Sun Blogs: Bird's Eye View
The Question of Kosovo
Email: 
Share: 
A lot happened in Versailles in 1919. Germany was crippled economically and began down the path towards the rise of the Nazi Party, the state of Iraq was born out of three dissimilar Ottoman provinces and Yugoslavia was created as the state for the South Slavs of the Balkans. The errors of Versailles have haunted us for a century, and with the independence of Kosovo, one of those mistakes has been settled. Independence in Kosovo has been conceived as the first of a series of dangerous “dominos” of unilateral declarations of independence by separatists across the world, from Quebec to Georgia. To me, however, Kosovo’s independence is the not the beginning of a wave, but instead one of the closing lines in the bloody and tragic dissolution of Yugoslavia.
The original Yugoslavia was conceived as a monarchy under the Serbian royal family. The new state was politically unstable and during World War II conflicts arose between Serb and Croat fascists and the partisans under Tito. In the post-war era, Yugoslavia was a federation of the republics of Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, Macedonia, Montenegro and the autonomous provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina. Within this federal structure, each ethnic group should have had a home and some control over its destiny. But under Tito, the strong-arm of the state that kept ethnic tension in check also stifled the growth of any unity across ethnic groups, besides the cult of personality around Tito.
Yugoslavia, too, has often been used as a vehicle for Serb nationalism, rather than as a genuine attempt at a union of all the South Slavs. Christopher Hitchens discusses the self-defeating nature of Serb nationalism in one of his articles. As to the argument of historical continuity that opponents of Kosovo’s independence like to reference, Hitchens reminds us that from the 1300’s until 1912, Kosovo was held as part of the Ottoman Empire. At the time that Serbia first lost Kosovo, the King of England was still claiming large parts of France as his domain. But alarmists continue to say that Kosovo is the first domino in a series of nascent states, as separatist groups around the world will be encouraged to intensify conflict.
Why do so many people consider Kosovo to be the first domino? It is not the first part of post-Balkan war Serbia to declare independence. After all, just last year Montenegro voted in a referendum to strike its own path and commentators had nothing controversial to say. Before Montenegro, the rest of the Yugoslavia’s republics also broke away. The unique history of Yugoslavia makes it unlikely that the Kosovo situation is one that will be repeated elsewhere. In fact, it is the last domino, not the first. The first domino fell when Slovenia voted for independence over seventeen years ago. Slovenia, which is now a member of NATO and the EU, is a model for the Balkans that both the Serbs and Kosovars should consider when contemplating their moves in the current dispute over independence. When considering the Balkans, it is important to remember that Yugoslavia is not Canada and Kosovo is not Quebec.
Kosovo
There is a consistent anti Serb policy promoted by US in the balkans for some geopolitical non transparent reasons. This has to be evident even to people who are not intimately familiar with balkan recent history. Promoting Kosovo independence is a colosal mistake of US foreign policy that will further erode credibility of US. When Yugoslavia was breaking apart former republics were considered as soverign countries. This argument was used against Serbs living in Croatia and Bosnia. Kosovo and Vojvoidina being autonomous provinces does not fit the definition that that was established as an argument for recognition of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Macedonia and Montenegro. Is Vojvidina the next chapter in carving out the flesh and soul out of Serbia?
Arguments parroted by US diplomats for Kosovo independence are easily refutable, with main argument being that because of Milosevic's repression of Albanians during 1990's Serbia lost moral right to govern Kosovo. First, Milosevic was overthrown by democratic pro western forces in year 2000 and transfered by pro western democrats to Hague tribunal in 2001 to stand the trial for crimes against humanity where the guilt was supposed to be individualized instead of pegged to entire nation. Second, why does US not apply this argument of "morality to govern" to Iraq where Sadam Husein has represssed Kurds in much worse way than Milosevic ever repressed Albanians. Why not support independent Kurdistan? Or support Catalans and Basques since these people have terribly suffered under Spain's Franco regime? Or Chechens to break away from Russia?
I would like to hear from the US State department real reasons behind the war against Serbia and now recognition of independence of Kosovo. The reasons put forward are an insult to intelligence and this lack of transparency leads to perception of sinister conspiracy theory for US global domianeering. Why is there an anti Serb policy persisting, even after 8 years of pro western democratic ruke in Serbia. Why are Serbs who do not want to relinquish right to call Kosovo Serbian labeled as nationalists?
The domino analogy is pretty
The domino analogy is pretty ironic...
Yugoslavias breakup actually began in kosovo.
Yugoslavias republics and 2 autonomous provinces had de facto powers of full-fledged republics, they all had a vote in the Federal Presidency (8 member council made up of reps from the six republics and kosova and Vojvodina), this set up insured that no one group power over anyone else. But the 2 provinces.. although they had federal autonomy...also had local govt. within the republic of serbia.
Slobodan Milosovic and Serbia wiped out the provinces local autonomy, and since a single republic had no authority to take Federal Powers from these provinces, Milosovic sent the elected representatives home and hand picked his own "for them"
This was the tipping point, Serbia had its powers, and it could count on its ally montenegro...and now it had control over the 2 provinces powers in the Yugoslav govt.
Prior to this, kosova had been looking for full republic status...the other republics looked for a looser federation. Despite the blame game that goes around regarding nationalist movements everywhere in yugoslavia at the time...Serbia did indeed make the first grab for control and it used kosova to do it.
Kosova is more like the first Domino...that finally fell.
Kosovo...
"After all, just last year Montenegro voted in a referendum to strike its own path and commentators had nothing controversial to say. Before Montenegro, the rest of the Yugoslavia’s republics also broke away."
And just WHY do you think that is?
Because those countries had claim to their land, before Yugoslavia was formed.
And now WHY do you think Serbia has a problem with part of their nation breaking away?
Because Serbia has claim to their own land. They even had claim WHEN the Turks controlled it.
See what I'm getting at?
IN 2007 Albanians out numbered Serbs 9:1 in Kosovo.
In 1912 it was 2:1.
In 1876 it was 1:1.
No one talks about the ethnic cleansing that the Muslim Albanians practiced.
No one talks about the (close to) 120 Serb Orthodox churches that were burned in that last 7 years.
No one talks about the 400,000 Serbs who've fled since the 1950's.
This is a little more complicated than righting a wrong that happened at Versailles in 1919.
This is a long standing feud that will not end here.
So remember Serbia is NOT Yugoslavia, but Kosovo IS Serbia.
What a collection of misinformation
The history of Kosovo did not begin in 1919! It began long before, many centuries ago. This is the place where Serbia was initially formed, and where predominantly orthodox Serbs lived until occupied by the muslims' Ottoman Empire. After centuries of occupation, Serbs finally liberated, but unfortunately killings, abuse and exodus continued, which resulted in the fact that there are less than 10% of Serbs living in Kosovo today.
The unilateral independence by Kosovo Albanians means absolutely nothing. In the eyes of law it is completely void. It was not recognized by Serbia and the UN security council, and Kosovo has no chances of ever joining the world of sovereign nations. Thus, in the eyes of law it is a part of Serbia (no matter how much the author of this article would like to be otherwise). So, contrary to the main point of this article, the unilateral declaration of independence is not the closing line of anything.
There are many similar situations in the world where people would like to separate piece of a country and proclaim independence, against the law. The argument that this is just somehow the part of the breakup of former Yugaslavia is just plain wrong. Kosovo has never been a state in the former Yugoslavia but a region in Serbia, and Serbia is now a recognized sovereign Country. So, the question is whether separatist movements have the right to separate from a sovereign Country (which is now against the law) or not. Of course everyone is independent and has the right to decide where he wants to live. The question is whether one has the right to take a piece of somebody else's property. Before you answer these questions, ask yourself what would the World look like if we wouldn't follow the law. What would you say if your friends decided to take one of the rooms in your house and proclaim (unilaterally) independence from you?
Kosovo the first domino
Why is Kosovo the first domino, Ron? Surely it's obvious. So far there has been general agreement among the powers to allow only repubics to secede from the federal states of the transition countries (the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslavakia). Slovenia, Montenegro and so on were all republics. Kosovo is a province of Serbia, which was a Yugoslav Republic. (That's part of the reason why the countries of the world ignored a previous unilateral declaration of independence from Kosovo by the way.) If one allows a province to secede from a republic then we have a whole new ball game.
Not to say that there isn't merit in the idea of letting people redefine their borders by popular vote, to much finer levels of geographic detail. You could even let people decide poll by poll what country they want to belong to as Scott Reid suggested in Canada Remapped. But this also gives some people an interest in trying to murder or drive away the potential opposition in advance of such a vote, which is why seemingly the most democratic solution is not necessarily the best, and certainly not the least bloody. Anyway whoever thought that it would be the US that would open this particular can of worms when Russia was content to leave it unopened?