation conducted in a non-native language.

Now for the important stuff--the Pistons absolutely dominated the Pacers last night. Indiana looks tired and demoralized whhile the Pistons looked energized and will play at home tomorrow night. If they win, it will likely be a Lakers-Pistons championship series. You're right, Ben Wallace has been "toughening-up" Darko Milicic in practice; maybe preparing him for the Piston's secret strategy of putting Darko on Shaq in the finals! Or maybe not. Although he doesn't play much, Darko is a crowd favorite in Detroit--the crowd cheers as soon he stands up from the bench to go in a game. As the only seven-foot tall dyed blond hair millionaire Serbian teenager in Detroit, he gets a lot of attention. We're looking forward to some productive court time in another year or two.