Top Serbian official issues war threat over Kosovo

[conspiracy analyst]

Top Serbian official issues war threat over Kosovo


Background: 'They're always being told it's three months away'

Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
Thursday December 6, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

The EU special envoy on Kosovo today demanded a retraction of a threat by a senior Serbian official that his country could resort to war if the mostly ethnic Albanian province declares independence.

Aleksandar Simic, an advisor to Serbia's prime minister, was quoted in the Belgrade media as saying that Serbia had the legal right to use war as a means of defending its territory if Kosovo, a UN protectorate for the past eight years, declares independence in the coming weeks as expected.

Article continues
"Serbia has had negative experiences from certain armed clashes during the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia, and this is why we are more prudent and cautious now, but, of course, state interests are defended by war as well," Mr Simic said.

Wolfgang Ischinger, the European member of a troika of international negotiators who have spent the past four months trying in vain to find a negotiated settlement on Kosovo's future, reacted angrily to Mr Simic's remarks.

"I believe it is inadmissible and intolerable that even before the troika report is out one of the parties expresses himself in this way," Mr Ischinger said in London today.

"I believe this is in clear violation of the firm commitments expressed by the president of Serbia himself at the conference table in a solemn fashion."

The envoy, who is also Germany's ambassador to London, said he expected the Serbian government to retract the statement.

There was no immediate response from Belgrade tonight, but a Serbian diplomat pointed to a statement on Wednesday by the foreign minister, Vuk Jeremic, in which he declared his government would use all means to oppose Kosovo's independence except military action in any form.

Serbia came under pressure on another front today when the outgoing war crimes investigator for the former Yugoslavia, Carla del Ponte, gave Belgrade until Monday to hand over Bosnian Serb fugitive General Ratko Mladic.

Failure to do so, she said, could block Serbia's pre-membership agreement with the EU that was initialled in November but not yet formally signed.

The new row reflects rising tensions in the run up to Monday's deadline for the last-ditch mediation effort by the troika, which also includes US and Russian envoys.

The troika report to the UN secretary general will make it clear that the mission explored every possible compromise solution without narrowing the differences between Kosovo's ethnic Albanian majority and the Serbian government.

Russia, which supports Belgrade's opposition to secession and which blocked a proposal for supervised independence earlier this year, has argued that negotiations should continue after Monday's deadline.

Mr Ischinger said however that further negotiation would not bring any convergence and would instead make the situation in the Balkans even more fragile.

"Today in early December the status quo is even less sustainable than was the case on August 1 [when the troika began its work]," he said. "If you offer opportunities for further delays you would increase, and not necessarily decrease, security risks and risks of instability in the region."

The looming Kosovo crisis will be discussed by a meeting of European foreign ministers on Monday, and at a European summit later next week before going before the security council on December 19.

The newly elected Kosovo Albanian leadership has assured the EU and Washington that it will not declare independence before those meetings take place but an announcement could come early in the new year.

"We are talking about weeks, not months," a senior western diplomat involved in the talks, said today.

The US and most of western Europe is expected to recognise Kosovo's independence rapidly, but Russia has vowed to resist a secession Moscow sees as illegitimate under international law.

The declaration of independence could also prove divisive in the EU as a handful of members, particularly Cyprus and Greece, have voiced reluctance to recognise a unilateral declaration of independence.

Serbia could impose a diplomatic and economic blockade on Kosovo, but the most dangerous flashpoints could be the Serb enclaves in the centre and south of the region, and the roughly 5,000 ethnic Albanians living in the mostly Serb north.

There is also a danger the north could break away from the rest of Kosovo. Nato has said it could reinforce its 16,000 force there if necessary, and Britain has offered extra troops if the need arises.

There are fears too that Kosovo's secession could cause a wave of instability in ethnic enclaves elsewhere in the Balkans and in the Caucasus.

[rodin]

The tribe need war to give them succour

[conspiracy analyst]

[karlos]

Kosovo has large deposits of rare precious metals
not gold but stuff used to make spacecraft and nuclear rockets

[conspiracy analyst]

[pebe]

[conspiracy analyst]

Mass demos occured today in Kosovo with US flags asking the USA to Kick Putins Ass.

In other words calling for a generalised war to break Serbia up even more.

[pebe]

They are waving US flags and calling for independence at the same time!!! The irony of that...
The saddest thing is that Kosovo is 90% Albanian only because the original inhabitants, the Serbs, had been driven out (ethnically cleansed!?) by them.

[PaulStott]

[conspiracy analyst]

On viewing the pictures again there weren't that many people on the demos. Even the Kosovars it appears dont want war.


Kosovo: Waiting for War, Dreaming of Diplomacy
by Diana Johnstone
December 10, 2007

The Kosovo mess illustrates the habitual U.S. rejection of diplomacy
in
favor of war.

The United States and its European allies have announced that
diplomacy
has failed to solve the Kosovo problem.

When diplomacy fails, that means war. Especially in so serious a
matter
as unilaterally declaring the independence of a part of another
country's territory.

But the next Kosovo war is supposed to be such a small, muted,
insignificant war that nobody will notice. NATO is occupying the
potential battlefield with over 16,000 men, backed by air power, and
is
poised, it says, to "avoid violence". The overwhelming military
advantage of NATO may indeed prevent any eventual violence from
reaching
the status of a "war". The confidence that comes of wielding
decisive
military force has allowed the United States and its NATO allies to
pursue a policy that normally would be a sure-fire formula for war.

War results when the opposing parties have totally conflicting views
of
reality. The Albanians and Serbs have totally opposing views of the
very
history of the disputed province of Kosovo. The role of diplomacy
is
to take such conflicting views of reality into account. It means
avoiding pushing one party to a dispute into a humiliating corner. It
involves seeking to promote mutual respect and understanding, at
least
enough to accept compromise.

Instead, the United States, followed by its irresponsible European
allies, has from the start endorsed the extreme Albanian nationalist
view, treating Serbia as a "rogue state" that does not deserve the
normal protection of international law. Washington has orchestrated
two
rounds of totally sham "negotiations", whose conclusions it dictated
from the start, on behalf of its Albanian clients. The first round
took
place at Rambouillet, leading to the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia and
occupation of Kosovo. The second round took place this year, leading
to
what could be another, more muted but longer, unpredictable conflict.

Long and short sham negotiations

At the end of the 1990s, the Clinton administration was not really
concerned with solving the Kosovo problem. It wanted to solve its
own
NATO problem. Its NATO problem was this: What is the use of this
military alliance, now that the Communist bloc, which it was created
to
deter, no longer exists? To preserve NATO, a new raison d'être had
to
be found. This was "humanitarian intervention". From now on, NATO
would exist in order to rescue oppressed minorities in foreign
countries
- especially those with some geostrategic or economic value, of
course.
The deep-rooted Kosovo conflict between the Serbian State and an
Albanian secessionist movement, marked by spasmodic violence on both
sides, provided the experimental terrain for this new policy. The
Kosovo
problem was proclaimed to be a crisis, requiring international
intervention, only weeks before NATO's 50th anniversary meeting, when
this U.S.-designed policy was officially adopted.

To provide a casus belli, the Clinton administration orchestrated
sham
negotiations at the French château in Rambouillet. The U.S. abruptly
promoted Hashim Thaqi, the head of the armed "Kosovo Liberation
Army",
to head the Kosovo Albanian delegation, shoving aside more reputable
Albanian leaders such as Ibrahim Rugova. No direct encounters
between
the Serbian and Albanian delegations were even allowed. Both were
ordered to accept a comprehensive plan drafted by the United States,
allowing for NATO occupation of Kosovo. Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright bullied Thaqi into reluctantly accepting the ultimatum, with
back-stage assurances that he would eventually get his own
"independent
Kosova". The Serbs had agreed to the principle of autonomy of
Kosovo,
and their parliament had drafted a proposal - totally ignored at
Rambouillet. But the Serbian delegation rejected the ultimatum,
which
included an annex that would have allowed NATO occupation of the
whole
of Serbia. This rejection was the result Ms Albright sought. On the
pretext that Serbia had "refused to negotiate", NATO could wage its
victorious little "humanitarian" war.

This year, the world has been provided with the spectacle of much
more
prolonged sham negotiations. For weeks and months, the West's
semi-official media have put out "news" reports that the negotiations
to
settle the Kosovo problem were not getting anywhere. This was not
news
because the negotiations were framed in such a way that they could
not
possibly succeed.

"The Serbian and Albanian sides can't agree", the pseudo-diplomats
say
of their pseudo-diplomacy. They mean, the Serbian side has not
agreed
to the Albanian demand for an independent Kosovo. This was the only
proposal with U.S. support. It amounted to yet another ultimatum to
the
Serbs. The Albanians knew they had the support of the United States
and
NATO, who are occupying Kosovo militarily. They had no incentive to
bargain. They could just wait for the negotiations to fail, sure
they
would be given what they want by occupying Great Powers.

Russia supports diplomacy and international law

The West is putting the blame for this failure on Vladimir Putin.
The
servile media are puffing up Putin's status as the latest world class
bad guy, motivated by "power" and a perverse desire to annoy the
virtuous Americans. Since the Americans back the Albanian demand for
independence, the Russians, out of contrariness, back the Serbian
position.

This is not exactly accurate. The Serbian position is to offer very
comprehensive autonomy to Kosovo, a self-government just short of
formal
independence. The Russian position is to be ready to support any
agreement reached between the two sides.

Western media refuse to grasp what this means. It means that the
Russians are insisting on genuine negotiations, between the two
parties,
the Serbian government and Kosovo Albanian separatists. They are not
saying what the outcome of such genuine negotiations would be. They
might reach some sort of compromise providing for some sort of
independence. The point is that such an agreement, reached by both
parties, would be legal under international law. Independence
proclaimed unilaterally by Kosovo Albanians, without negotiated
agreement with Serbia, would constitute a clear violation of
international law. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has
repeatedly
warned that a unilateral proclamation of independence could provoke
further interethnic violence in the region and set a dangerous
precedent
for many other countries with ethnic minorities.

In the level of principles, the contrast is not between the U.S.
backing
Albanian Kosovo independence and Russia backing Serbia. It is
between
Russia backing diplomacy and the United States backing force.

A "NATO State"

But how much "independence" will Kosovo really enjoy? In private,
European governments know that Kosovo is not a viable independent
state.
This has been demonstrated during eight years of international
protectorate. Kosovo's economy is almost entirely dependent on
remittences from emigrés to their families, international aid
(including
Saudia Arabian mosque building projects) and flourishing crime (drug
and
sex trafficking in particular).

Since official international endorsement of unilateral Serbian guilt
has
made reconciliation between Serb and Albanian inhabitants impossible,
NATO forces, under the guise of the European Union, are expected to
stay
on "to protect the human rights of minorities". In terms of
security,
the "independent" Kosovo will be a NATO satellite. Formal
independence
from Serbia, following eight years of de facto independence from
Serbia,
will do nothing to improve the miserable state of the economy. The
huge
number of unemployed young Albanians like to hope independence will
bring jobs and prosperity. But it is hard to see how closed borders
with
a hostile Serbia will do more for Kosovo's economy than decades of
preferential Yugoslav development funds. Some sources of income may
even diminish, notably foreign aid, as "humanitarian" NGOs move
elsewhere. Even foreign remittances may be cut back if certain
European
governments decide to send their Albanian guest workers back to their
"liberated" homeland. Only organized crime seems certain to prosper.

Last August, as the long round of sham negotiations got underway,
Slobodan Samardzic, the Serbian minister for Kosovo, said that a
Kosovo
state created with the U.S. support "would only serve the interests
of
America and the local mafia clans." Samardzic belongs to the
younger,
pro-Western generation that tended to attribute the West's hostility
to
Serbia to Slobodan Milosevic. But Milosevic has been gone for years,
and
Western policy remains unchanged.

Samardzic said that NATO plans to make Kosovo virtually its own
territory, "a satellite, an army barracks state on foreign
territory".
The main source of power in Kosovo would be the huge U.S. military
base,
Camp Bondsteel, built immediately after NATO occupied the territory
in
June 1999, without asking permission from anyone.

As the latest round of sham negotiations ended, Serbian prime
minister
Vojislav Kostunica said events prove that the real reason NATO bombed
Serbia in 1999 was in order to conquer Kosovo as a "NATO puppet
state".

And what has Serbia been offered in return for loss of its historic
territory? Merely a vague suggestion that, if it behaves, it may
eventually obtain EU membership. In short, in return for losing
sovereignty over Kosovo, it may be allowed to give up more of its
sovereignty to the European Union. But even this is a hazy prospect.

It is quite possible that Serbia could manage better economically
without Kosovo, which was always the poorest and least developed part
of
Yugoslavia, despite massive development funds from the rest of the
country. But Serbia's reasons for wanting to retain Kosovo are not
economic, but moral. The West has refused to take these into
account,
brushing them all aside with the single argument that Serbia "lost
its
right" to the territory because of Milosevic's repression of Albanian
separatists. More realistically, NATO "won its right" to dispose of
Kosovo by bombing Serbia. The Western argument comes down to might
makes
right, or rather, superior might makes right.

Serbia's case

The Serbian reasons to reject Kosovo's secession are legal and moral:

1 - International law. Even after NATO bombed Serbia into allowing
Kosovo to be occupied, its sovereignty over the province was
officially
confirmed under international law. As the one-sided war ended, the
United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1244 which
reaffirmed
"the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and
territorial
integrity" of Yugoslavia, of which Serbia is the successor State.
Resolution 1244, which remains the existing basis for the legal
status
of Kosovo, also speaks of "substantial autonomy and meaningful
self-administration" - which is what Serbia has agreed to and
proposed.
It does not speak of independence.

What has Serbia done since the fall of Milosevic to merit worse
treatment than was prescribed in 1999?

2 - The impossibility of abandoning the Serbian minority to almost
certain persecution and expulsion. Nor can Serbia abandon its
historic
monuments, the precious medieval monasteries of Decani, Gracanica,
Pec
and many others.

3 - The deep, truly painful sense of injustice and humiliation at the
manner in which the Great Powers are orchestrating the amputation of
this most cherished part of Serbia's historic territory. Serbs are
blamed for something they never did, something even Milosevic never
did:
the attempted "genocide" or at least "expulsion" of Albanians from
Kosovo. This is no more than wartime propaganda, which by now is
probably believed by most Albanians, since the Great Powers endorse
it.
The official line, criminalizing Serbia, echoed daily by more or
less
ignorant, but well-coached, editorialists and commentators, heaps
unbearable insult on injury. Sometimes insult is harder to take than
injury.

This last reason, which may be the strongest of all, is virtually
invisible to Americans and Europeans who have swallowed whole the
official line of wicked Serbs persecuting innocent Albanians, in
willful
ignorance of the complexities of history and culture of the region.

If these perfectly legitimate Serb concerns were taken into
consideration, patient diplomacy could in all probability achieve a
compromise settlement that would differ from the initial negotiating
positions of both sides, but which, with international guarantees and
incentives, could satisfy at least part of the demands of both sides.

Dreaming of what might have been...

Even after the disaster of NATO bombing and occupation of Kosovo made
the situation far worse, by exacerbating hostility between the
Albanian
and Serbian communities to the boiling point, diplomacy might have
been
able to play a constructive role. That would simply require a bit of
good will and constructive imagination - qualities to which current
U.S.
leaders do not even aspire, preferring to rely on the iron fist.

Let us imagine that the United States had not managed to subvert the
peace-making functions of international organizations such as the
OSCE
and the United Nations. Let us imagine the existence of a real
"international community", which could give serious backing to
diplomatic efforts to find a compromise solution for Kosovo. Instead
of
uniting a "Troika" made up of the United States, the European Union
and
Russia, let us suppose that India, China and Brazil could appoint a
group of diplomats, for instance, former ambassadors to Yugoslavia
(including, perhaps, both the former East and West German ambassadors
to
pre-disintegration Yugoslavia, former Canadian ambassador James
Bissett
and former British ambassador Ivor Roberts, as well as former
ambassadors from non-European countries) to facilitate open-ended
negotiations between Serbs and Albanians. There would be no
preconditions except one: the negotiations would last until the two
parties agreed to a compromise solution.

My own personal belief is that genuine, patient negotiations could
arrive at some sort of overall agreement involving border changes and
partition, as well as some sort of union between the secessionist
Albanian part of Kosovo and Albania itself. The arguments for such a
solution are overwhelming, and have been stated most convincingly by
Dobrica Cosic, Serbia's most distinguished novelist and a former
President of Yugoslavia, well before the Kosovo problem exploded into
armed conflict in 1998-99.

It is true that both the Albanian and Serbian sides reject partition,
more or less vehemently. But that is natural at the start of
negotiations. The Albanians adamantly demand all of Kosovo within
its
present borders. This demand is supported by the United States,
which
also insists that there be no union between Kosovo and Albania. This
is
the point on which some compromise could be worked out.

Serbia's position has been to offer a degree of autonomy that would
in
fact be tantamount to total internal independence. This is
understandable as a bargaining position, but it is hard to see how it
would be favorable to Serbia itself. Serbia would risk bearing a
financial burden for a territory over which it exercises no control.

On the other hand, the Albanians' expectations for independence, and
most of all, the hatred they foster for Serbia, makes a return to
Serbian rule impossible in practical terms. Moreover, Serbia has one
of
Europe's lowest birth rates, while Kosovo Albanians have the highest.
After being outnumbered by Albanians in Kosovo, Serbs might
eventually
be outnumbered by Albanians in Serbia.

The welfare of both Serbs and Albanians could be ensured best by an
overall agreement to end the hostilities between the two populations,
something that clearly has not been accomplished in eight years of
U.N.-NATO protectorate. This should involve some territorial
rearrangements, as well as economic and cultural agreements between
the
parties concerned. Neighboring countries should also be brought into
the negotiations. Agreements should be made on the basis of
practical
realities, not on presumptions of "guilt" and "innocence".

Finally, identity needs to be detached from particular territories
and
particular events. Future generations of Serbs and Albanians must be
able to live their lives freed from the burdens of past resentments
and
ancentral vendettas.

But, unfortunately, this is only a dream...

***********************************************************

Diana Johnstone is author of Fools' Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and
Western Delusions, PlutoPress/Monthly Review Press. She can be
reached
at diana.jo...@yahoo.fr

[pebe]

Let's remind ourselves of what the policy of “preventive war by which the US government claims the unilateral right to attack other nations which are said to pose a threat to national security" (translate as "we have these 4 tonnes of depleted uranium weapons we have not tested yet so let's do it here") looks like first hand.
Same number of people died in the bombing of Serbia as on 911 yet the topic is still very much ignored.
WARNING! This clip contains scenes that some viewers may find offensive!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QlwhjeH6DE8&feature=related

[conspiracy analyst]

[conspiracy analyst]

Putin Orders ‘First Strike’ Against US Forces Over Kosovo?

Putin Orders ‘First Strike’ Against US Forces Over Kosovo
Report by Sorcha Faal

In reading the latest Military and Intelligence reports circulating in the Kremlin today one cannot help but have the feeling that our world has entered into a time-warp and instead of this being 2007, we have been plunged 93 years back to 1914.

In 1914, after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the Austro-Hungarian Empire issued an ultimatum to the Russian backed Serbian government, and who instead of bending to the Western Powers mobilized for war. The resulting aftermath of the First World War left over 40 million dead with an additional 50 million human beings killed by the Spanish Flu Epidemic spread around the World by Western military forces returning from war in 1918.

Here in 2007, we, again, have the spectre of World War looming over us as Serbia, once again backed by Russia, is mobilizing for war due to the Western Powers intention to acknowledge the independence of the Serbian province of Kosovo, and which Russia has vowed will not be allowed to stand.

This is coupled with China announcing the possible beginning of human-to-human Bird Flu transmission and Russia reporting another outbreak of this deadly disease and which the World Health Organization has warned will turn into a catastrophic pandemic.

In response to the latest war provocations by the Western Powers, President Putin today ordered the ‘official’ ending of the arms control treaty with the NATO Nations. Putin has further ordered Russia’s Naval Forces back on World-Wide patrol status, with particular focus being on the Russian Navy’s ability to confront NATO Forces in the Mediterranean Sea, and which controls the sea access to the Balkans.

Particularly ominous in these new reports is that Putin has reportedly ordered Russian Military Forces to ‘First Strike’ capability against any NATO force that may seek to block Russia’s sea access to the Balkans and relief to the Serbs upon the outbreak of war.

Though being kept from the American people themselves, and as the former Soviet Leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, has warned, the United States Military Leaders aggressive moves in the Balkans and the Middle East are designed to confront Russia, and not Iran as these peoples are being led to believe.

It is more than a coincidence, too, that the United States is, once again, leading the World towards another depression by their insane monetary polices as they did in the aftermath of the World War I and which led to the Great Depression.

World War, Catastrophic Flu Pandemic and World Economic Collapse have long been the Western Powers ‘master plan’ goal to accelerate their main objective of One World Government upon our World, and which only Russia and China have the ability to prevent.

What is most extraordinary about the horrific plans of the Western Powers against our human race, however, is not their stated goals, but that so many of the Western peoples still fail to see that their lives are about to be destroyed, exactly like those of their ancestors from last century.

As the American people alone face the crushing burdens of accelerating oil prices, the collapse of their stock market, the World-Wide collapse of the US dollar, and the catastrophic collapse of their housing market, it is, perhaps, instructive for them to know what their War Leaders know, and which is:

“2,000 years ago the Roman Empire collapsed due to its trade deficit rising to 3% of its total economy.

Fifty years ago, Brazil had a massive trade deficit, which were critical to its decline – the currency was battered over and over again.

Eight years ago, the tiger economies of Asia were plunged into a currency crisis, due to big domestic and over-reliance on foreign capital.

And yet the US economy continues to flaunt history and economics. At 6.4% of GDP (US$58.9bil), US trade deficits are perilous and significantly exceed those of Rome, Brazil or any Asian country one decade ago.”

There is more than an ice storm that has paralyzed the people of the United States today, there is a ‘storm of ice’ that covers their minds and is leading them in their ignorance to an abyss from which they cannot possibly survive as a Nation…but which has been the plan of their War Leaders all along.


http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=207477

[QuitTheirClogs]

Nicolas Sarkozy: