Arafat inviting Milosevic to Bethlehem demonstrates again that he was a fan of thugs of all stripes. This was the guy who sent the Chinese a congratulations note for dealing with those pesky students at Tiananmen Square. It doesn't mean Israel should immediately side with whoever Arafat was close to. As for Hamas, they probably did what most Islamist groups did at the time: denounced Western involvement as part of the war on Islam, whilst supporting Kosovar efforts to create a Muslim state (or at least a state for Muslims).

The case for Kosovo's independence ought to be separated from the case for a KLA-run state. The KLA are, at best, a criminal syndicate prone to murder and terrorism. At worst, they will accomodate al-Qaeda. Surely that's the similarity here? Kosovars, like the Palestinian Arabs, might have a claim to a state, but their conduct and leadership makes endorsing one a foolish move.

Posted by: MattW at March 20, 2008 4:21 PM

Interesting observations. I am wondering what role Islamic NGOs will have on the whole situation?

They have been pretty active in the area, especially in Bosnia after the war. The brand of Islam, hence, has become a bit more conservative and it moving more in that direction all of the time. This is following a general trend in the wider Muslim world.

Many of these Islamic NGOs are from the Gulf and espouse a pretty harsh version of Islam called "Salafi". This is similar to what many in the West would know as "Wahhabis" but not always the same.

This Salafism is a pretty big change from the hard drinking reputation that Albanians and other Balkan Muslims have.

I dont think Kosovo has any relevence to the Palestinian/Israeli issue, but I think we need to keep an eye on what certain groups are doing in the area.

Just because most of them are our friends doesnt mean some of them are not, think "Ansar al Islam" in American friendly Kurdistan. It also doesnt mean that the opinions of a significant portion of the population might not be swayed by active and energetic Salafi NGOs in the area spread cash around with their texts.

Posted by: Marc at March 21, 2008 6:52 AM

Kosovo and Israel have more in common yet.

Both are inhabited by peoples who have lived in the region for 3000 years.

Both have been confronted by their current enemies since around 600 CE.

Both have current enemies who are supported by Russia.

Both are friends with Turkey and both were once part of the Ottoman Empire.

Both are opposed by violent people whose protests usually include burning flags and attacking embassies.

Both live on their ancient land while their enemies make the claim that it is their own ancient land and theirs alone.

Both have important cultural ties to Europe and specifically German-speaking Europe.

I have written about that here:

http://citizenleauki.joeuser.com/article/300032/Kosovo

And if the "Palestinians" declared independence, there would be much rejoicing in Israel. After all, Since 1948 Israel has been trying to get them to declare their own state and leave Israel alone.

Unfortunately the "Palestinian cause" is more about destroying Israel and killing all the Jews, and that cannot be done by declaring independence.

Posted by: Leauki at March 21, 2008 8:36 AM

Excellent article! Very good summary of the Balkans and middle east.

Posted by: Leauki at March 21, 2008 8:38 AM

You know, I am sensible to the points you are making. As an Albanian Jew, at first I've been proud of Albania's self proclamation as "the Israel of the Balkans".

Now I tend to roll my eyes at it. It's as if Westerners, particularly Americans, and especially American Jews, can only be made to care about the Kosovo conflict if it is painted with charged analogies to their own domestic issues.

Some draw parallels between Kosovo and Israel, some on the contrary say Serbia is Israel "with balls", others play the "what if a Hispanic majority state proclaimed independence and seceded from the Union" routine.

Although I find the Albania-Israel analogy much more factually and contextually valid than the other ones thrown out there, I find it offensive and demeaning that most "interested" people don't give enough of a crap to study the history of the region for what it is to understand the conflict on its own terms. Caricaturizing it into an analogy of a charged domestic conflict, is to concede that these Serbs and Kosovars don't deserve to be understood in their own idiosyncratic environment, but we only care about Israel, or about illegal immigrants in our own country, and we will pick whichever side in this completely unrelated Albania-vs-Serbia conflict fits the cookie-cutter of our own pet issue, and side with them. That’s just intellectually lazy…

Why not call Israel the Kosovo of the Middle East? Oh wait, but then so much of the history, of the context, of the nuances that make the struggle of the Jewish people is lost. Kosovo is what it is, and wise people should have the common sense to withhold judgment until they are properly informed on the realities of the conflict, which cannot be encapsulated into such analogies without gross distortions. Those who lack the motivation or intellectual discipline to do their own homework, but yet have no hesitation in hurling tomatoes at whichever side they reflexively perceive as closest to their personal nemesis, well, they have some bigotry to account for: I know the Kosovo conflict is geopolitically distant and many information sources on it are tainted, but to lack the basic human empathy of needing to understand the Kosovars as more than just demonizable Muslims, to dig a little bit deeper into the dynamics involved,… there’s just something wrong with that.

The reaction to the Kosovo issue in some anti-Jihadi circles I used to greatly respect has shocked me. I understand now that the ideological explosiveness of the anti-Jihadi coalition is greater than I had previously appreciated. I had already witnessed with disgust the recent alliance of some of its sectors with the European Neo/Crypto Nazis. Now the reflexive hysterics against Kosovars/Albanians are a new low. I have never thought it possible before, but it seems that Islamophobia does exist in some circles: an irrational hateful fear and animosity of anything or anyone perceived as related to Islam.

It is especially curious to observe the tantrums of the Zionist Christians/Christianophile Jews. These recent tenuous pretenses of unity between Christians and Jews are highly entertaining. The rear-view mirror of my historic understanding extends beyond the past 50 years. The greatest crimes against Jews have been historically committed by Christians, lest we forget. My own Jewish ancestors were driven off from Spain in the 16th century, and it was in Albania that they found refuge and were never harassed. The ethnic cleansing of Jews by European Christian countries as late as Hitler’s last attempt surpasses anything Muslims have had the chance or ingenuity to enact against Jews.

That being Christian automatically makes Serbs the good guys is outrageous.

First of all this was never a religious conflict; it was an ethnic conflict. The Islam vs Christianity crusade-wannabe interpretation is laughable. If that’s what this was about, then how come the Catholic Croats fought a bloody war to get out of Serbia’s dominion? Why did Orthodox “Macedonia” sneak away under the radar? Yeah, and how about Montenegro and Slovenia?

Not only that, but neither Kosovo nor Albania proper are homogeneous Muslim blobs. Calling Albania a Muslim country is incorrect and unfair to its population. The census data on which the “majority Muslim” assertion is based is older than WW2. According to these statistics, Albania’s population is 70% Muslim, 20% Orthodox, and 10% Catholic.

Religion has been illegal in the country for about 50 years, more than enough to severely damage the passing on of religious mores to the new generation. My parents were raised in a strictly atheist environment and despite their families’ traditions being Jewish and Orthodox Christian respectively, they both grew up despising either religion. Their story is very typical of Albanians raised under communism, and despite a recent revival of religious life in the country, the vast majority of the population (especially in urban centers) remains indifferent to any religion.

Even if Albania were currently a Muslim majority country, its political infrastructure is strictly secular. It’s not PC to call the US a Christian country due to the clear separation of church and state; likewise, it’s not proper to call Albania a Muslim country.

Kosovo is more Muslim than Albania, and this is merely the result of resentment and ideological resistance to Serbian oppression. While there is a sizable Orthodox population in Albania, in Kosovo there is virtually none to be found, with almost all Kosovar Albanians being either Muslims or Catholics. This is understandable, as Serbia has historically obfuscated religion as a proxy for ethnicity.

Is Kosovo vulnerable to well-funded extremist influence from the Saudis? Sure it is. Its economy is paralyzed after almost a decade of statist parasitic UN administration. A young unemployed population is volatile. So guide them, help them draft their constitution modeled after that of the US, export capitalism in a country already adulating American culture, build consistent US allies.

Mr.Totten, I also wanted to comment on a few historical references in your article:

Not only did Serbs lose the major battle in Kosovo in 1338 and this is somehow one of their greatest pretexts of attachment to the land, but that battle was not only the Serbs’! It was a coalition of Albanians, Serbs, and Bulgarians, and it was actually an Albanian rebel who managed to reach the Sultan’s tent and kill him, although the battle was nevertheless lost. A Serbian prince merely led this coalition militarily, but at the time Kosovo was already heavily populated by Albanians.

Serbs have never administered Kosovo long enough or unequivocally enough for any substantial Serbian cultural life to flourish there. Their cultural cradle, if they ever had one, was located in Raska (to the north of Kosovo). The claim to all these majestic ancient Orthodox churches in Kosovo testifying to their cultural legacy there is largely an outrageous Serbian fabrication.

During the 1999 war, many Albanian families sheltered Kosovar refugees who had fled to the neighboring countries to escape the genocidal wave. My family also hosted a Kosovar family in our tiny apartment for months. The old man, in his 60s, joked about being 500 years old. He had been put in forced labor camps/projects to build Orthodox churches in Kosovo, which the Serbs now claim are hundreds of years old!

There is so much revisionism going on it’s unbelievable.

In any case, I understand that many people do NOT care enough to learn the real history in itself, but will nevertheless flaunt an opinion. So your piece is a welcome counter-thought-experiment to the almost whole-sale identification of the Anti-Jihadi front with the Serbs

Posted by: medaura at March 21, 2008 12:14 PM

I read this article (from the pajama media site) written Jonathan Davis who (apparently) debunks lies about Serbian depravity. He claims that the same spin media that sold us on Iraq duped us on the Serbians as well.

http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/03/kosovo_and_the_myth_of_serbian.php

It's good that there is a debate on this issue.

Posted by: lee at March 21, 2008 12:33 PM

Hi Kejda (Medaura)!

Come on, now. You know it's not just comparing Kosovo to Israel in order to choose sides. I am sure Michael knows the history of Kosovo enough to understand the situation on its own. He is usually well-informed. The comparison to Israel is not something that has to be done to understand it, it is something that happens once you learn about both peoples.

My own connection to Albania was Albanian friends in Germany. I didn't know anyone from Israel back then (although my father lived on a kibbutz for a short time before I was born). I knew about Yugoslavia and Kosovo back in the 1980s. Yugoslavia was the place where West-Germans and East-Germans could meet during holidays.

I think you can still be proud of the comparison with Israel. Yes, Albanians have their own history, but alliances are made between friends and not between people with history and people without. The comparison is valid and Kosovo refugees in Israel have felt the connection between the peoples too.

No reason to roll eyes, people need to compare to what they know. For Americans Kosovo is as far away as Israel. For me it is as close as Israel.

What Kosovo did and the comparison was to show which of the anti-Jihadis are really anti-Jihad and which simply hate Islam as such.

I remember the LGF discussions about the subject. Gruesome!

Incidentally, the Arabs seem to have chosen sides and not recognised Kosovo. The Kosovars are Muslims persecuted by Christians, but unfortunately they reject Christian persecution of Muslims just as much as Muslim persecution of Jews. And that makes the Kosovars part of the western world, I suppose.

Posted by: Leauki at March 21, 2008 12:37 PM

The reaction to the Kosovo issue in some anti-Jihadi circles I used to greatly respect has shocked me. I understand now that the ideological explosiveness of the anti-Jihadi coalition is greater than I had previously appreciated. I had already witnessed with disgust the recent alliance of some of its sectors with the European Neo/Crypto Nazis. Now the reflexive hysterics against Kosovars/Albanians are a new low.

I agree. This article is a good counter-argument to that kind of hysteria. It presents the facts without condemning anyone. Great summary of the issue!

Posted by: maryatexitzero at March 21, 2008 12:55 PM

If the religious inclinations of the Albanians are any guide, then half of Kosovars are atheists and the other half go to the mosque as often as Europeans go to church.

Posted by: Boojum at March 21, 2008 1:22 PM

Medaura,

I appreciate your comments. Understand, though, that I'm comparing Kosovo to Israel because I believe it will help my audience, especially the audience at Commentary Magazine, understand the issue more clearly. Also because I think Israel ought to recognize Kosovo and not see it as a boogeyman country.

I have been following events in the Balkans for more than ten years, and I do understand the area on its own terms.

You could certainly say that Israel is the Kosovo of the Middle East. Making that point in Prishtina might clarify a few things for an audience there. Commentary is an American magazine that often covers Israel and Judaism, so it the comparison is an apt one for that audience.

I completely agree that some in the anti-jihad community (a community which I often agree with myself) are hysterical about Kosovo and do not understand it. I also had them in mind when I wrote this.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 21, 2008 2:10 PM

Mr.Totten,

In the light of your response and Leauki's take, and rereading what I wrote, I realize now that there was one point in my comment where you might think I was coming after you.

I just wanted to clarify that it's not what I meant. I have thoroughly enjoyed your reports from Iraq, have read of your credentials, and I had no doubt in my mind that you were well-versed in the history of the Balkans when I posted my first comment.

Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly enough. My conversational wounds are still fresh from gruesome debates I've had on the issue on LGF and beyond (which Leauki is referencing above) with people most of whom didn't seem to care about those involved in this conflict beyond spinning them into caricatures of Jews, Palestinians, or even illegal aliens from Mexico (and in my mind I was still talking to this kind of people when I wrote my comment).

When I wrote the following, please understand I was not referring to you, but to the general level of shallow discussion which usually tends to emerge from charged regional analogies (specifically to the Albanophobe Serbia="Israel with balls"/Kosovars="Illegal Aliens" constructions).

"Although I find the Albania-Israel analogy much more factually and contextually valid than the other ones thrown out there, I find it offensive and demeaning that most “interested” people don't give enough of a crap to study the history of the region for what it is to understand the conflict on its own terms. Caricaturizing it into an analogy of a charged domestic conflict, is to concede that these Serbs and Kosovars don't deserve to be understood in their own idiosyncratic environment, but we only care about Israel, or about illegal immigrants in our own country, and we will pick whichever side in this completely unrelated Albania-vs-Serbia conflict fits the cookie-cutter of our own pet issue, and side with them. That’s just intellectually lazy…"

I have myself resorted to the "Israel of the Balkans" analogy you presented in your article when discussing the issue at LGF. For anyone who understands the conflict's dynamics, the legitimate parallels become pretty clear and worth voicing.

But I soon realized that while for people who understand Balkans' history the analogy is clear, it is nevertheless an argument of weak persuasiveness when presented to people who lack background knowledge on the conflict, because it merely competes on the same plane with many other opposite analogies (e.g Serbia="Israel with balls") almost all of which bear some sort of superficial resemblance to the issue at hand. They may all sound equally legitimate on a skin-deep level and confuse an interested observer who may be ignorant on the Balkans.

That's why I usually try to educate or provide resources on the actual Kosovo reality, rather than enter the frey of such comparisons which everyone manages to spin in all directions.

But I admit that when used seriously, especially by someone like yourself, universally well-admired for your objectivity, the analogy can be a tool to draw in potentially sympathetic ears.

I understand and respect that.

Kejda

Posted by: medaura at March 21, 2008 3:45 PM

Kejda,

No need to apologize. I understand exactly where you're coming from and what you mean.

You give me a bit too much credit, though, when you refer to me as unbiased. I have my opinions, and I don't conceal them. However, I do try to be as close to 100 percent accurate as possible. I very carefully fact-checked this piece before publishing it. I will not include falsehoods in my work just because they happen to line up with my opinions. If the facts don't fit my opinions, my opinions will change.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 21, 2008 4:34 PM

Nice article. I'm still reluctant to get the US any more involved in the Balkans. It's a hornet's nest of too many ethnic groups in too small a space. I really don't care about Kosovo enough to go to war with Russia.

Medaura,
Forgive me if I trust you on this issue as much as my Serbian student: i.e. not at all. It's literally he said / she said.

As for anti-Muslim sentiment, I credit it to the fact that the anti-jihad movement sees all of the horrible acts of Al Qaeda, combined with the continuous lying and deception of the propaganda of jihad and fake moderates. Not only can you not take an individual's word on whether he isn't an AQ fanboy, most middle east scholars can't be trusted either, as they have bought into the enemy's propaganda. This creates an environment where all Muslims under suspicion. For added anger, stir in the abuse of the word Islamophobia and claims of racism from hypocritical scumbag groups like CAIR. The resulting mess is what leads to actual hatred of Islam and the occasional call for Islamocide.

I would probably think the same thing, if I hadn't read so many stories of Muslims who are not diabolical killers. Mr. Totten certainly played a role in this, along with others.

Posted by: OmegaPaladin at March 22, 2008 7:01 AM

I have some problems with some elements in the article.

Montenegro's independance was different. It had a domestic legal framework to gain independance in an internationally legally recognized way. If I'm not mistaken the same goes for Slovenia, Croatie and Macedonia who were federal 'state' entities (with republican titles)and not provinces.

Kosovo took its independance, regardless of its public opinion and regardless of the public opinion of its minorities. Including the Serb minority.

What I notice is that you seem to have missed something important. Kovoso has its proper flag but so far only one I've seen is the Albanian flag being waved. What selfrespecting nation or 'independent' population would be waving someone else's flag as their own - en masse ? Kosovar is not merely secession it is deemed to be irrendentism cloaked by a blunt secession.

That is the difference between Israël and Palestine. You have two nations locked in a bloody messy conflict, one is a state the other still isn't. Israëli's wave their flag, Palestinians wave their proper flag - not the Egyptian or Syrian or Jordanian. It is a sign of the 'identity concept' these populations have taken.

The starting quotes. They're a tad of a problem. If the UN's definitians and rules are so important then: UN members violated the UN Charter by recoginizing Kosovo's independance as its independence is a clear violation of the territorial integrity of Serbia.

The Hague Tribunal itself had difficulties to substantiate 'genocide' in Kosovo. What you had was ethnic cleansing by both main groups: Serbs and Kosovar Albanians. Ethnic cleansing, that is the proper term not genocide.

As to comparing Kosovo and Israël. That's something that wouldn't come into mind.

Israeli's were entangled in a civil war and were able to establish their independance and full control through a military victory and has kept the 'enemy' at bay since then. Kosovar Albanians conned NATO into bombing Serbia in the wake of the Yugoslav wars. As far as I recall it were the Albanians who started the guerilla campaign against Serbians, which led to an OSCE ceasefire that backfired. Without UN or EU help Kosovo would form a prime example of a failed state.

Posted by: Briggs at March 22, 2008 9:05 AM

Right, my apology for all of the spelling mistakes in the previous comment. Rushed it.

Before anyone pops in invoking the UN Right of Self-Determination of People. That right is not universal but can only be applied to the specific context of decolonization. Only colonial territories can use it to gain independence. That is the only international way to legally obtain indepedence without a local legal framework. If you're part of a current State and the constitution allows you to seceede then it can be internationally recognized if proper constitutional procedure was followed.

Israel emanates out of the Palestinian Mandate. The current Palestinian Authority was divided between current Egypt and Jordan. Kosovo was a Serbian province, not a colony. Which forms another discrepency between Kosovo and Israel.

Posted by: Briggs at March 22, 2008 10:02 AM

Briggs,

Kosovo was Serbian only because Milosevic revoked its autonomy. All of Yugoslavia came apart, and Serbia violently resisted it almost everywhere. I see no good reason for everyone in Yugoslavia to get their own state except the Kosovars.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 22, 2008 10:10 AM

I'm not being tribal about it. If Serbs in northern Kosovo want to detatch and join Serbia, I won't object. They should be allowed to go for the same reason the Kosovars left, even if Mitrovica is technically part of Kosovo. Improper borders lead to terrible wars in that part of the world, and fixing the borders ends wars.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 22, 2008 10:14 AM

"Montenegro's independance was different. It had a domestic legal framework to gain independence in an internationally legally recognized way. If I'm not mistaken the same goes for Slovenia, Croatie and Macedonia who were federal 'state' entities (with republican titles)and not provinces."

The Serb republic within Bosnia did not have a title or anything. It became one sub-republic of Bosnia simply by Serbian force.

And I don't think International Law comes into it unless we want to judge the legality of history.

I agree that Kosovo's independence is illegal under International Law. But I disagree that we should care. International Law is so far removed from morality and justice that applying it to anything will give extremely skewed results.

"What I notice is that you seem to have missed something important. Kovoso has its proper flag but so far only one I've seen is the Albanian flag being waved. What selfrespecting nation or 'independent' population would be waving someone else's flag as their own - en masse?"

You might not be aware of this, but the "Palestinian" flag is the flag of the Arab National Movement.

It was designed by the British to give Arabs a symbol for the revolt against the Ottomans and has since been used by Palestinians on both sides of the Jordan river and by Syria. Egypt, Syria, and Iraq also use a modified version of the same flag.

The Palestinians Arabs are waving someone else's flag; that is, they are waving the flag that represents all Arabs and today stands for Arab nationalism as well as the Hashemite monarchy (which are NOT the same thing).

Perhaps all 8 million Albanians are one people. But that wouldn't change the fact that those living in Kosovo did not want to live under Serbian rule, do want to be allies of the west, and were, like most other peoples in Yugoslavia, targets of Serbian nationalism.

Posted by: Leauki at March 22, 2008 10:14 AM

"If Serbs in northern Kosovo want to detatch and join Serbia, I won't object."

Same here.

I think this will probably happen anyway.

And we'll see whether the Serbs in Kosovo really fear the Albananians (and will use the opportunity to become part of Serbia) or whether they want to remain in Kosovo so that Serbia can retain some sort of claim.

It reminds me of Israeli Arabs, many of whom despise living under "Jewish rule" but would not want to become a part of an Arab state instead.

Posted by: Leauki at March 22, 2008 10:17 AM

OmegaPaladin,

I could care less whether you trust me or not.

With the exception of the story of the refugee family we hosted and what I learned from them regarding ancient Orthodox churches in Kosovo, I have not presented any anecdotal information to be taken my word for. My claims about Raska and the battle of 1338 are easily verifiable by anyone who cares to do just a bit of research and fact-checking.

So what part don’t you believe? And don’t you understand that between the “he said” and “she said” there is an objective reality, a state of affairs you must do your best to grasp before you are legitimately entitled to an informed opinion?

Oh and, if you needed many “stories” by Mr.Totten or others, to convince you that Muslims do not deserve to be demonized as a group because they are not this amorphous “other” incapable of individual choices or actions, well, I pity your understanding of people and reality.

“It's a hornet's nest of too many ethnic groups in too small a space. I really don't care about Kosovo enough to go to war with Russia.”

Do you care enough for Israel to go to war with Iran? That’s not even the point. You are not claiming to have done your homework and come to the conclusion that Serbia is the side worth siding with. I could understand such a position, however I strongly I may disagree with it. You rather are basically saying that the people involved are not worth caring for one way or another, and opportunism should guide US policy instead. You are speaking like a political sociopath.

Perhaps ignorance and callousness feed off of each-other: if you had cared to explore the purpose and means of pan-slavic-brotherhood propaganda you would know that there’s no chance Russia will want to go to war over Kosovo. The Kremlin is calculative and rational even in its displays of international thuggery, unlike the Jihadists.

Here is another “she said” piece of my mind on Russia’s prospects:
http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/index.php/punditry/comments/russias_military_options_in_kosovo/

Mr.Totten,

Objectivity and neutrality are of course far from synonyms. Facts by themselves are only useful in so far as they allow us to legitimately reach opinions/conclusions grounded in reality. Honesty and humility in the face of facts is not the same and should not be the same as refraining from forming any opinions at all. Perhaps none of us can completely avoid bias, but as long as bias is not deliberate or motivated by an agenda, it can be corrected by reality checks.

Posted by: medaura at March 22, 2008 10:34 AM

Anyway, genocide and/or ethnic cleansing void a government's right to rule over the victims. Even the nebulous and unenforceable "international law" recognizes this at times. Saddam Hussein had his sovereignty over Iraq abrogated by the UN, and no-fly zones were imposed to protect Shias and Kurds.

I don't really care if all this is "illegal." There is no world government or world police last time I checked. I'm a little bit tired of hearing that the United States and its allies are in violation of "international law." Without fail, some dictatorship or terrorist regime is "in compliance" with said "international law" when we "violate" it. Serbia isn't a dictatorship today, but it was when Kosovo's autonomy was revoked.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 22, 2008 10:34 AM

If we didn't go to war with Russia over Vietnam and Korea, we certainly won't over Kosovo. Nor will Russia want to go to war with us over Kosovo.

Russia doesn't really care about Kosovo anyway. Serbia cares about Kosovo, and we've already gone to war with Serbia over Kosovo. It won't happen again now that Slobo is out.

The NATO war with Serbia over Kosovo wasn't even about Kosovo per se. It was much more about Serbia's repeated acts of aggression in the area, and keeping the violence from spilling beyond the boundaries of the former Yugoslavia.

It may also have been about NATO claiming Eastern Europe as its new "back yard" and preventing Russia from being the local power broker instead. That is not, however, the same as "going to war with Russia."

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 22, 2008 11:31 AM

The whole hypothesis of a Russian military response is basically a very silly scenario: the Russians and Serbs really knew back in 1999 that they had lost Kosovo but it’s not in their style to go down without a self-aggrandizing tantrum.

Russia will refrain itself to only stirring incendiary shit in the Middle East, because the controlled volatility they calculatingly infuse in the region serves to artificially boost the price of nationalized energy they export, so it contributes to Putin’s personal wealth (ranging in the 40s of billions of dollars, last time I checked). Those are Russia’s real pragmatic interests: Kosovo is just show biz.

Putin is comfortable with what he is doing and he won’t compromise his position over tales of Slavic Brotherhood: he doesn’t care about that; it’s just a bone to throw to the little people in Russia who continue to trade food and freedom for second-hand Pan-Slavic collectivist glory. He will find something else to keep the masses distracted from this symbolic loss.

As far as "International Law" goes, one of the things I am grateful to George W. Bush for, is that he has treated the UN as the increasingly unfunny joke it is.

Where does "International Law" derive its legitimacy? Israel for one would be toast by now if the UN had had its way.

And what does Albania's/Kosovo's flag have to do with anything?

Posted by: medaura at March 22, 2008 11:51 AM

"And what does Albania's/Kosovo's flag have to do with anything?"

I thought it was an interesting point.

It's irrelevant for the Kosovo issue, since the question of whether Kosovars are a nation in their own right or Albanians has nothing to do with whether Serbia is allowed to rule them.

But when it comes to Israel, the "Palestinian" (aka Arab nationalist) flag could be relevant.

If "Palestine" is a country, why don't they have a flag? Why do they use the pan-Arab flag?

Posted by: Leauki at March 22, 2008 5:58 PM

If the Pals had an appropriate flag, it would be Israel's overlaid with a big black 'X'.

Tell me, do Sufis believe in an inevitable Global Ummah?

Posted by: Brian H at March 23, 2008 11:50 PM

medaura;
Edit: "I couldn't care less ...".

Comment: Indeed, Russia will go to war only for its own survival or if there are easy imperial pickings to be had.
But I worry about its efforts to survive the ongoing demographic implosion. With a Slav life expectancy of 55 yrs. or so, and minuscule birth rate, it is in a losing race against time before it is de facto a Muslim country. I cannot envisage any plausible good outcomes for that country. And desperate people do desperate things.

Posted by: Brian H at March 23, 2008 11:57 PM

Brian H: do Sufis believe in an inevitable Global Ummah?

No. Think of Sufis as the Quakers of Islam. They aren't pacifists. They'll fight to defend themselves. But they're peaceful and tolerant. There are no Sufi terrorist groups.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 24, 2008 12:14 AM

@Michael J Totten:

See that's one of my biggest issues with the Kosovar independence. They secceeded the whole territory of Kosovo. They're the ones who're provoking and basically seeking a kick in the butt by not having let the Serbs go their own way.

The last Ethnic map I've seen of Kosovo shows a majority of Serbs around the Ibar river (with mitrovica forming the spearhead), a group of Serbs between (Bosnian) Pizren and Urosevac bordering Macedonia and a mixed Serb-Albanian population from underneath Urosevac (also an area situated towards the Macedonian border) past Gnjilane.
If you're going to let the Mitrovica Serbs go, then you're going to have the others go as well.

The question then pops in: Historically whose territory is it? What is the importance of that historical background?

Serbia is a democratic state no longer the Milosevic state. So, if one is going to play the "Genocide and/or ethnic cleansing void a government's right to rule over the victims" then it should have been done back in 1999 and not in 2008. And both parties, as far as I recall, are guilty of ethnic cleansing.

I'm not that sure about Russia. If Kosovo becomes the standard then its proper sovereignty is threatened. I doubt there is sufficient European support for another Battle of Kosovo and I have my reservations about another American-led intervention. If the Russians want to play it smart they'd move in to defend Serbia and re-arm the Serbs and let the Serbs move into Kosovo. Europe is not going to seek or dare to go into conflict with Russia (not only because it is quite dependent on its energy resources).

There was an alternative possibility: Serbia into the European Union, would have had to respect the Kosovar Albanian minority. Could have given them a prospect of regained level of autonomy.

Leauki: The Republic Srpska is a different story, IIRC Dayton agreements & conflict forged it. And the Palestinian flag was the Arab Revolt Flag recognized as the official Palestinian flag as such in 1948 by the Arab League (endorsed by the PLO in the 1960s, IIRC). Still difference between waving the Albanian flag instead of the official Kosova flag. See either we blow up the international system and basically everybody can declare its independence and should get it or we have to follow a set of rules, which only indicates that the current set is prehistoric and needs a change. Heck, why would I adhere to the Non Proliferation Treaty if Intl Law is meaningless?

The flag issue is relevant for Kosovo, its a symbol of what identity they adhere too. Its not Kosovo but Albania. Palestinians, like a whole bunch of Mashriq republics, have a common history and background in guise of the Nationalist movement identity being tackled by the religious identity.

Posted by: Briggs at March 24, 2008 2:55 AM

"Kosovo was Serbian only because Milosevic revoked its autonomy. All of Yugoslavia came apart, and Serbia violently resisted it almost everywhere. I see no good reason for everyone in Yugoslavia to get their own state except the Kosovars."

The difference is that Kosovo was an autonomous province of Serbia and not a republic inside the SFRY. Unlike Bosnia & Herzegovina,Croatia,Macedonia and Montenegro and Slovenia that were all Republics part of SFRY. The independance of the above fomer republics is a different case than Kosovo because their starting point is different. Currently Bosnia Herzegovina consists of the Federation of Bosia & Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska under the Daytona Agreements.

So, if the Kosovars are allowed to just walk away without second thoughts then the Republika Srpka as well. The Hungarians in the Vojdvodina as well.
So tomorrow US counties with a majority of Mexicans can just break away and rejoin Mexico if they want too, or not? The Eskimo's up in Canada can break away and create their own proper internationally recognized State? Heck, I could claim my own proper individual independence then?

Indepedence should be possible, outside the current UN scope of colonies, but there should be some rules otherwise it can lead to chaos.

Posted by: Briggs at March 24, 2008 4:46 AM

Wow, some great stuff here. I have been in the area a couple of times in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but never Kosovo itself.

I have to say I learned a fair amount from the discussion here. Thanks people.

BTW, what does "belief in the global Ummah" mean? All Muslims believe and wish for a united Muslim community, and at it's most base term, that was the Ummah is, the world Muslim community.

I would think Sufis, like most other religious people, have a belief that their ideas are eventually going to come out on top. I guess the question is just how do they think is the best way to make this happen.

It is an essential part of Christian thought that one day the entire world will become Christian, Muslims have the same sort of idea. Again, the question being how does the world come to your point of view? Through violence or peaceful methods?

What happens to those who do not come to whatever particular faith? Are they beheaded? Are they converted or sent to hell?

As to Sufis, some of them are regularly attacked by Islamic extremists and some of their practices are banned in places like Saudi Arabia.

It is interesting to note that Sufis, historically, played the largest role in the expansion of Islam. Much more so the spreading it by the sword, a fact that Islamic extremists tend to ignore.

For myself I think the very idea that one side will come out "on top" tends to breed extremism and hatred, but that is only my opinion.

Posted by: Marc at March 24, 2008 12:03 PM

Briggs,

I have no objection to letting the Serbs of Kosovo attach to Serbia, and letting Republica Srpska do whatever it wants with itself. That's how it should be. I'm no advocating special rights for Kosovars over Serbs.

it should have been done back in 1999 and not in 2008

It was done in 1999 in all but name.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at March 24, 2008 5:33 PM