Back from the Grave: Familiar stories in Croatia

Inat. It's why I both admire and want to strangle them at the same time.

I know, Gael, me too :)

Well, I don't think you understand Serbs or sincerely wish them well if you're describing K&M as "that black hole for eternity" or "miserable little plot in the south (where Serbian citizens - Albanians live)". And what or who and from whom did UN ever protect??? This can only come from a friend - "pretender", stranger, who actually really does not care about the future of Serbian province. And why should you?
You haven't given me one reason why Serbs should consider partition, except to please the NATO community that don't belong there to begin with.
Of course you can ridicule my POV, but it's much more straight forward and honest.

Well I don't know the bona fides of the author, or where he is coming from, and find the assertion that in Croatia you must choose between militant nationalist or communists of some varient to be shocking, and if true depressing. So I am speechless because I am adrift, and really have no independent source of knowledge about the internal doings of Croatia, and the posters here on the topic typically are totally biased and unreliable. So I a adrift. I hope that helps.

Great post with great arguments. I'm beginning to see it like that too.

Torie,let me make one thing clear:we had our desagreements on FR before,and,on many issues don`t see "eye to eye".But,I appreciated your posts.

This thread was amusing .But,"you don`t know the boma fides" of the author!?How do I know them,then?Go to the Washington Times site and check him out,it`s easy!

Everything that I have posted here is true(and not only me!).But,if you don`t like it ,than,"it is a biased view!"That`s a BS,and you know it!

I don`t need Tropoljac,also HDZ member from Supercooldude`s neighborhood,to explain to me "objectivelly" what is happening in Croatia.I read Croatian press on daily basis,for years.

And,I think that in one of my previous posts,I have explained,in a very rational way,why former Communist politicians are making come backs in Eastern Europe.

I suppose,if political map in UK,for instance,is changed,that 90% of current politicians (Labour,Tories and Liberals) would be the participants in the future political contest!Under a diferent name and,different political programs.

It is so logical.

I guess I didn't make myself clear. I had no intention of ridiculing your point of view. By "miserable plot in the south" I meant the part that would go to Albanians IF Serbia opted for partition.

No, I don't think Serbs should consider partition to please NATO. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that Kosovo has always been a huge financial drain (black hole -- as in much investment with no return and no practical hope of return in the future) on the rest of Yugoslavia. From reading press accounts in the 1970s and 1980s it is obvious Croats were resentful about having to pay for Kosovo. It's also one of the reasons most cited by Croats to me why they wanted independence. They felt they could have a much better economy without having to support Kosovo.

Press accounts from the 1970s and 1980s are also full of horror stories about the treatment of Serbs by Albanians.

The 1990s saw the emergence of a shadow economy in Kosovo mainly funded by crime, supplemented with forced donations from the Albanian diaspora, but generating no taxes and no contribution to the official economy.

As I've stated on FR before, I don't know Kosovo well. I passed through with my family as a child back in the 1970s. Even as a child I could see it was a rather awful place, not at all like the rest of Yugoslavia. But maybe I got the wrong impression about it. What I saw in and around Pristina was men sitting around and drinking coffee and smoking, not working, and little boys begging cigarettes along the roadsides. It was dirty, nasty, ugly, and, well, not a nice place -- had a sinister aura about it. The countryside was picturesque, with herders and so forth. I liked the countryside.

Actually, I do hope Serbia does well. But what it does about Kosovo isn't my business. It's the business of the people of Serbia (keeping in mind that by "Serbia" I mean all of it, including Kosovo). I surely do wish Clinton and NATO had stayed out of the whole thing, though.

The danger I see with partition is that it will encourage further expansionist adventures by those who seek a "Greater Albania." And that's also the business of Serbia, Macedonia, Greece and Montenegro. Another danger is that the southern part of Kosovo relinquished to the Albanians will continue to be dominated by KLA mafia, and that's the business of all of Europe and INTERPOL.

I don't see any good answers for Kosovo. Maybe you do or someone else does. Maybe there aren't any good answers.

If Serbia re-takes possession of Kosovo, what then? How to deal with all those Albanians? How to clean up the crime, the terrorism, repair the infrastructure, provide services, welfare and pensions to a huge population of ethnic Albanians who would then constitute nearly 20% of the total population (who contribute nothing in taxes or to the economy and who have an extremely high birth rate) when the other 80% (with an extremely low birth rate) who would have to pay for it all is barely making it now? It would take a heck of a lot money and government-funded (read tax-funded) manpower -- would it stretch Serbia past the breaking point?

From a purely economic standpoint, it makes sense for Serbia to keep the north with Trepca and let the independent southern part of Kosovo serve as a pool of "guest workers" to fill in and help pay the pensions for Serbia's declining and aging population (what the Germans and Swiss have been doing officially for decades first with Italy and now with many countries and what the USA has been doing unoffically with Mexico). The "guest workers" would be those left out of the KLA crime syndicates, and such workers will increase over time what with the high birth rate.

But that's taking the heart out of it. I really can understand Serbs wanting to keep the southern part of Kosovo even though it's a crime-infested economic basket case. I'm truly not making fun of the less practical reasons for wanting to keep it.

What do I think my own country should do, which is my business? I think they should apologise, say they made a huge blunder with the whole Kosovo thing (personally I think it was more of a crime than a blunder), pay reparations to Serbia, once again declare the KLA as a terrorist organisation and use their troops to disarm them, hand Kosovo back over to Serbia ... oh, so much more. But it's not going to happen.

Torie, my opinion is that the article is mostly ridiculous garbage and it's obvious that the author based it on the opinions of second- and third-generation members of the '40s exile community. Read the history of this exile community in the Americas (mainly Argentina, Canada and USA), how they organised themselves, etc., and you'll understand. Of course I realise my opinion doesn't count with you, as it doesn't match up with your fave authors' opinions.

As for a choice between "militant nationalists" and "communists", well, you can work that one out in your own head. Croatia was part of a communist country. Everyone in politics who came of age before 1991 was once a communist. So the pool of folks who can serve in higher political office were all once communists. Some of those communists, like Tudjman, turned militant nationalist and were heavily supported and funded by the 40's exile community and its successors (who are all militant nationalists).

There are former "communist" Croats who are truly capitalists at heart and who believe in democracy, and these may make good leaders for Croatia in future. But, right now, if they're not also nationalists the well-connected and well-funded nationalist exile community slaps the "communist" label on them. If they're not compliant enough for "the international community" they, too, slap the "communist" sign on their foreheads. It's easy to smear any politician as a "communist" because they all were once at least nominally "communists". They couldn't have got into politics otherwise.

It's just common sense. You don't need Trop or anyone else to understand it. BTW, I miss Trop too. We had some great conversations and he cleared up the 70 dead sheep question for me.

Correction: If they're not compliant enough for "the international community" they, too, slap the "communist" and/or "militant nationalist" sign on their foreheads.

Okay, then that answers your question, I hope, as the new law specified applicants no longer had to renounce citizenship in any other former Y republic to gain FRY citizenship, which would include BiH, of course. As for Kosovo (which was not a republic, but a province of Serbia), that's taken care of, as I deducted the population of Kosovo from the 1991 figures. If I left something out or got it wrong, please speak up!

Ping to my #108. You usually post good articles and info on FR and then take responsibility for and pay attention the threads you start. Somehow, you posted this article and started this thread, then ignored it. Maybe this one somehow slipped through the cracks you'd like to come back for comment?

Daniel Server, Director of Balkan Initiative for Peace speaks for 'Blic News' about details of secret meeting on Kosovo status that he chaired himself Secret meeting about Kosovo in Washington
Belgrade - More than a month before Serbian Prime Minister started initiative for beginning of talks on Kosovo final status, a secret meeting dealing with the same topic was held in Washington.
The meeting was held on December 5 in the premises of the Institute for peace and chaired by Daniel Server, Director of the Balkan Initiative of this institute.
The leading American and European experts took part in the discussion as well as representatives of USA Government and EU countries. Server refused to tell 'Blic' News' any of the names of the participants.
Last week he was in Belgrade where he had a series of meetings with non-government organizations and representatives of certain embassies.
Both Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic and Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica refused to meet with him on account of to heavy schedule. The only high official that met with Server was Nebojsa Covic, one of Serbian deputy Prime Ministers and also Chief of state Coordination Center for Kosovo and Metohija.
Judging by the six-page report, some of the conclusions of the secret meeting in Washington might cause dissatisfaction of Serbian politicians since independence of Kosovo is being treated as a finished matter. Serbian politicians have been represented as completely indifferent when the future of southern Serbian province is concerned.
'This meeting was held before Serbian politicians have changed their stance towards Kosovo. At that meeting we have not thought that Zoran Djindjic would request that talks on Kosovo should begin immediately', Server says for 'Blic News'.
The report also speaks about the consequences of disintegration of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro for the future status of Kosovo.
American participants think that before beginning of talks USA should decide about its position regarding final Kosovo status and then support it in later on negotiations.
Server further says that there were participants that opposed independence of Kosovo explaining that it could cause instability in the Balkans, but none of the participants thought that Kosovo should return under the competence of Belgrade.
As regards Djindjic's latest statements, Server considers them as something to be connected with the home politics. 'Some Djindjic's statements are rather problematic such as suggestion that Serbia will request parts of BiH territories as compensation for the loss of Kosovo. I think that the international community will set the rules for negotiations about Kosovo. One of these rules will be that destabilization of Macedonia and Bosnia is not going to be allowed', Server said.

See what I mean?