The "Hail Mary" pass

Ah, ex-Ambassador Montgomery. Once again you hit upon an excellent analogy to discuss the woes of the region. And once again you singularly fail to apply it appropriately. Shame.

The DS, not truly understanding the last minute/desperation nature of the 'hail mary' pass, chose to launch their bomb a few weeks back. It was when Sutanovac decided that discrediting Kostunica was the way to remove the DSS from the electoral scene - and hope to mop up more of the voters falling out than the SRS could. It failed. They chose to sow the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.

Your analogy would have been better portrayed by suggesting that the EU quarterback has just launched his bomb in the vain hope that it will give the edge to the DS. As you rightly point out, it looks to be failing and is also likely to be counter-productive.

Serbia's choice isn't Europe or isolation, it's East or West.

The West made choices on March 24th and February 17th, and Serbia will have to make its choice on May 11th.

Does Serbia want to pursue friendship with the nations who attacked it 1999 and supported the theft of its territory in 2008? Or does Serbia have a brighter future if it adopts an Eastern orientation and ties its future to the growing economic and military strength of friendly Eastern nations like Russia, India, and China.

Serbia has friends, they just aren't in the West. The EU and the Americans can go to Hell. Serbia should only pursue friendship with nations who are friendly towards it. Nations who attacked Serbia and support the theft of Kosovo deserve nothing but Serbia's contempt -- isolation from those nations would be a great blessing.

Nik,

Serbs absolutely would want to "play the game", but first, let's define what a game is:-

"a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules"

Key point - a game must have rules, and this is our problem, the rules are different for us.

"Europe's" rules:-

Ethnic seperatism is strictly not allowed (except when it works against Serbia).

Borders cannot change without mutual consent (except when it works against Serbia).

etc, etc...

For your soccer analogy, we are being "invited" to play in the EU league but are only allowed 5 people on the field and can't have a goalkeeper.... of course we don't want to play!

The danger for Europe is that there are other sports and leagues that are showing an interest in inviting Serbia in - and they do have consistent rules - so we are thinking about it. Why not? We have every right to. Soccer is not the only game on the planet.

Time for all the hypocrites and Serbophobes to get off their high horses and offer us the same respect as all other "European" countries get.

We'll gladly play in the European league then.

nik,

You claim "So keeping in mind that Kosovo was a subject of the defunct Yugoslav federation, which is to say a de facto Republic"

Propaganda lies with you. First of all,Under 1974 Yugoslavia Constitution Kosovo enjoyed the status of an autonomous province of Yugoslavia, while being a constituent part of the Republic of Serbia.Which part of part of SERBIA you have hard time comprehending?

Key facts about Kosovo's Islamic Albanian minority of Serbia and the century long drive by Islamic extremists to exterminate Kosovo Serbs from that region:

1389---Muslims defeat Christian Serb defenders in Kosovo, depopulate the area and invite mountain tribe of Albanians, in exchange for converting to Islam, to take over pillaged land from Serbs.

1594---Sinan Pasha, an ethnic Albanian, who was a commander in the Ottoman Turkish Empire, burned the relics of St. Sava at Vracar, Belgrade. St. Sava is the Saint that brought Serbs into Christianity.

1878---Albanian nationalist leaders meet in Prizren, known as the First League of Prizren, to announce the creation of a Greater Albania, which will include all areas settled by Albanians, including Kosovo-Metohija, western Macedonia, known as Illirida, southern Montenegro, and northern Greece, Chameria. This is when the Kosovo or “Kosova” separatist agenda starts.

1878---Ottoman Turkish forces put down Albanian insurgency to create a Greater Albania. This was the first attempt to create an Albanian “Kosova” by an insurgency or by military force. A century later, another Greater Albania insurgency would have NATO and US backing.

1900-1918---Austria-Hungary and Italy are sponsors of a Greater Albania and support Albanian expansion in the Balkans, at the expense of Serbia.

1912---Albanian ultranationalists seize Skopje in Macedonia as part of a Greater Albania.

1920---After borders of “Jugoslavia” are legally settled under international law and recognized by the League of Nations, Albanian separatists launch a terrorist insurgency in “Kosova”, murdering Serbian civilians and police. This is known as the “kachak movement” and is the start of Albanian attempts to take over “Kosova” by military or armed force.

1941---Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini invade, occupy, and dismember Yugoslavia. They make “Kosova” a part of a Greater Albania under Mustafa Kruja. Western Macedonia is also made a part of Greater Albania by Hitler and Mussolini
1943---The Second League of Prizren, sponsored and established by Nazi Germany, reaffirms the commitment to create and maintain an independent “Kosova” and a Greater Albania under Nazi sponsorship. Later, the US and EU would replace Nazi Germany as the sponsor of Greater Albania.

1944---Albanians create a Nazi Waffen SS Division, Skanderbeg, made up mostly of Kosovo Albanian Muslims, “Kosovars”. These Albanian Muslim Nazi SS troops murder thousands of Kosovo Serbian Christians and drive thousands of other Kosovo Serbs out of Kosovo.
1944---Kosovo Albanian Muslims play a role in the Holocaust, the murder of European Jews. The Albanian “Kosovar” Skanderbeg Nazi SS Division rounds up Kosovo Jews who are sent to the Nazi concentration camp at Bergen Belsen where they are killed.

1948---The U.S. brings Midhat Frasheri, the leader of the Nazi/fascist Balli Kombetar, National Front, whose goal is a Greater Albania that includes Kosovo, and other wanted Albanian “Kosovar” war criminals, such as Xhafer Deva and Hassan Dosti, to the U.S. to form anti-Communist forces for the takeover of Albania. The U.S. put the Communist regime in power in Albania then sought to overthrow it by means of “regime change”.

1951---The U.S. organizes and launches Operation Fiend, one of the first experiments in “regime change” in Albania. Frank Wisner is one of the leaders of the project. His son would lead the efforts in 2006 to create a Greater Albania, an independent “Kosova”, which his father failed to achieve.

1968---Albanian separatism in Kosovo emerges. Closer tries with Albania are established.

1969---Kosovo Albanians begin closer ties with Tirana and begin importing textbooks and teachers from Albania and create their own Albanian school system and university. The “Albanianization” of Kosovo begins.
1974---The Communist dictator Josip Broz Tito changes the Yugoslav constitution giving Kosovo Albanians control of Kosovo. Albanians control every area of Kosovo from the police to teachers to judges.

1981---Albanians in Kosovo demand independence or secession from Yugoslavia. They demand to be a Republic which is code for independent or a part of Albania. They demand: “We Want a Unified Albania!” Dozens are killed in separatist riots. Serbian Patriarchate in Pec is burned down but no one knows how or why.

1982---British historian Nora Beloff notes that “ethnic cleansing” originated in Kosovo when Albanian Muslims killed or drove off Serbs. Albanians begin terror campaign of ethnic cleansing against Kosovo Serbs. From 1981-1989, an estimated 20,000 Kosovo Serbs are driven out of Kosovo by Albanian ultranationalists.

1982---Ethnically motivated murders of Kosovo Serbs begin with the murders of Kosovo Serbs Danilo Milincic and Miodrag Saric.

1985---Kosovo Serb Djorje Martinovic is “found with a broken bottle up his anus.” Albanian attackers sodomized him to force him out of the province to create an ethnically pure Kosova. US media claims that Martinovic was a closet homosexual who injured himself. The brutal sodomy of Martinovic inflames passions in the rest of Serbia.

1987---Fadil Hoxha, leader of Kosovo Albanians, advocates that Albanian Muslims rape Kosovo Serb women.
1989---Murders, rapes, desecration of Kosovo Serbian property, churches, and cemeteries forces Serbian government to rescind “autonomy” that Communist dictatorship created.

1991---Albanian separatists respond by proclaiming Kosovo a republic, which is tantamount to independence, which is recognized only by neighboring Albania. Albanian separatists gain sponsorship of a Greater Albania by contributing money to Thomas Lantos, Robert Dole, and Joe Biden. The U.S. becomes the sponsor of Greater Albania.

1996---A violent and armed terrorist and separatist group emerges, the KLA/UCK, whose goal is to create a Greater Albania, an independent “Kosova”. KLA begins killing Kosovo Serb civilians and police. Dozens of Yugoslav policemen, Serbs and Albanians, are brutally murdered by the KLA.

April, 1998---95 percent of the Yugoslav population rejected international mediation on Kosovo in a referendum. The so-called Balkan Contact Group imposed new international sanctions against Yugoslavia even though the decision was by a majority of the Yugoslav population, that is, was democratically determined.

uly-August, 1998---The KLA separatists takes over 40 percent of Kosovo by force, by killing Yugoslav police and driving Kosovo Serbs out. The KLA terrorist groups are well-armed and supplied. The U.S. is one of the backers of the KLA separatists or terrorists.

1998---US State Department declares the KLA separatists are “terrorists”. US media dismisses the pronouncement.

1998---US media dismiss the fact that the Kosovo conflict is an illegal land grab, a separatist, ethnic war to create a Greater Albania. Instead, the US media concoct a deception that the conflict is about “greater rights” and “genocide”, when it is about Greater Albania, an independent, ethnically pure “Kosova”.

October, 1998---NATO plans airstrikes against Yugoslav targets, which would later include hospitals, nursing homes, passenger trains, TV stations, power grids, factories, and busses. Many of these attacks are war crimes under international law.

January 15, 1999---A “massacre” is manufactured in Racak by the US media and government. In fact, those killed were KLA separatists who had murdered Serbian policemen and had been killed in combat against Yugoslav police.

February, 1999---At a staged peace conference at Rambouillet, the US demands that Serbia allow Kosovo to become an independent nation after three years and that US and NATO troops be allowed to occupy Serbia. The US diktat was meant to force a war which the U.S. had long been planning. Rambouillet was a transparent sham.

March, 1999---Yugoslavia’s democratically elected leaders reject the US peace deal as tantamount to dismemberment and military occupation, unacceptable to a sovereign state.

March 24, 1999---NATO launched air strikes against Yugoslavia for 78 days, killing thousands of Serbian civilians. The KLA and U.S. advisers create a fake humanitarian catastrophe by telling and even forcing Kosovo Albanians to flee into Albania and Macedonia Yugoslav forces are falsely blamed for driving out Albanians. The U.S. scores a huge propaganda success with images of refugees.

June 10, 1999---NATO forces Slobodan Milosevic to withdraw Yugoslav forces from Kosovo and to allow NATO to occupy it. NATO occupies Kosovo.

June 12, 1999---After 50,000 NATO peacekeepers begin deployment in Kosovo, over 200,000 Kosovo Serbs, Roma, Gorani, and Jews are forced out of Kosovo by Albanians. Thousands of Kosovo Serbs are murdered by Albanians as NATO takes control of the province. Over 150 Serbian Orthodox Churches would be destroyed by Albanian Muslims protected by NATO troops.

March, 2004---March Pogroms: Albanians attack the last remaining Kosovo Serbs to drive them out of the province to create an ethnically pure Shqip Kosova.

October, 2006---Serbia held a referendum and approved a new constitution which declared that Kosovo was an integral part of Serbia. This decision had the support of the majority of the population of Serbia, that is, was democratically determined

January 21, 2007---Serbia held parliamentary elections where the Radical Party won the most votes, although not enough votes to form a new government.

April, 2007---Russia rejected the Marti Ahtisaari proposal in the U.N. Security Council because it violated Serbian sovereignty by supporting Albanian separatism.

June, 2007---U.S. President George W. Bush claimed that Kosovo had to be independent "sooner rather than later." This is an issue for the UN to be decided under international law, however, not a decision for the President of the U.S.

August, 2007---Envoys from the U.S., EU and Russia began 120 days of further negotiations between Albanian separatists and the Serbian government in order to reach an agreement. No agreement was forthcoming because the only “agreement” the U.S. was pushing was an independent “Kosova”. There was nothing to negotiate about. The negotiations were a sham and a hoax.

December, 2007---Albanian separatist efforts fail at the U.N. The U.S. and Albanian goal is then to unilaterally declare independence outside of international law and the UN Charter, which is illegal and violates the sovereignty of Serbia and denies the will of the majority of Serbs. The majority of the Serbian population rejects the secession of Kosovo by Albanian separatists. This decision is reached by means of the democratic process.

February, 2008---Having failed to achieve their separatist agenda through international law and in the U.N., the U.S. switched gears and told the Albanian separatists to unilaterally declare an independent “Kosova”. This is an illegal act which violates all international norms and conventions and laws. The U.S. reliance is on military force only. The illegal measure is justified by force only.



And in words of Hannah Arendt "Only the mob and the elite can be attracted by the momentum of totalitarianism itself. The masses have to be won by propaganda." Well consider yourself debunked.

Sreten you are too patient with this ( Nik.He is arguing about right of Kosovo to be independent from Serbia , but fails to see Kosovo's sovereignty is a fiction: real power lies with EU officials backed by Western firepower.

The European Union plans to send some 2,000 officials to Kosovo to take over from the United Nations, which has governed the province since 1999. It wants to appoint an International Civilian Representative who – according to the plan drawn up last year by Martti Ahtisaari, the UN envoy – will be the "final authority" in Kosovo with the power to "correct or annul decisions by the Kosovo public authorities". Kosovo would have had more real independence under the terms Belgrade offered it than it will now.

Those who support the sort of "polyvalent sovereignty" and "postnational statehood" that we already have in the EU welcome such arrangements as a respite from the harsh decisionism of post-Westphalian statehood. But such fictions are in fact always underpinned by the timeless realities of brute power. There are 16,000 Nato troops in Kosovo and they have no intention of coming home: indeed, they are even now being reinforced with 1,000 extra troops from Britain. They, not the Kosovo army, are responsible for the province's internal and external security.

Kosovo is also home to the vast US military base Camp Bondsteel, near Urosevac – a mini-Guantánamo that is only one in an archipelago of new US bases in eastern Europe, the Balkans and central Asia. This is why the Serbian prime minister, Vojislav Kostunica, speaking on Sunday, specifically attacked Washington for the Kosovo proclamation, saying that it showed that the US was "ready to unscrupulously and violently jeopardise international order for the sake of its own military interests".

In order to symbolise its status as the newest Euro-Atlantic colony, Kosovo has chosen a flag modelled on that of Bosnia-Herzegovina – the same EU gold, the same arrangement of stars on a blue background. For Bosnia, too, is governed by a foreign high representative, who has the power to sack elected politicians and annul laws, all in the name of preparing the country for EU integration.

As in Bosnia, billions have been poured into Kosovo to pay for the international administration but not to improve the lives of ordinary people. Kosovo is a sump of poverty and corruption, both of which have exploded since 1999, and its inhabitants have eked out their lives for nine years now in a mafia state where there are no jobs and not even a proper electricity supply: every few hours there are power cuts, and the streets of Kosovo's towns explode in a whirring din as every shop and home switches on its generator.

This tragic situation is made possible only because there is a fatal disconnect in all interventionism between power and responsibility. The international community has micro-managed every aspect of the break-up of Yugoslavia since the EU brokered the Brioni agreement within days of the war in Slovenia in July 1991. Yet it has always blamed the locals for the results. Today, the new official government of Kosovo will be controlled by its international patrons, but they will similarly never accept accountability for its failings. They prefer instead to govern behind the scenes, in the dangerous – and no doubt deliberate – gap between appearance and reality.

One of the important election issues should be the EU Brussels nonsense and their malice hypocritical manipulation of a independent country. It is Brussels how threw the "Hail Mary" pass of their illegal doings and of its big members country's how like to hide behind Brussels and continue with their age old expansion agendas under guise of semi free trade with a lot of rules for their benefit. Or the only Brussels European nonsense way. The Brussels talking heads dupes are so enamored with like to spew out at every chance. They think they have the hole corner on it everyone should listen to them and play homage and implement it or yore not a European which is of course hypocritical self serving total nonsense from Brussels talking heads.

Again Nik, everything you said could be easily disputed.

"That is absolutely untrue! As I explained in previous postings, the the concept of unviolability of the borders had to be combiumed with the process of decolonization."

I've sent you a link to a Helsinki Final Act that clearly recognizes right to Self-determination of the "people" adopted in 1975 (post WW2 and post-colonial period) on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (not in Africa).
I don't know where this claim is comming from that it's cancelled after WW2 or that it's related to decolonisation only.

Than you argued, just as you do now, that " it had to be on territorial, not on ethnic ground."
Last time when you read that Helsinki Final Act recognizes right of "people" to self-determination (not territories), you argued that "in the West people means group of people under a common government! "
It's true that this definition applies to states created by colonizing settlers, not in "West" in general, as far as I know. So, in the "New World" it's true, American people are not defined by ethnicity or race, but by use of territorial principle. People as people living on the same terriitory and under a common government (US).
So, we have Americans in US and Brazillians in Brazil and Australians in Australia. This is clear and justified, but where do you get that this territorial principle applies in the "Old World"? Or any of your other claims? Where do you get this stuff?
This is reflected in many of national laws of the different countries.
In US territorial principle is used, so person born in the USA is automatically an American.
On the other hand I personally know several people who were born and raised in Germany, and speak German language as a first language. But there, territorial principle does not apply, and the fact that they were born on German territory "under a common" (German) government does not make them part of German people, and they don't have a citizenship.
So, I don't understand where do you get an idea that "everyone in the West" defines "people" through territorial principle?
Even if you do, what makes you think that this definition is universal?
But, if "anyone in the West" is really using definition of "people" by territorial and not ethnical principle , then "everyone in the West" should be at least decent enough not to ever again mention rights of "Tibetan people", that by their own definition don't even exist.
There is only one people living in China, one territory and under a common government (unless China also dissolved without me noticing?). Therefore, there is only Chinese people in China, as there are Australian people in Australia.
Tibetan people don't exist.
I'm sure that Chinese government would like that. Unfortunatelly for their government officials, China is not a country created by colonizing settlers. It' s not a part of "New world", and by current international laws and definitions (that were not cancelled after WW2 by any means) and ETHNIC principle, there is such thing as Tibetan people. Furthermore, China could divide them, take their ethnic territory apart, and give it to neighbouring Chinese provinces thus making Tibetans minority in every one of them (through some "Amalgamation for better managment" project or something like that), still there is no use. Those borders are internal and they can be changed. The fact that China is denying them right to self-determination hangs over heads of Chinese government like a sword.
Then again if "everyone in the West" can't define people on ethnic ground, and think that Tibetans don't exist, please, by all means stand by your principles and don't mention them ever again. We will understand.
As for your other claim that Kosovo was part of Yugoslavian Federation according to Yugoslavian constitution, I already adressed that.
You accept Badinter decision that Yugoslavia dissolved and that Croatia and Bosnia were not divisable. But you don't accept his decision that Serbia is also indivisable. You also accept his decision that Yugoslavian constitution should be disregarded, except in a part of it where Kosovo was part of Yugoslavian Federation. Again, part that Alexandra pointed out.
"First of all,Under 1974 Yugoslavia Constitution Kosovo enjoyed the status of an autonomous province of Yugoslavia, while being a constituent part of the Republic of Serbia.Which part of part of SERBIA you have hard time comprehending? "
So, we should, as you say, simply accept this legality based on Partial and selective recognition of Badinter's oppinion, and on partial and selective recognition of the constitution of former Yugoslavia? And that's what making it legal?
In the same time we should disregard number of "irelevant" legal considerations such as UN Charter, Helsinki Final Act, Montevideo Agreement, (and yes - Badinter's decision), UN 1244 Resolution, and about half of dozen of other international laws and treaties?
I doubt that even creators of this legal scheme think of it as legal, Nik. Legal is legal and law could and should be implemented everywhere. Why did we have so many Western leaders then, lining up to tell everybody that this cannot be used as precedent?
In plain English - "Should anyone ever try to use those legal arguments that we are using now, we will be the first ones to tell him to have his head cheked"
What, then, makes you such a believer that this is all legal?
"the Albanians of Kosovo that managed better to persuade the Western community that there was no ethnic seperatism involved," you say.
And I am well aware Nik that there is this story going around in the West for years. In this story nobody was a separatist or nationalist except the Serbs, everyone else was commited to creation of multi-ethnic, multi-cultural state. Serbs being nationalistic separatist caused all the trouble in former Yugoslavia. I only don't know how do they explain conflict in Macedonia, there was no Serbs involved?
And those who wanted to leave Yugoslavia were somehow not separatists, while those who wanted to stay were "etnoseparatists". Or in Kosovo's case, Serbia. Somehow those who want to separate are not separatists, and those who don't want to separate are.
We should also "understand" that people are territorial definition, therfore, "Kosovar" people engaged in self-inflicted ethnic cleansing after 1999 when they started throwing out other "Kosovars" and burning Kosovar churches, etc.
And one more thing, Nik.
"Sreten is right claiming that the Croats were wrong in degrading the status of the Serbs and firing them from thir jobs. Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal."
Shouldn't you be also saying that while what you called " encroachment against the authonomy of Kosovo" is reprihensible, but when KLA started firing bullets it was criminal? Or firing bullets wasn't criminal if fired by the "right" side? I think that you should be saying that, Nik. If for no other reason, next time when you start a debate (as you did last week) with sentence ""I am amazed of the fact that the Serb nationalists always believe in double standarts.", you will sound much more beliavable, then simply to repeat on every issue favorit mantra that Serbs are quilty of everything.

And when Serbia shows that it has accepted all this in earnest, it will be amazed how quickly it will regain respect!
Well, I am the one that can't accept this. I can't just close my eyes and pretend that all this is true.
You go ahead, Nik. Most people involved with handling of affairs in former Yugoslavia seemed to be doing so with their eyes closed, so you won't be the only one. Then we all wonder why are the things so dark in the Balkan. But, closing eyes doesn't make darkness go away.

What is the point, folks, of writing such a long letters, when the most important news Montgomery gives us is, the demise of the EU darling DS+Seventeen Dwarfs coalition.
It is Kaput and let's drink to that.

@Nik: the dissolution of Czecheslovakia did involve some minor border changes. The leaders involved did look at the ethnic composition and did have referenda in villages were the situation was not clear. In my opnion the guidelines for borderchanges are clear: don't do it and if you have to do it do it in a fair way. The Badinter commission with its fixed borders ignored this rule and pushed Yugoslavia in the abyss. They should be exposed as frauds and not be quoted like saints.

Commentatpr wrote:

Ethnic seperatism is strictly not allowed (except when it works against Serbia).

Borders cannot change without mutual consent (except when it works against Serbia).

That is absolutely untrue! As I explained in previous postings, the the concept of unviolability of the borders had to be combiumed with the process of decolonization. But it had to be on territorial, not on ethnic ground. What was presumed to be a country, was given a right of self determination, provided it guaranteed the rights of all of its inhabitants. After the demise of the communist Federations (USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia) the constituent rebublics defimed by their constitutional borders were considered as countries. So it was the rebelion of the Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia that was presumed to be ethnoseperatism. Sreten is right claiming that the Croats were wrong in degrading the status of the Serbs and firing them from thir jobs. Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal. Especially in Bosnia, where there was no clear majority, no particular rights of the Serbs were thretened before the war. Unfortunaly the Serbs failed to realize that Yugoslavia was dead as a dodo and that the International Community will not allow ethnoseperatizm in Croatia and Bosnia.Serbs hated the transformation of the "administrative" borders into international ones no more that most of its neighbours hated their international borbers in the past, but eventually discovered that in the process of Eurointegration, the presumed injustice could be compensated. Kosovo of course was a special case. If there were no wars in Bosnia and Croatia and no encroachment against the authonomy of Kosovo, NO country would have recognized Kosovo's UDI. But it was the presumed loosers, the Albanians of Kosovo that managed better to persuade the Western community that there was no ethnic seperatism involved, that they were struggling for independent Kosovo of all its citizens. So keeping in mind that Kosovo was a subject of the defunct Yugoslav federation, which is to say a de facto Republic, it was accepted as a special case. Most importantly,it was recognized when it became clear that it could not be absorbed in the Serbia's political sysytem. So to start the new ball game Serbia must accept that Bosnia is a different country, and that Kosovo's independence was recognized by most of the West. Serbia may not recognize it (Irland has never recognized N. Irland), but accept that the others have done so and stop accusing them. Instead of trying to split Kosovo up, it should insist on the strictest respect of the Ahtisaari plan as well as the right of return of all of the fugitives from Krajna. When Serbia shows that it has accepted this strategy in earnest, it will be amazed how quickly it will regain respect!

"Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal. "

Bit like Slobodan Milosevic firing Albanians from their jobs (reprihensible) and the KLA then firing bullets (criminal)??

No? Don't agree? Are you about to say that this is a "different" situation?

Once again, Serbs seem to be judged by seperate rules - this is not acceptable EVER if you want real peace.

Your arguments are interesting Nik, but just don't stack up.

Alexandra, thank you so much for
this chronological historical data- I have never seen more comprehensible text about the historical conflict between the Serbs and the Albanians.
I've learned a lot from it...
It is scary though to note how Nacism played a role in repeatedly helping Great Albania project get off the ground and especially considering the hatred and historical revanshism that in Europe exists against Serbs but also Russians (only against Russians they cannot win).
I have this feeling already for long that in present day Europe, namely EU, Fashism is more alive than ever.
Only now it took another even more frightening face: the monster with many heads of the EU countries (but lead and directed by the Germans, Brits
Dutch, Belgiums etc. united).
So this new Europe
has crowned itself with the pearl, inauguration of "Independent Kosovo State".
UGHHH

I cannot agree with you Nik.
"All that has nothing to do with denying cultural rights. But they are mostly INDIVIDUAL." you say.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/16/tibet.unrest/index.html

"The Dalai Lama on Sunday called for an international probe of China's treatment of Tibet, which he said is causing "cultural genocide" of his people." in this CNN article.
Tibetans as individuals are not any more deprived of rights then any other Chinese citizens. Chine is, simply, not very generous when it comes to individual rights of anybody. Period. And concern about Tibetan rights is very much about denial of their cultural rights, not individual. Thus, "cultural genocide" etc.
But, I don't want to argue about this. As you said, the real question is "What to do next?"
"The "administrative" borders within Yugoslavia have turned into internationally recognized ones. But if the interntionally recognized borders in Europe turn into "administrative" ones, the cirle will be closed."
Another mind-boggling enigma that defies common sense. Instead of supporting Yugoslavia by all means, those who wanted to separate were given all the support. Process of separation continues. Latest example was on February 17th this year. Is there some project "Creating borderless society through introduction of new international borders" in effect? I'm sure that this makes sense to Westerns to whom those who want to SEPARATE from the country are not SEPARATISTS, but those who want to stay are.
And everyone is saying that Serbs should simply accept this as it doesn't even matter, borders in united Europe will be less important, etc. One big flaw in this tactic is that it's aimed only at the Serbs. Shouldn't you be telling the same things to Albanians in Kosovo?
"Listen guys. Borders in Europe will not matter. We don't see any need for creating another one , and setting a dangerous precedent (while pretending that it isn't) to create any new international borders. Take a wide autonomy and live with it."
Or go to Sarajevo and try to peruade Silajdzic to give independence to Serb entity. Why not? The new border would soon turn "administrative" again, and circle will be closed. Serbs will accept this, no problem.
But as it is, Serbs should be "reasonable" while all others shouldn't. It's not going to sell.
Question "What next?" brings us finally to Montgomery's article that I want to make a comment on.
After reading Montgomery's oppinion one very charming lady from Canada, gifted with deep comprehension of political issues and with keen sense of political currents, made a private comment. She said that article is good, only this "throwing a football" analogy looks to her more like "throwing a boomerang".
I share this oppinion completely.
"Boris Tadić won the recent Serbian Presidential Election because he was successful in framing it as a referendum on "the European path or Isolation." This led to a very high voter turnout and ultimately an uncomfortably narrow victory for President Tadić and the "pro-European" forces.

Unfortunately for DS/G17 Plus, polling shows that this strategy has not (at least thus far) been nearly as effective in the current campaign for the May 11 Parliamentary elections. The electorate seems to be ignoring this either-or scenario and inclined to vote along traditional party lines."
This is the only statement in your article that I somewhat disagree with. Most people do see this elections as referendum on " the European path". But, there is a very significant change in political circumstances compared to recent Presidential elections. Day after Presidential elections Kosovo declared independence. This was not unexpected. While EU itself could not reach a concensus on recognition of Kosovo, it was left to individual countries to do so. Most of them decided to recognize Kosovo's declaration of independence, creating an impression in Serbia that EU is supporting Kosovo's independence (while EU itself actually isn't). Furthermore, EULEX, as European mission (not the mission of individual countries that recognized Kosovo's independence) went to Kosovo. Another signal that EU supports Kosovo's "supervised" independence. One has to take oppinion polls taken in Serbia as indicator of electoral will. Every major poll of political oppinion in Serbia show very strong support for European intergration. It's been sliding in past few years slightly, as some people appearantly, reached a conclusion that such "marriage" couldn't work due to "inreconciable differences" in oppinions. Mr. Montgomery wrote about it few weeks ago, when he mentioned that "one should not assume that Serbs are subscribed to American view of history". I think that debate between Nik and myself in last two weeks would be a good example of it. Support have been sliding slightly, but it's still very strong. For a past few years now, on question would they still support European integrations if they should give up Kosovo for it, even greater majority of the people answered that they wouldn't. And that is preciselly why Tadic was wrong to go into this elections presenting it as referendum on European integrations. In a light of new political circumstances he should not have assumed that just because people are overwhelmingly supportive of European integrations would be the same if European integration is perceived as giving up on Kosovo. And that lead to poor showing of DS in the polls.
To try to turn things around Tadic then threw this "Hail Marry" pass. So far, it really seems that he have thrown a boomerang, and for several reasons.
You pointed out some of them.
"There are several problems with this "Hail Mary" strategy, however:

-The European Union has been so blatant about its preferences in the upcoming election and its motivations in offering the SAA that it has, at least among some Serbs, become counter-productive. It has become a campaign issue itself.

-Both the "visa map" and the SAA will have conditions and requirements attached to them, which make their actual implementation problematic. This will rob them of a lot of their value. "
First one, that it's been seen simply as an attempt to interfere with Serbian elections. Then again, most of voters did expect that EU will try to send "strong signal" in support of "pro-European" forces. This signal could have been sent without signing of SAA agreement, and by choosing to do it this way was a very bad strategy, in my view. Second one, that signing the of the agreement will not have any benefit in forseeable future has another dimension to it. Many have wondered why such a hurry to have it signed before the elections as its implementantion and potential benefit from it lies far down the road at best case scenario?
As I said, to send a signal that EU would like to have Serbia inside of it, could have been sent in many ways. "Visa map" is not a problem, for example. Inclusion of SAA was a very bad decision.
Signing of the SAA agreement is the very issue that lead to the fall of the government and reason for these elections. Rulling politcal coallition fell apart unable to reach an agreement on this issue. The only way out was to call an elections, and let voters decide. Now, Tadic decided to sign it, before voters had a chance to give their oppinion on the matter, leaving an impression that he couldn't care less what voters in Serbia think about it, and that only thing that matters to him is what EU thinks about it. In the same time he refused to bring to the conclusion some of the issues that were agreed upon, before the coallition fell apart, like energy deal with Russia, saying that caretaker government should not be doing that. All this lead to raise of a suspicion especially among undecided voters. Why this urgency, when SAA agreement isn't going to benefit anyone in Serbia, any time soon, anyway? Especially as it si "caretaker" government on all other issues? Is there more to it then only signal in support of Serbia's pro-European forces? I think that there is some awareness of this growing suspicion in EU, and that this is the reason behind statements of many EU officials that SAA agreement has nothing to do with Kosovo, EULEX, etc.
There were few opposite statements, too.
http://www.politika.co.yu/rubrike/Svet/SSP-omogucava-lakshi-ulazak-Euleksa-na-Kosovo.lt.html
Unfortunatelly, it's not in English. It's interview with top Slovenian diplomat, Dimitrij Rupel on May 5th, published in Serbian daily "Politika". He said quite a few things in this interview, but one remark made it into a title.
"SSP omogućava lakši ulazak Euleksa na Kosovo" ( "SAA allowes for easier introduction of EULEX in Kosovo")
In text he said that "...SSP omogućava lakšu penetraciju snaga Euleksa na Kosovu kroz nove, kreativne interpretacije rezolucije 1244 SB UN." ("... SAA allowes for easier penetration of Eulex forces in Kosovo through new, creative interpretations of resolution 1244 of SC UN.")
Given that Eulex is there to implement "supervised independence" this won't play well in Serbia, and it will make at least some voters even more suspicios of SAA agreement. Ones again, it seems that Tadic attempted "Hail Mary" pass with the boomerang.
"While it is correct that Koštunica and the Radicals would probably have ended up opposing the SAA and "visa map" in any case, the timing of the offers made this a certainty and the rhetoric used will make it much harder for these individuals and parties to ever reverse course. This has to have an impact on Serbian relations with the EU, regardless of what happens in the coming elections. "
Very good observation. Serbian relations with the EU were on down-spiral for a while, just to be seriously aggravated recently by Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independece, and recognition of it by majority of EU countries. To that we can probably add this "Hail Mary" pass, unless, by some, chance it works. The end result of it will probably be Serbia and EU driffting further apart. Unfortunatelly, as this isn't what EU wants, and according to the polls, it's not what majority of people in Serbia would want either.

Sreten, you are obviously a very knowlageble nad inteligent person. Yet you post saings like:
"Instead of supporting Yugoslavia by all means, those who wanted to separate were given all the support. "
Do you forget that then chairman of the EU Commission Jacques Delore came to Belgrade to tell "Yugoslavs" that EU gives full support of the unity of the country and that it will help them in every way if they stick together! Or you believe that Yugoslavia was destroyed by a German revanchist-Yankee imperialist- Vatican - Islamic- Judeo-masonic- or whatever conpirasy? Yugoslavia fell appart on it own weight! Nobody could have preserve it. Before the fallout there was a long devergency. Slovenia was drifting towards democracy, but unfortunatly among the Croats and especially among the Serbs the drift was towards unbridled nationalism! Their nationalists used their newly gained freedom to endolge in what they were prevented by Tito - nationalist rhetoric! There were no leaders to tell the Croats and the Serbs that after the end of the Cold War, the time is ripe for Eurointegration of the whole of Yugoslavia! It has been said that the Devil could not do to you the damage you could inflict on yourself. The international community was mumbling about preservation of the territorial unity of Yugoslavia even when "president" Stipe Mesic was bombed by "his own" air force.
Talking about leadership, well that is what I believe president Tadic is doing today. That is how I would describe his "Hail Mary" pass. Machiavelli once wrote that it takes a leader like Moses to lead his people into the wilderness. Everyone could take them into the promised land. Signing the SAA he does not follow the public opinion but leads! It is a difficulte choice, but it shows honesty and braveness. Majority of the Serbian people would like to have EU integration and "keep" Kosovo. Well that is not the dilema. The painful dilema is: EU integration, while "loosing" Kosovo or EU isolatian, and again loosing Kosovo. Is it so difficulte even for inteligent people, like Sretan, Commentator and Alexandra to realise that Kosovo is "lost". Not now, not in 1999, not even in 1974, but may be three centuries ago! What leader would it take to convince the Serbian people that all the efforts made in the last 100 years to reincorporate it in Serbia was a waist of precious resurses. I think that Serbian dilema now is like that of France during the Algerian war.
Will Tadic prove to be such a leader? Well, lets close our eyes on May 11.

I wouldn't be taking space in a debate that is not really related to an article. You could write to me directly if you wish at pacimbum@hotmail.com
Same goes for anyone else that would like to write to me. Thanks.

Mr. Montgomery, Good comparismant! But I am not sure if your critics to the EU commissioners is correct. It should not be seen as an interference with Serbian party politics, but as a clear sign that Serbia must start playing a completly new ball game. That is really the choice. And it is not easy to do so after being relagated with 7:0 (soccer terms), keeping in mind that you were the champion for a long, long time.
In the 19 century the ballgame was independence, in the early 20 century - territorial expansion. In the 21 century the ballgame is integration in the most developed parts of the world.
The Serbs ended in the victorious camps in two Balkan and two world wars and avoided defeat in the Cold War. This way they became the champions of South Easth Europe. So, for them it was much harder that it was for the loosers to say: "We don't want to play that game anymore"! In the last 20 years the others, some of them considered hopeless, were playing the new game and scoring some goals while the former champions kept loosing match after match.At first everybody believed they will switch to the new rules soon and will quickly catch up. After all, they were the champions! But after every loss they became more and more reluctant to do so. Now far from being South East Europe's favorites, they became the long shot!
And many of them get encouraged by the calls of the Radicals and Kostunica when they repeat: It is not over!".
Well the umpire must blow the wistle and call: "Game OVER! Satrt playing the new game now, or you will be disqualified for a long time!"

Alexandra,

While not at all siding with Kosovo Albanians I must say that your one-eyed collection of facts comes very close to a dishonest account of events.

You can try to ride on Hannah Arendt. Nevertheless you are a part of the problem. And you have nothing to do with a solution.

Alexandra. I am sure that your historical recount is correct. Yet all a foreiner would remember is: Serbs and Albanians have long fought over this territory, even when it was within the Ottoman Empire and Yugoslavia. (both defunct) Finally in 1974 Tito gave the Albanian majority home rule which was taken away under Milosevic. It was to be authomomy within Serbia, but it is obvious that it couldn't work".
Sreten you are wrong in claiming: "So, in the "New World" it's true, American people are not defined by ethnicity or race, but by use of territorial principle. People as people living on the same terriitory and under a common government' That is not only in the "New World". The French president is a son of a Hungarian emigrant and a grand son of Salonica Jew. If the likes of him were treated as nonfrench, if the emigrants from Magreb are told thet they will be a "minority" forever the repelion of 2005 will seem like picknick!
All that has nothing to do with denying cultural rights. But they are mostly INDIVIDUAL. Sreten likes to nemtion Tibet. Well Tibet was a sepate country occupied by Maoist China in late 1940's. Dali Lama has accepted that Tibet will remain part of China, but requires a home rule. The Chinise, all too awear that China is a multinational Empire(only 45% of its territory was populated by Han Chinese) and in some situation may have the fate of ...all othe empires that once seemed much more powerful - The Brittish Empire, the Rusiian Empire, later proclaimed a federation ( the USSR).
When I talk about double standart Ialso mean that Serb nationalist gloryfy the struggls of Serbs ouside Serbia, in the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary, but denigrade the Albanians who have done the same, by the Prizren league ete.
Svetlana, shouldn't you be glad that the "independence" of Kosovo is fictional and that the real power is held by the EU. I like you strongly doubt the capacity of the present Kosovo leaders to uphold the high standarts of human rights.
And that bring us to the core of our discussion. Whatever happened happened, the question is what to do next???
It must be clear for everyone that Kosovo will not be reincorporated in Serbia. Most Eu states have recognized Kosovo more will follow after May 11. But as we agreed, the concept of independences is becoming fictional. All countries are losing their soveregnity. But the rights of the individuals are being enhansed. Don't Serbs want to be like the rest of the Europeans, to live in a borderless environment, to traval arround the continent, to be able to live, work and study everywhere? Yes the price of this will be that more decisions will be made not in Belgrade, but elswhere. But isn't that true today? Don't Serbian people suffer from the fact that their wishes are disregarded? EU membership is not just a sweetener, but indead a trade off. If one could be a good Serbian not just in Belgrade, but in Prishtina, Knin, Paris or London and there are no phisical barriers between those cities, woouldn't that be the only feasible happy end of the saga? The "administrative" borders within Yugoslavia have turned into internationally recognized ones. But if the interntionally recognized borders in Europe turn into "administrative" ones, the cirle will be closed.

Mr. Montgomery, Good comparismant! But I am not sure if your critics to the EU commissioners is correct. It should not be seen as an interference with Serbian party politics, but as a clear sign that Serbia must start playing a completly new ball game. That is really the choice. And it is not easy to do so after being relagated with 7:0 (soccer terms), keeping in mind that you were the champion for a long, long time.
In the 19 century the ballgame was independence, in the early 20 century - territorial expansion. In the 21 century the ballgame is integration in the most developed parts of the world.
The Serbs ended in the victorious camps in two Balkan and two world wars and avoided defeat in the Cold War. This way they became the champions of South Easth Europe. So, for them it was much harder that it was for the loosers to say: "We don't want to play that game anymore"! In the last 20 years the others, some of them considered hopeless, were playing the new game and scoring some goals while the former champions kept loosing match after match.At first everybody believed they will switch to the new rules soon and will quickly catch up. After all, they were the champions! But after every loss they became more and more reluctant to do so. Now far from being South East Europe's favorites, they became the long shot!
And many of them get encouraged by the calls of the Radicals and Kostunica when they repeat: It is not over!".
Well the umpire must blow the wistle and call: "Game OVER! Satrt playing the new game now, or you will be disqualified for a long time!"

Alexandra. I am sure that your historical recount is correct. Yet all a foreiner would remember is: Serbs and Albanians have long fought over this territory, even when it was within the Ottoman Empire and Yugoslavia. (both defunct) Finally in 1974 Tito gave the Albanian majority home rule which was taken away under Milosevic. It was to be authomomy within Serbia, but it is obvious that it couldn't work".
Sreten you are wrong in claiming: "So, in the "New World" it's true, American people are not defined by ethnicity or race, but by use of territorial principle. People as people living on the same terriitory and under a common government' That is not only in the "New World". The French president is a son of a Hungarian emigrant and a grand son of Salonica Jew. If the likes of him were treated as nonfrench, if the emigrants from Magreb are told thet they will be a "minority" forever the repelion of 2005 will seem like picknick!
All that has nothing to do with denying cultural rights. But they are mostly INDIVIDUAL. Sreten likes to nemtion Tibet. Well Tibet was a sepate country occupied by Maoist China in late 1940's. Dali Lama has accepted that Tibet will remain part of China, but requires a home rule. The Chinise, all too awear that China is a multinational Empire(only 45% of its territory was populated by Han Chinese) and in some situation may have the fate of ...all othe empires that once seemed much more powerful - The Brittish Empire, the Rusiian Empire, later proclaimed a federation ( the USSR).
When I talk about double standart Ialso mean that Serb nationalist gloryfy the struggls of Serbs ouside Serbia, in the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary, but denigrade the Albanians who have done the same, by the Prizren league ete.
Svetlana, shouldn't you be glad that the "independence" of Kosovo is fictional and that the real power is held by the EU. I like you strongly doubt the capacity of the present Kosovo leaders to uphold the high standarts of human rights.
And that bring us to the core of our discussion. Whatever happened happened, the question is what to do next???
It must be clear for everyone that Kosovo will not be reincorporated in Serbia. Most Eu states have recognized Kosovo more will follow after May 11. But as we agreed, the concept of independences is becoming fictional. All countries are losing their soveregnity. But the rights of the individuals are being enhansed. Don't Serbs want to be like the rest of the Europeans, to live in a borderless environment, to traval arround the continent, to be able to live, work and study everywhere? Yes the price of this will be that more decisions will be made not in Belgrade, but elswhere. But isn't that true today? Don't Serbian people suffer from the fact that their wishes are disregarded? EU membership is not just a sweetener, but indead a trade off. If one could be a good Serbian not just in Belgrade, but in Prishtina, Knin, Paris or London and there are no phisical barriers between those cities, woouldn't that be the only feasible happy end of the saga? The "administrative" borders within Yugoslavia have turned into internationally recognized ones. But if the interntionally recognized borders in Europe turn into "administrative" ones, the cirle will be closed.

Commentatpr wrote:

Ethnic seperatism is strictly not allowed (except when it works against Serbia).

Borders cannot change without mutual consent (except when it works against Serbia).

That is absolutely untrue! As I explained in previous postings, the the concept of unviolability of the borders had to be combiumed with the process of decolonization. But it had to be on territorial, not on ethnic ground. What was presumed to be a country, was given a right of self determination, provided it guaranteed the rights of all of its inhabitants. After the demise of the communist Federations (USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia) the constituent rebublics defimed by their constitutional borders were considered as countries. So it was the rebelion of the Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia that was presumed to be ethnoseperatism. Sreten is right claiming that the Croats were wrong in degrading the status of the Serbs and firing them from thir jobs. Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal. Especially in Bosnia, where there was no clear majority, no particular rights of the Serbs were thretened before the war. Unfortunaly the Serbs failed to realize that Yugoslavia was dead as a dodo and that the International Community will not allow ethnoseperatizm in Croatia and Bosnia.Serbs hated the transformation of the "administrative" borders into international ones no more that most of its neighbours hated their international borbers in the past, but eventually discovered that in the process of Eurointegration, the presumed injustice could be compensated. Kosovo of course was a special case. If there were no wars in Bosnia and Croatia and no encroachment against the authonomy of Kosovo, NO country would have recognized Kosovo's UDI. But it was the presumed loosers, the Albanians of Kosovo that managed better to persuade the Western community that there was no ethnic seperatism involved, that they were struggling for independent Kosovo of all its citizens. So keeping in mind that Kosovo was a subject of the defunct Yugoslav federation, which is to say a de facto Republic, it was accepted as a special case. Most importantly,it was recognized when it became clear that it could not be absorbed in the Serbia's political sysytem. So to start the new ball game Serbia must accept that Bosnia is a different country, and that Kosovo's independence was recognized by most of the West. Serbia may not recognize it (Irland has never recognized N. Irland), but accept that the others have done so and stop accusing them. Instead of trying to split Kosovo up, it should insist on the strictest respect of the Ahtisaari plan as well as the right of return of all of the fugitives from Krajna. When Serbia shows that it has accepted this strategy in earnest, it will be amazed how quickly it will regain respect!

Sreten, you are obviously a very knowlageble nad inteligent person. Yet you post saings like:
"Instead of supporting Yugoslavia by all means, those who wanted to separate were given all the support. "
Do you forget that then chairman of the EU Commission Jacques Delore came to Belgrade to tell "Yugoslavs" that EU gives full support of the unity of the country and that it will help them in every way if they stick together! Or you believe that Yugoslavia was destroyed by a German revanchist-Yankee imperialist- Vatican - Islamic- Judeo-masonic- or whatever conpirasy? Yugoslavia fell appart on it own weight! Nobody could have preserve it. Before the fallout there was a long devergency. Slovenia was drifting towards democracy, but unfortunatly among the Croats and especially among the Serbs the drift was towards unbridled nationalism! Their nationalists used their newly gained freedom to endolge in what they were prevented by Tito - nationalist rhetoric! There were no leaders to tell the Croats and the Serbs that after the end of the Cold War, the time is ripe for Eurointegration of the whole of Yugoslavia! It has been said that the Devil could not do to you the damage you could inflict on yourself. The international community was mumbling about preservation of the territorial unity of Yugoslavia even when "president" Stipe Mesic was bombed by "his own" air force.
Talking about leadership, well that is what I believe president Tadic is doing today. That is how I would describe his "Hail Mary" pass. Machiavelli once wrote that it takes a leader like Moses to lead his people into the wilderness. Everyone could take them into the promised land. Signing the SAA he does not follow the public opinion but leads! It is a difficulte choice, but it shows honesty and braveness. Majority of the Serbian people would like to have EU integration and "keep" Kosovo. Well that is not the dilema. The painful dilema is: EU integration, while "loosing" Kosovo or EU isolatian, and again loosing Kosovo. Is it so difficulte even for inteligent people, like Sretan, Commentator and Alexandra to realise that Kosovo is "lost". Not now, not in 1999, not even in 1974, but may be three centuries ago! What leader would it take to convince the Serbian people that all the efforts made in the last 100 years to reincorporate it in Serbia was a waist of precious resurses. I think that Serbian dilema now is like that of France during the Algerian war.
Will Tadic prove to be such a leader? Well, lets close our eyes on May 11.

Alexandra,

While not at all siding with Kosovo Albanians I must say that your one-eyed collection of facts comes very close to a dishonest account of events.

You can try to ride on Hannah Arendt. Nevertheless you are a part of the problem. And you have nothing to do with a solution.

One of the important election issues should be the EU Brussels nonsense and their malice hypocritical manipulation of a independent country. It is Brussels how threw the "Hail Mary" pass of their illegal doings and of its big members country's how like to hide behind Brussels and continue with their age old expansion agendas under guise of semi free trade with a lot of rules for their benefit. Or the only Brussels European nonsense way. The Brussels talking heads dupes are so enamored with like to spew out at every chance. They think they have the hole corner on it everyone should listen to them and play homage and implement it or yore not a European which is of course hypocritical self serving total nonsense from Brussels talking heads.

Nik,

Serbs absolutely would want to "play the game", but first, let's define what a game is:-

"a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules"

Key point - a game must have rules, and this is our problem, the rules are different for us.

"Europe's" rules:-

Ethnic seperatism is strictly not allowed (except when it works against Serbia).

Borders cannot change without mutual consent (except when it works against Serbia).

etc, etc...

For your soccer analogy, we are being "invited" to play in the EU league but are only allowed 5 people on the field and can't have a goalkeeper.... of course we don't want to play!

The danger for Europe is that there are other sports and leagues that are showing an interest in inviting Serbia in - and they do have consistent rules - so we are thinking about it. Why not? We have every right to. Soccer is not the only game on the planet.

Time for all the hypocrites and Serbophobes to get off their high horses and offer us the same respect as all other "European" countries get.

We'll gladly play in the European league then.

nik,

You claim "So keeping in mind that Kosovo was a subject of the defunct Yugoslav federation, which is to say a de facto Republic"

Propaganda lies with you. First of all,Under 1974 Yugoslavia Constitution Kosovo enjoyed the status of an autonomous province of Yugoslavia, while being a constituent part of the Republic of Serbia.Which part of part of SERBIA you have hard time comprehending?

Key facts about Kosovo's Islamic Albanian minority of Serbia and the century long drive by Islamic extremists to exterminate Kosovo Serbs from that region:

1389---Muslims defeat Christian Serb defenders in Kosovo, depopulate the area and invite mountain tribe of Albanians, in exchange for converting to Islam, to take over pillaged land from Serbs.

1594---Sinan Pasha, an ethnic Albanian, who was a commander in the Ottoman Turkish Empire, burned the relics of St. Sava at Vracar, Belgrade. St. Sava is the Saint that brought Serbs into Christianity.

1878---Albanian nationalist leaders meet in Prizren, known as the First League of Prizren, to announce the creation of a Greater Albania, which will include all areas settled by Albanians, including Kosovo-Metohija, western Macedonia, known as Illirida, southern Montenegro, and northern Greece, Chameria. This is when the Kosovo or “Kosova” separatist agenda starts.

1878---Ottoman Turkish forces put down Albanian insurgency to create a Greater Albania. This was the first attempt to create an Albanian “Kosova” by an insurgency or by military force. A century later, another Greater Albania insurgency would have NATO and US backing.

1900-1918---Austria-Hungary and Italy are sponsors of a Greater Albania and support Albanian expansion in the Balkans, at the expense of Serbia.

1912---Albanian ultranationalists seize Skopje in Macedonia as part of a Greater Albania.

1920---After borders of “Jugoslavia” are legally settled under international law and recognized by the League of Nations, Albanian separatists launch a terrorist insurgency in “Kosova”, murdering Serbian civilians and police. This is known as the “kachak movement” and is the start of Albanian attempts to take over “Kosova” by military or armed force.

1941---Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini invade, occupy, and dismember Yugoslavia. They make “Kosova” a part of a Greater Albania under Mustafa Kruja. Western Macedonia is also made a part of Greater Albania by Hitler and Mussolini
1943---The Second League of Prizren, sponsored and established by Nazi Germany, reaffirms the commitment to create and maintain an independent “Kosova” and a Greater Albania under Nazi sponsorship. Later, the US and EU would replace Nazi Germany as the sponsor of Greater Albania.

1944---Albanians create a Nazi Waffen SS Division, Skanderbeg, made up mostly of Kosovo Albanian Muslims, “Kosovars”. These Albanian Muslim Nazi SS troops murder thousands of Kosovo Serbian Christians and drive thousands of other Kosovo Serbs out of Kosovo.
1944---Kosovo Albanian Muslims play a role in the Holocaust, the murder of European Jews. The Albanian “Kosovar” Skanderbeg Nazi SS Division rounds up Kosovo Jews who are sent to the Nazi concentration camp at Bergen Belsen where they are killed.

1948---The U.S. brings Midhat Frasheri, the leader of the Nazi/fascist Balli Kombetar, National Front, whose goal is a Greater Albania that includes Kosovo, and other wanted Albanian “Kosovar” war criminals, such as Xhafer Deva and Hassan Dosti, to the U.S. to form anti-Communist forces for the takeover of Albania. The U.S. put the Communist regime in power in Albania then sought to overthrow it by means of “regime change”.

1951---The U.S. organizes and launches Operation Fiend, one of the first experiments in “regime change” in Albania. Frank Wisner is one of the leaders of the project. His son would lead the efforts in 2006 to create a Greater Albania, an independent “Kosova”, which his father failed to achieve.

1968---Albanian separatism in Kosovo emerges. Closer tries with Albania are established.

1969---Kosovo Albanians begin closer ties with Tirana and begin importing textbooks and teachers from Albania and create their own Albanian school system and university. The “Albanianization” of Kosovo begins.
1974---The Communist dictator Josip Broz Tito changes the Yugoslav constitution giving Kosovo Albanians control of Kosovo. Albanians control every area of Kosovo from the police to teachers to judges.

1981---Albanians in Kosovo demand independence or secession from Yugoslavia. They demand to be a Republic which is code for independent or a part of Albania. They demand: “We Want a Unified Albania!” Dozens are killed in separatist riots. Serbian Patriarchate in Pec is burned down but no one knows how or why.

1982---British historian Nora Beloff notes that “ethnic cleansing” originated in Kosovo when Albanian Muslims killed or drove off Serbs. Albanians begin terror campaign of ethnic cleansing against Kosovo Serbs. From 1981-1989, an estimated 20,000 Kosovo Serbs are driven out of Kosovo by Albanian ultranationalists.

1982---Ethnically motivated murders of Kosovo Serbs begin with the murders of Kosovo Serbs Danilo Milincic and Miodrag Saric.

1985---Kosovo Serb Djorje Martinovic is “found with a broken bottle up his anus.” Albanian attackers sodomized him to force him out of the province to create an ethnically pure Kosova. US media claims that Martinovic was a closet homosexual who injured himself. The brutal sodomy of Martinovic inflames passions in the rest of Serbia.

1987---Fadil Hoxha, leader of Kosovo Albanians, advocates that Albanian Muslims rape Kosovo Serb women.
1989---Murders, rapes, desecration of Kosovo Serbian property, churches, and cemeteries forces Serbian government to rescind “autonomy” that Communist dictatorship created.

1991---Albanian separatists respond by proclaiming Kosovo a republic, which is tantamount to independence, which is recognized only by neighboring Albania. Albanian separatists gain sponsorship of a Greater Albania by contributing money to Thomas Lantos, Robert Dole, and Joe Biden. The U.S. becomes the sponsor of Greater Albania.

1996---A violent and armed terrorist and separatist group emerges, the KLA/UCK, whose goal is to create a Greater Albania, an independent “Kosova”. KLA begins killing Kosovo Serb civilians and police. Dozens of Yugoslav policemen, Serbs and Albanians, are brutally murdered by the KLA.

April, 1998---95 percent of the Yugoslav population rejected international mediation on Kosovo in a referendum. The so-called Balkan Contact Group imposed new international sanctions against Yugoslavia even though the decision was by a majority of the Yugoslav population, that is, was democratically determined.

uly-August, 1998---The KLA separatists takes over 40 percent of Kosovo by force, by killing Yugoslav police and driving Kosovo Serbs out. The KLA terrorist groups are well-armed and supplied. The U.S. is one of the backers of the KLA separatists or terrorists.

1998---US State Department declares the KLA separatists are “terrorists”. US media dismisses the pronouncement.

1998---US media dismiss the fact that the Kosovo conflict is an illegal land grab, a separatist, ethnic war to create a Greater Albania. Instead, the US media concoct a deception that the conflict is about “greater rights” and “genocide”, when it is about Greater Albania, an independent, ethnically pure “Kosova”.

October, 1998---NATO plans airstrikes against Yugoslav targets, which would later include hospitals, nursing homes, passenger trains, TV stations, power grids, factories, and busses. Many of these attacks are war crimes under international law.

January 15, 1999---A “massacre” is manufactured in Racak by the US media and government. In fact, those killed were KLA separatists who had murdered Serbian policemen and had been killed in combat against Yugoslav police.

February, 1999---At a staged peace conference at Rambouillet, the US demands that Serbia allow Kosovo to become an independent nation after three years and that US and NATO troops be allowed to occupy Serbia. The US diktat was meant to force a war which the U.S. had long been planning. Rambouillet was a transparent sham.

March, 1999---Yugoslavia’s democratically elected leaders reject the US peace deal as tantamount to dismemberment and military occupation, unacceptable to a sovereign state.

March 24, 1999---NATO launched air strikes against Yugoslavia for 78 days, killing thousands of Serbian civilians. The KLA and U.S. advisers create a fake humanitarian catastrophe by telling and even forcing Kosovo Albanians to flee into Albania and Macedonia Yugoslav forces are falsely blamed for driving out Albanians. The U.S. scores a huge propaganda success with images of refugees.

June 10, 1999---NATO forces Slobodan Milosevic to withdraw Yugoslav forces from Kosovo and to allow NATO to occupy it. NATO occupies Kosovo.

June 12, 1999---After 50,000 NATO peacekeepers begin deployment in Kosovo, over 200,000 Kosovo Serbs, Roma, Gorani, and Jews are forced out of Kosovo by Albanians. Thousands of Kosovo Serbs are murdered by Albanians as NATO takes control of the province. Over 150 Serbian Orthodox Churches would be destroyed by Albanian Muslims protected by NATO troops.

March, 2004---March Pogroms: Albanians attack the last remaining Kosovo Serbs to drive them out of the province to create an ethnically pure Shqip Kosova.

October, 2006---Serbia held a referendum and approved a new constitution which declared that Kosovo was an integral part of Serbia. This decision had the support of the majority of the population of Serbia, that is, was democratically determined

January 21, 2007---Serbia held parliamentary elections where the Radical Party won the most votes, although not enough votes to form a new government.

April, 2007---Russia rejected the Marti Ahtisaari proposal in the U.N. Security Council because it violated Serbian sovereignty by supporting Albanian separatism.

June, 2007---U.S. President George W. Bush claimed that Kosovo had to be independent "sooner rather than later." This is an issue for the UN to be decided under international law, however, not a decision for the President of the U.S.

August, 2007---Envoys from the U.S., EU and Russia began 120 days of further negotiations between Albanian separatists and the Serbian government in order to reach an agreement. No agreement was forthcoming because the only “agreement” the U.S. was pushing was an independent “Kosova”. There was nothing to negotiate about. The negotiations were a sham and a hoax.

December, 2007---Albanian separatist efforts fail at the U.N. The U.S. and Albanian goal is then to unilaterally declare independence outside of international law and the UN Charter, which is illegal and violates the sovereignty of Serbia and denies the will of the majority of Serbs. The majority of the Serbian population rejects the secession of Kosovo by Albanian separatists. This decision is reached by means of the democratic process.

February, 2008---Having failed to achieve their separatist agenda through international law and in the U.N., the U.S. switched gears and told the Albanian separatists to unilaterally declare an independent “Kosova”. This is an illegal act which violates all international norms and conventions and laws. The U.S. reliance is on military force only. The illegal measure is justified by force only.



And in words of Hannah Arendt "Only the mob and the elite can be attracted by the momentum of totalitarianism itself. The masses have to be won by propaganda." Well consider yourself debunked.

Again Nik, everything you said could be easily disputed.

"That is absolutely untrue! As I explained in previous postings, the the concept of unviolability of the borders had to be combiumed with the process of decolonization."

I've sent you a link to a Helsinki Final Act that clearly recognizes right to Self-determination of the "people" adopted in 1975 (post WW2 and post-colonial period) on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (not in Africa).
I don't know where this claim is comming from that it's cancelled after WW2 or that it's related to decolonisation only.

Than you argued, just as you do now, that " it had to be on territorial, not on ethnic ground."
Last time when you read that Helsinki Final Act recognizes right of "people" to self-determination (not territories), you argued that "in the West people means group of people under a common government! "
It's true that this definition applies to states created by colonizing settlers, not in "West" in general, as far as I know. So, in the "New World" it's true, American people are not defined by ethnicity or race, but by use of territorial principle. People as people living on the same terriitory and under a common government (US).
So, we have Americans in US and Brazillians in Brazil and Australians in Australia. This is clear and justified, but where do you get that this territorial principle applies in the "Old World"? Or any of your other claims? Where do you get this stuff?
This is reflected in many of national laws of the different countries.
In US territorial principle is used, so person born in the USA is automatically an American.
On the other hand I personally know several people who were born and raised in Germany, and speak German language as a first language. But there, territorial principle does not apply, and the fact that they were born on German territory "under a common" (German) government does not make them part of German people, and they don't have a citizenship.
So, I don't understand where do you get an idea that "everyone in the West" defines "people" through territorial principle?
Even if you do, what makes you think that this definition is universal?
But, if "anyone in the West" is really using definition of "people" by territorial and not ethnical principle , then "everyone in the West" should be at least decent enough not to ever again mention rights of "Tibetan people", that by their own definition don't even exist.
There is only one people living in China, one territory and under a common government (unless China also dissolved without me noticing?). Therefore, there is only Chinese people in China, as there are Australian people in Australia.
Tibetan people don't exist.
I'm sure that Chinese government would like that. Unfortunatelly for their government officials, China is not a country created by colonizing settlers. It' s not a part of "New world", and by current international laws and definitions (that were not cancelled after WW2 by any means) and ETHNIC principle, there is such thing as Tibetan people. Furthermore, China could divide them, take their ethnic territory apart, and give it to neighbouring Chinese provinces thus making Tibetans minority in every one of them (through some "Amalgamation for better managment" project or something like that), still there is no use. Those borders are internal and they can be changed. The fact that China is denying them right to self-determination hangs over heads of Chinese government like a sword.
Then again if "everyone in the West" can't define people on ethnic ground, and think that Tibetans don't exist, please, by all means stand by your principles and don't mention them ever again. We will understand.
As for your other claim that Kosovo was part of Yugoslavian Federation according to Yugoslavian constitution, I already adressed that.
You accept Badinter decision that Yugoslavia dissolved and that Croatia and Bosnia were not divisable. But you don't accept his decision that Serbia is also indivisable. You also accept his decision that Yugoslavian constitution should be disregarded, except in a part of it where Kosovo was part of Yugoslavian Federation. Again, part that Alexandra pointed out.
"First of all,Under 1974 Yugoslavia Constitution Kosovo enjoyed the status of an autonomous province of Yugoslavia, while being a constituent part of the Republic of Serbia.Which part of part of SERBIA you have hard time comprehending? "
So, we should, as you say, simply accept this legality based on Partial and selective recognition of Badinter's oppinion, and on partial and selective recognition of the constitution of former Yugoslavia? And that's what making it legal?
In the same time we should disregard number of "irelevant" legal considerations such as UN Charter, Helsinki Final Act, Montevideo Agreement, (and yes - Badinter's decision), UN 1244 Resolution, and about half of dozen of other international laws and treaties?
I doubt that even creators of this legal scheme think of it as legal, Nik. Legal is legal and law could and should be implemented everywhere. Why did we have so many Western leaders then, lining up to tell everybody that this cannot be used as precedent?
In plain English - "Should anyone ever try to use those legal arguments that we are using now, we will be the first ones to tell him to have his head cheked"
What, then, makes you such a believer that this is all legal?
"the Albanians of Kosovo that managed better to persuade the Western community that there was no ethnic seperatism involved," you say.
And I am well aware Nik that there is this story going around in the West for years. In this story nobody was a separatist or nationalist except the Serbs, everyone else was commited to creation of multi-ethnic, multi-cultural state. Serbs being nationalistic separatist caused all the trouble in former Yugoslavia. I only don't know how do they explain conflict in Macedonia, there was no Serbs involved?
And those who wanted to leave Yugoslavia were somehow not separatists, while those who wanted to stay were "etnoseparatists". Or in Kosovo's case, Serbia. Somehow those who want to separate are not separatists, and those who don't want to separate are.
We should also "understand" that people are territorial definition, therfore, "Kosovar" people engaged in self-inflicted ethnic cleansing after 1999 when they started throwing out other "Kosovars" and burning Kosovar churches, etc.
And one more thing, Nik.
"Sreten is right claiming that the Croats were wrong in degrading the status of the Serbs and firing them from thir jobs. Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal."
Shouldn't you be also saying that while what you called " encroachment against the authonomy of Kosovo" is reprihensible, but when KLA started firing bullets it was criminal? Or firing bullets wasn't criminal if fired by the "right" side? I think that you should be saying that, Nik. If for no other reason, next time when you start a debate (as you did last week) with sentence ""I am amazed of the fact that the Serb nationalists always believe in double standarts.", you will sound much more beliavable, then simply to repeat on every issue favorit mantra that Serbs are quilty of everything.

And when Serbia shows that it has accepted all this in earnest, it will be amazed how quickly it will regain respect!
Well, I am the one that can't accept this. I can't just close my eyes and pretend that all this is true.
You go ahead, Nik. Most people involved with handling of affairs in former Yugoslavia seemed to be doing so with their eyes closed, so you won't be the only one. Then we all wonder why are the things so dark in the Balkan. But, closing eyes doesn't make darkness go away.

Sreten you are too patient with this ( Nik.He is arguing about right of Kosovo to be independent from Serbia , but fails to see Kosovo's sovereignty is a fiction: real power lies with EU officials backed by Western firepower.

The European Union plans to send some 2,000 officials to Kosovo to take over from the United Nations, which has governed the province since 1999. It wants to appoint an International Civilian Representative who – according to the plan drawn up last year by Martti Ahtisaari, the UN envoy – will be the "final authority" in Kosovo with the power to "correct or annul decisions by the Kosovo public authorities". Kosovo would have had more real independence under the terms Belgrade offered it than it will now.

Those who support the sort of "polyvalent sovereignty" and "postnational statehood" that we already have in the EU welcome such arrangements as a respite from the harsh decisionism of post-Westphalian statehood. But such fictions are in fact always underpinned by the timeless realities of brute power. There are 16,000 Nato troops in Kosovo and they have no intention of coming home: indeed, they are even now being reinforced with 1,000 extra troops from Britain. They, not the Kosovo army, are responsible for the province's internal and external security.

Kosovo is also home to the vast US military base Camp Bondsteel, near Urosevac – a mini-Guantánamo that is only one in an archipelago of new US bases in eastern Europe, the Balkans and central Asia. This is why the Serbian prime minister, Vojislav Kostunica, speaking on Sunday, specifically attacked Washington for the Kosovo proclamation, saying that it showed that the US was "ready to unscrupulously and violently jeopardise international order for the sake of its own military interests".

In order to symbolise its status as the newest Euro-Atlantic colony, Kosovo has chosen a flag modelled on that of Bosnia-Herzegovina – the same EU gold, the same arrangement of stars on a blue background. For Bosnia, too, is governed by a foreign high representative, who has the power to sack elected politicians and annul laws, all in the name of preparing the country for EU integration.

As in Bosnia, billions have been poured into Kosovo to pay for the international administration but not to improve the lives of ordinary people. Kosovo is a sump of poverty and corruption, both of which have exploded since 1999, and its inhabitants have eked out their lives for nine years now in a mafia state where there are no jobs and not even a proper electricity supply: every few hours there are power cuts, and the streets of Kosovo's towns explode in a whirring din as every shop and home switches on its generator.

This tragic situation is made possible only because there is a fatal disconnect in all interventionism between power and responsibility. The international community has micro-managed every aspect of the break-up of Yugoslavia since the EU brokered the Brioni agreement within days of the war in Slovenia in July 1991. Yet it has always blamed the locals for the results. Today, the new official government of Kosovo will be controlled by its international patrons, but they will similarly never accept accountability for its failings. They prefer instead to govern behind the scenes, in the dangerous – and no doubt deliberate – gap between appearance and reality.

"Yet firing people from their jobs is reprihensible, firing bullets is criminal. "

Bit like Slobodan Milosevic firing Albanians from their jobs (reprihensible) and the KLA then firing bullets (criminal)??

No? Don't agree? Are you about to say that this is a "different" situation?

Once again, Serbs seem to be judged by seperate rules - this is not acceptable EVER if you want real peace.

Your arguments are interesting Nik, but just don't stack up.

I cannot agree with you Nik.
"All that has nothing to do with denying cultural rights. But they are mostly INDIVIDUAL." you say.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/16/tibet.unrest/index.html

"The Dalai Lama on Sunday called for an international probe of China's treatment of Tibet, which he said is causing "cultural genocide" of his people." in this CNN article.
Tibetans as individuals are not any more deprived of rights then any other Chinese citizens. Chine is, simply, not very generous when it comes to individual rights of anybody. Period. And concern about Tibetan rights is very much about denial of their cultural rights, not individual. Thus, "cultural genocide" etc.
But, I don't want to argue about this. As you said, the real question is "What to do next?"
"The "administrative" borders within Yugoslavia have turned into internationally recognized ones. But if the interntionally recognized borders in Europe turn into "administrative" ones, the cirle will be closed."
Another mind-boggling enigma that defies common sense. Instead of supporting Yugoslavia by all means, those who wanted to separate were given all the support. Process of separation continues. Latest example was on February 17th this year. Is there some project "Creating borderless society through introduction of new international borders" in effect? I'm sure that this makes sense to Westerns to whom those who want to SEPARATE from the country are not SEPARATISTS, but those who want to stay are.
And everyone is saying that Serbs should simply accept this as it doesn't even matter, borders in united Europe will be less important, etc. One big flaw in this tactic is that it's aimed only at the Serbs. Shouldn't you be telling the same things to Albanians in Kosovo?
"Listen guys. Borders in Europe will not matter. We don't see any need for creating another one , and setting a dangerous precedent (while pretending that it isn't) to create any new international borders. Take a wide autonomy and live with it."
Or go to Sarajevo and try to peruade Silajdzic to give independence to Serb entity. Why not? The new border would soon turn "administrative" again, and circle will be closed. Serbs will accept this, no problem.
But as it is, Serbs should be "reasonable" while all others shouldn't. It's not going to sell.
Question "What next?" brings us finally to Montgomery's article that I want to make a comment on.
After reading Montgomery's oppinion one very charming lady from Canada, gifted with deep comprehension of political issues and with keen sense of political currents, made a private comment. She said that article is good, only this "throwing a football" analogy looks to her more like "throwing a boomerang".
I share this oppinion completely.
"Boris Tadić won the recent Serbian Presidential Election because he was successful in framing it as a referendum on "the European path or Isolation." This led to a very high voter turnout and ultimately an uncomfortably narrow victory for President Tadić and the "pro-European" forces.

Unfortunately for DS/G17 Plus, polling shows that this strategy has not (at least thus far) been nearly as effective in the current campaign for the May 11 Parliamentary elections. The electorate seems to be ignoring this either-or scenario and inclined to vote along traditional party lines."
This is the only statement in your article that I somewhat disagree with. Most people do see this elections as referendum on " the European path". But, there is a very significant change in political circumstances compared to recent Presidential elections. Day after Presidential elections Kosovo declared independence. This was not unexpected. While EU itself could not reach a concensus on recognition of Kosovo, it was left to individual countries to do so. Most of them decided to recognize Kosovo's declaration of independence, creating an impression in Serbia that EU is supporting Kosovo's independence (while EU itself actually isn't). Furthermore, EULEX, as European mission (not the mission of individual countries that recognized Kosovo's independence) went to Kosovo. Another signal that EU supports Kosovo's "supervised" independence. One has to take oppinion polls taken in Serbia as indicator of electoral will. Every major poll of political oppinion in Serbia show very strong support for European intergration. It's been sliding in past few years slightly, as some people appearantly, reached a conclusion that such "marriage" couldn't work due to "inreconciable differences" in oppinions. Mr. Montgomery wrote about it few weeks ago, when he mentioned that "one should not assume that Serbs are subscribed to American view of history". I think that debate between Nik and myself in last two weeks would be a good example of it. Support have been sliding slightly, but it's still very strong. For a past few years now, on question would they still support European integrations if they should give up Kosovo for it, even greater majority of the people answered that they wouldn't. And that is preciselly why Tadic was wrong to go into this elections presenting it as referendum on European integrations. In a light of new political circumstances he should not have assumed that just because people are overwhelmingly supportive of European integrations would be the same if European integration is perceived as giving up on Kosovo. And that lead to poor showing of DS in the polls.
To try to turn things around Tadic then threw this "Hail Marry" pass. So far, it really seems that he have thrown a boomerang, and for several reasons.
You pointed out some of them.
"There are several problems with this "Hail Mary" strategy, however:

-The European Union has been so blatant about its preferences in the upcoming election and its motivations in offering the SAA that it has, at least among some Serbs, become counter-productive. It has become a campaign issue itself.

-Both the "visa map" and the SAA will have conditions and requirements attached to them, which make their actual implementation problematic. This will rob them of a lot of their value. "
First one, that it's been seen simply as an attempt to interfere with Serbian elections. Then again, most of voters did expect that EU will try to send "strong signal" in support of "pro-European" forces. This signal could have been sent without signing of SAA agreement, and by choosing to do it this way was a very bad strategy, in my view. Second one, that signing the of the agreement will not have any benefit in forseeable future has another dimension to it. Many have wondered why such a hurry to have it signed before the elections as its implementantion and potential benefit from it lies far down the road at best case scenario?
As I said, to send a signal that EU would like to have Serbia inside of it, could have been sent in many ways. "Visa map" is not a problem, for example. Inclusion of SAA was a very bad decision.
Signing of the SAA agreement is the very issue that lead to the fall of the government and reason for these elections. Rulling politcal coallition fell apart unable to reach an agreement on this issue. The only way out was to call an elections, and let voters decide. Now, Tadic decided to sign it, before voters had a chance to give their oppinion on the matter, leaving an impression that he couldn't care less what voters in Serbia think about it, and that only thing that matters to him is what EU thinks about it. In the same time he refused to bring to the conclusion some of the issues that were agreed upon, before the coallition fell apart, like energy deal with Russia, saying that caretaker government should not be doing that. All this lead to raise of a suspicion especially among undecided voters. Why this urgency, when SAA agreement isn't going to benefit anyone in Serbia, any time soon, anyway? Especially as it si "caretaker" government on all other issues? Is there more to it then only signal in support of Serbia's pro-European forces? I think that there is some awareness of this growing suspicion in EU, and that this is the reason behind statements of many EU officials that SAA agreement has nothing to do with Kosovo, EULEX, etc.
There were few opposite statements, too.
http://www.politika.co.yu/rubrike/Svet/SSP-omogucava-lakshi-ulazak-Euleksa-na-Kosovo.lt.html
Unfortunatelly, it's not in English. It's interview with top Slovenian diplomat, Dimitrij Rupel on May 5th, published in Serbian daily "Politika". He said quite a few things in this interview, but one remark made it into a title.
"SSP omogućava lakši ulazak Euleksa na Kosovo" ( "SAA allowes for easier introduction of EULEX in Kosovo")
In text he said that "...SSP omogućava lakšu penetraciju snaga Euleksa na Kosovu kroz nove, kreativne interpretacije rezolucije 1244 SB UN." ("... SAA allowes for easier penetration of Eulex forces in Kosovo through new, creative interpretations of resolution 1244 of SC UN.")
Given that Eulex is there to implement "supervised independence" this won't play well in Serbia, and it will make at least some voters even more suspicios of SAA agreement. Ones again, it seems that Tadic attempted "Hail Mary" pass with the boomerang.
"While it is correct that Koštunica and the Radicals would probably have ended up opposing the SAA and "visa map" in any case, the timing of the offers made this a certainty and the rhetoric used will make it much harder for these individuals and parties to ever reverse course. This has to have an impact on Serbian relations with the EU, regardless of what happens in the coming elections. "
Very good observation. Serbian relations with the EU were on down-spiral for a while, just to be seriously aggravated recently by Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independece, and recognition of it by majority of EU countries. To that we can probably add this "Hail Mary" pass, unless, by some, chance it works. The end result of it will probably be Serbia and EU driffting further apart. Unfortunatelly, as this isn't what EU wants, and according to the polls, it's not what majority of people in Serbia would want either.

What is the point, folks, of writing such a long letters, when the most important news Montgomery gives us is, the demise of the EU darling DS+Seventeen Dwarfs coalition.
It is Kaput and let's drink to that.

Alexandra, thank you so much for
this chronological historical data- I have never seen more comprehensible text about the historical conflict between the Serbs and the Albanians.
I've learned a lot from it...
It is scary though to note how Nacism played a role in repeatedly helping Great Albania project get off the ground and especially considering the hatred and historical revanshism that in Europe exists against Serbs but also Russians (only against Russians they cannot win).
I have this feeling already for long that in present day Europe, namely EU, Fashism is more alive than ever.
Only now it took another even more frightening face: the monster with many heads of the EU countries (but lead and directed by the Germans, Brits
Dutch, Belgiums etc. united).
So this new Europe
has crowned itself with the pearl, inauguration of "Independent Kosovo State".
UGHHH

I wouldn't be taking space in a debate that is not really related to an article. You could write to me directly if you wish at pacimbum@hotmail.com
Same goes for anyone else that would like to write to me. Thanks.

@Nik: the dissolution of Czecheslovakia did involve some minor border changes. The leaders involved did look at the ethnic composition and did have referenda in villages were the situation was not clear. In my opnion the guidelines for borderchanges are clear: don't do it and if you have to do it do it in a fair way. The Badinter commission with its fixed borders ignored this rule and pushed Yugoslavia in the abyss. They should be exposed as frauds and not be quoted like saints.

Ah, ex-Ambassador Montgomery. Once again you hit upon an excellent analogy to discuss the woes of the region. And once again you singularly fail to apply it appropriately. Shame.

The DS, not truly understanding the last minute/desperation nature of the 'hail mary' pass, chose to launch their bomb a few weeks back. It was when Sutanovac decided that discrediting Kostunica was the way to remove the DSS from the electoral scene - and hope to mop up more of the voters falling out than the SRS could. It failed. They chose to sow the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.

Your analogy would have been better portrayed by suggesting that the EU quarterback has just launched his bomb in the vain hope that it will give the edge to the DS. As you rightly point out, it looks to be failing and is also likely to be counter-productive.

Serbia's choice isn't Europe or isolation, it's East or West.

The West made choices on March 24th and February 17th, and Serbia will have to make its choice on May 11th.

Does Serbia want to pursue friendship with the nations who attacked it 1999 and supported the theft of its territory in 2008? Or does Serbia have a brighter future if it adopts an Eastern orientation and ties its future to the growing economic and military strength of friendly Eastern nations like Russia, India, and China.

Serbia has friends, they just aren't in the West. The EU and the Americans can go to Hell. Serbia should only pursue friendship with nations who are friendly towards it. Nations who attacked Serbia and support the theft of Kosovo deserve nothing but Serbia's contempt -- isolation from those nations would be a great blessing.