Georgia and Kosovo: A single intertwined crisis

Excellent article, and a clear argument that beneath all the rhetorical bluster and visual spectacle that is the West, it is led either by a bunch of bumbling incompetents who are blinded by their own self-inflated sense of importance, or by a group of sycophantic megalomaniacs who feel some justification of acting as bailiff, judge, and juror over the lives of others. Either way, we are led by individuals who should never be given that much power and influence. The fact that the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and Serbia was in many cases a planned policy of many foreign interests from the beginning negates all efforts at justifying any of their actions as falling within any legal or moral grounds.

Albano

You need to check your history. Before the Slavic migration in the 6th century, there was NO Catholic church around to build anything in the Balkans. The only Church at the time was Constantine's church. The Great Schism occurred half a millenium later, so it's literally IMPOSSIBLE for Catholic churches to have preceded the Slavic migration.

"Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Priština to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory.”"

this sentence pretty much says it all. that´s the future-direction.

not only the Shanghai-states are against the illegal puppet-entity, now with Indonesia even an important muslim state has joined the phalanx of defenders of international law.

I would recommend the K-albanians to make use of their autonomy quite carefully and to take care about the Serbs in the southern serbian province and to protect them.

Ron, if 800,000 Albanians were ethnically cleansed from Kosovo then how come the Albanian population of Kosovo is 90% while Serbian only 10%.

It was 200,000 K-Serbs who were ethnically cleansed under the noses of NATO and nobody wants to mention that fact except journalists like John Pilger who has the guts to tell the truth no matter how unpopular the truth is in the west.

The more you talk about ethnic cleaninsing of Albanians from Kosovo the more ridiculous you sound. The figures are so over inflated and there is not one bit of evidence to support your claim. Experts have been over that are and I am still waiting for the proof of mass graves, exterminations of Albanians etc.
One question only reimains.
How come there are 90% Albanians in a place where they were ethnically cleansed from?

Extremely well put. NATO has gone beyond their initial purpose. Good for Russia! I hope th erest of the world sees what NATO is doing.

Nice article. However, it has it wrong when it comes to the negotiations. Ahtisaari has made it clear that he started the negotiations with the principle that Kosovo should never again come under Serbian rule. Besides that he adopted the Contact Group principles that among others forbade a partition of Kosovo. According to him the only thing to negotiate was the position of the Serbs in Kosovo. But in fact his "principles" put the Serb delegation in a negotiation position without any power so that were delivered to whatever the Albanians and their American friends wanted to offer.

The final outcome - the Ahtisaari Plan - looks nice on paper. But in lawless Kosovo all its guarantees don't mean very much. And Ahtisaari refused to include stronger guarantees like autonomous areas.

It would have been better when the international community had accepted Belgrade's Finland proposal and dropped all those "principles". That would have put the Albanians in a position where they had something to loose and would have provoked real negotiations.

Not a bad article, although it leavs much to be desired. It has it wrong on peace negotiations as Wim noticed. But, it has it wrong on other things too.
Here is one example.

"Arguing that something between crimes against humanity and genocide was under way - and citing reports that between 10,000 and 100,000 Kosovo Albanians were missing or had been killed - NATO launched a campaign designed to stop the killings."

Not true at all. They launched campaigne first, on pretext that Serbia refused to sign military occupation, called Rambulliet Agreement. There was no refugees until well into a bombing campaigne. Then NATO started claiming 10,000 and 100,000, etc. and quickly named war "humanitarian" - to stop the killing and return refugees home.

"They did not, however, find that mass murder on the order of the numbers claimed had taken place."

At least guys from Stratfor know that much.

Not the first time, though.
Dec 20 2007

http://www.b92.net/eng/insight/opinions.php?nav_id=46346

"...and later that 10,000 had been killed and bodies were being dissolved in acid. The post-war analysis never revealed any atrocities on this order of magnitude."

And there are other things too. But, nevermind that now.

To Veton Rugova.

I can never stop being amazed with people like yourself, who base their oppinion only on what "reputable" people do or "approve of".

" The independence of Kosova was strongly supported within hours by the United States and reputable European Union countries, while the reaction we have seen with the case of the independence of Georgia's territories has been very disapproving."

There you have it. Judgement is there.
I'm sure that in your oppinion bombing of hospitals in Serbia in 1999 was not a war crime, because it was done by United States and "reputable European Union countries"

Who needs things like Geneva Conventions, etc. when we could simply be all like Veton Rugova and a lot of his "compatriots", and base our oppinions solely on what somebody approves of or not.

Cultivate your own oppinion, Veton. Thinking for yourselfv doesn't hurt.

But, the truth is that situation in Central Asia is more complicated, with lots of powers having their say.
This is from "China Daily"

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-08/28/content_6978391.htm

Shanghai group meeting opened yesterday (coincidence?).

Shaghai group is comprised of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Mongolia, Pakistan, Iran and India are observers of the organization. Organization doesn't make it a great secret that it wants to be major player in energy distribution out of Central Asia, and it will be something that will have to be taken into account.

It's going to be interesting to see how things develope from here.

Ah, Stratfor, I remember their 1999 analysis of Kosovo, in which they claimed that within few months, K-Albanians will launch attacks against NATO and UN forces deployed there. I also remember their "expert" knowledge that Kosovo will become a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism. At one moment I was sure Stratfor will say that some K-Albanian killed Kennedy.

Anyway. Kosovo crisis begun in 1981, not late 1999. Kosovo Albanians had already launched several uprisings before, such as in 1945, so to claim that they have arrived to Kosovo is ridiculous. Stratfor should also take into account the Cubrilovic program of expulsion of Albanians to Turley, just so we can have a clear picture of who was where in the course of time.

In anaslysing the war in Kosovo, Stratfor places focus on crimes committed against Albanians, practically implying that "eh, too bad, not enough Albanians were slaughtered", but shrewdly ignores the number of K-Albanians ethnicaly cleansed from their land (over 800.000). That, for Stratfor, is an irrelevant detail.

Stratfor also deliberatelty ignores the fact that then Prime Minister of Russian Chernomyrdin was, along with Ahtisaari, meeting Milosevic to stop the hostilities in Kosovo. So, Russia WAS involved in the crisis.

The war did not go as well as history records, says Stratfor. What history? Serbia got defeated in 5 months and Milosevic was overthrown by US assisted OTPOR some more than a year later.

I can go on and on commenting this ludicrous quazy-analysis, but then - I expect nothing else from Stratfor.

I mean, what could one say about the claim that Kosovo set the stage for the rise of Putin.

And here we were all told earlier that it was Chechnya that launched Putin on the world scene.

Russian hegemonic plan is being implemented in face of the scepticism of the EU and the United States, with the latter being focused on the internal elections for the White House.
By manipulating with the Kosova case and by presenting Kosova, through unmatched propaganda, as a world precedent, Moscow staged the foretold play with Georgia's separatist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Following a sudden occupation of the Georgina territory by the Russian troops, those two provinces declared their independences, and Russia rushed to recognize them. On the other hand, the international community has immediately expressed disagreement with such a policy of Russia.
But, has Kosova's independence produced real effects on the Russia-Georgia conflict?
In fact the pretext was excellent for Moscow, but the reality is completely different.
The independence of Kosova was strongly supported within hours by the United States and reputable European Union countries, while the reaction we have seen with the case of the independence of Georgia's territories has been very disapproving.
This international stance suggests immediate isolation and refusal to recognize those two unsustainable countries created solely as a result of Russia's expansionist policy.
After the recognition by Russia of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, it will be interesting to see Serbia's position, which has not recognized Kosova yet. Now after those two separatist regions seceded from Georgia and after they were recognized by Russia, Belgrade will be left without a key argument it has continuously used. Now it will be easier for them to recognize us as a state. But, at the same time there is fear with regard to the unstable north of Kosova. With its policies, Serbia may provoke extremist activities, and one should not rule out efforts for secession of that part of Kosova. For this reason the international community and Kosova institutions should be very cautious and efficient in the north of the country.
We should not allow South Ossetia and Abkhazia happen in Kosova. In such a case the consequences would go beyond the Republic of Kosova borders.

When I divorced my wife, we had a big house. It had a seperate styaircase, so the court gave one floor to her and one to me. They were easily turned into separate apartments. In theory, she the kids and her new husband could live in her apartment, my new wife and I - in the other. The law alowed it. But there are other, unwitten laws of life that made this impossible. So I had to abandone my apartment in benefit of my children and go into debt to buy a new home.
Serbia had all legal rights to cling on to Kosovo. But in reallity the K. Albanians were to many, too different, indeed too hostile to remain within one body politic with the Serbs. So a negotiated divorce was the only solution. Painful as it may be! Serbian governments stonewalled all demands for independence betting only on legal grounds. Did they really imegine living happily ever after with the K.Albanians under one roof.
The promises made by NATO and EU for fast track accession as a reward for solving the Kosovo problem also failed. So the West had little choice. Eather to isolate the whole Western Balkan region, or to accept the questionable UDI.
The Russians responded. It should have been wxpected. What choice did they have. Eastern Europeans were offered integration with the West. But the Western leaders after 1989 never had a good idea what to do with Russia?

Precisely Veton, you are rightfully concerned about a major conflagration around Mitrovica, and other areas where Serbs are oppressed and are being cleansed from their historic towns.

The fact is that the Siptar hand has been played fully, and the moral cause rests with the Serbs now. Justice always wins.

I know exactly how the future will play out.

"..In the late 1990s, a crisis began to develop in the Serbian province of Kosovo. Over the years, Albanians had moved into the province in a broad migration. By 1997, the province was overwhelmingly Albanian, although it had not only been historically part of Serbia but also its historical foundation. Nevertheless, the Albanians showed significant intentions of moving toward either a separate state or unification with Albania. Serbia moved to resist this, increasing its military forces and indicating an intention to crush the Albanian resistance."

If the albanians migrated to Kosova, then just tell me from where the serbs came to Ballkan? According to your theorie, when serbs moved from Dracula's land, there was nobody around?
I dont know who wrote this story, however it is very wrong, because if you look older maps, much older then the time of slavic migration on the Ballkan, you will see it that those areas were allready populated, there were no more place for serbs around, so if you are a scientis, writer or whatever you might be get an archeological team together go to Kosova , even further north and you will find more evidence then you need, to prove yourself that those landsw were eagle lands, not the slavic lands, check the formation of old building churches ( which you so proudly claim to be serbian ) and you will see that they were builded by catholics and not orthodox, there are some chnges on that, but as an occupator, even if serbs tryed to destroy history, they could not make it, history can't be destroyed.

I don't know on what data some people base their conention that migration changed the ethnic composition of Kosovo; there is no such evidence. To the contrary there is evidence that the only people that contnously lived in Kosovo were the Albanians. The rest of contentions are just that, contentions, that are hard to support.

Bill

I don't know on what data some people base their conention that migration changed the ethnic composition of Kosovo; there is no such evidence. To the contrary there is evidence that the only people that contnously lived in Kosovo were the Albanians. The rest of contentions are just that, contentions, that are hard to support.

Bill

Sreten,
As always you are very knowlageble but you miss the big Dilema. The world is once again getting divided and Serbia

must choose fast where it belongs!In the East tha state is keeping its primate, in the West the citizen's rights are

about to go far beyond the national borders. If Serbia chooses the East, it will preserve its sovereignity in a much

larger degree, but it will be an isolated outpost, with strictly controled borders. If it chooses the West, it would

loose,indeed share, much of it's sovereignity, its borders will be diluted. In the first case it will be a

landlocked enclave, in the second Serbs will roam free from the Black Sea to the Atlantic, eventually beyond!
Many Serbs don't see how the Kosovo war and its UDI fits with those lofty principles?
Well, they do.
wor is considered to be the continuation of politics by other means. Only when those means are exhausted, war is

permisible.
The Kosovars by a large majority, over 90% majority demanded independance. Had this been the desire of a small

minority of them, no matter how violent, the West would have stood firm by Serbia's side.But mo matter what

political means the Kosovo's majority population used, the Serbian side, using legal mumbo-jumbo, sounding in the

ears of the K. Albanians the same way as the claims of king Goerge III sounded to the 13 American colonies, blocked

the politiocal solution.
Some may say: Why accept independence as the only political solution? Why not a wide ranged autonomy. Why not blame

the K.Albanians for blocking a potential political solution by their declaration that they would accept independence

and nothing else!
As a get tired of explaining, independence, painful as it may be offers a solution. Keeping the two communities that

hate each other's guts under tha same roof is only a prelude to more and more problems. Divorce is certainly a bad

thing, but if there are irrecoverable differences, every judge will grant divorce.
Is the situation if Abkhazia and South Ossetia any different?
May be not. Both abkhazians and South Ossetians lived fore decades in a big country where the Russian language was

the main meanse of communication. May be they found it rediculous to end up in a small Georgian language country.

Were the Georgians right to try to reassert their sovereignity?? Yes, at least in the case of Abhazia, there was a

Georgian speaking majority before 1992.
one way or the other, the Georgeans had to be smart enough to realise that their great goal, to become part of the

West required some sacrifices - letting the two provinces go!

"..In the late 1990s, a crisis began to develop in the Serbian province of Kosovo. Over the years, Albanians had moved into the province in a broad migration. By 1997, the province was overwhelmingly Albanian, although it had not only been historically part of Serbia but also its historical foundation. Nevertheless, the Albanians showed significant intentions of moving toward either a separate state or unification with Albania. Serbia moved to resist this, increasing its military forces and indicating an intention to crush the Albanian resistance."

If the albanians migrated to Kosova, then just tell me from where the serbs came to Ballkan? According to your theorie, when serbs moved from Dracula's land, there was nobody around?
I dont know who wrote this story, however it is very wrong, because if you look older maps, much older then the time of slavic migration on the Ballkan, you will see it that those areas were allready populated, there were no more place for serbs around, so if you are a scientis, writer or whatever you might be get an archeological team together go to Kosova , even further north and you will find more evidence then you need, to prove yourself that those landsw were eagle lands, not the slavic lands, check the formation of old building churches ( which you so proudly claim to be serbian ) and you will see that they were builded by catholics and not orthodox, there are some chnges on that, but as an occupator, even if serbs tryed to destroy history, they could not make it, history can't be destroyed.

I don't know on what data some people base their conention that migration changed the ethnic composition of Kosovo; there is no such evidence. To the contrary there is evidence that the only people that contnously lived in Kosovo were the Albanians. The rest of contentions are just that, contentions, that are hard to support.

Bill

Ah, Stratfor, I remember their 1999 analysis of Kosovo, in which they claimed that within few months, K-Albanians will launch attacks against NATO and UN forces deployed there. I also remember their "expert" knowledge that Kosovo will become a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism. At one moment I was sure Stratfor will say that some K-Albanian killed Kennedy.

Anyway. Kosovo crisis begun in 1981, not late 1999. Kosovo Albanians had already launched several uprisings before, such as in 1945, so to claim that they have arrived to Kosovo is ridiculous. Stratfor should also take into account the Cubrilovic program of expulsion of Albanians to Turley, just so we can have a clear picture of who was where in the course of time.

In anaslysing the war in Kosovo, Stratfor places focus on crimes committed against Albanians, practically implying that "eh, too bad, not enough Albanians were slaughtered", but shrewdly ignores the number of K-Albanians ethnicaly cleansed from their land (over 800.000). That, for Stratfor, is an irrelevant detail.

Stratfor also deliberatelty ignores the fact that then Prime Minister of Russian Chernomyrdin was, along with Ahtisaari, meeting Milosevic to stop the hostilities in Kosovo. So, Russia WAS involved in the crisis.

The war did not go as well as history records, says Stratfor. What history? Serbia got defeated in 5 months and Milosevic was overthrown by US assisted OTPOR some more than a year later.

I can go on and on commenting this ludicrous quazy-analysis, but then - I expect nothing else from Stratfor.

I mean, what could one say about the claim that Kosovo set the stage for the rise of Putin.

And here we were all told earlier that it was Chechnya that launched Putin on the world scene.

I don't know on what data some people base their conention that migration changed the ethnic composition of Kosovo; there is no such evidence. To the contrary there is evidence that the only people that contnously lived in Kosovo were the Albanians. The rest of contentions are just that, contentions, that are hard to support.

Bill

Precisely Veton, you are rightfully concerned about a major conflagration around Mitrovica, and other areas where Serbs are oppressed and are being cleansed from their historic towns.

The fact is that the Siptar hand has been played fully, and the moral cause rests with the Serbs now. Justice always wins.

I know exactly how the future will play out.

When I divorced my wife, we had a big house. It had a seperate styaircase, so the court gave one floor to her and one to me. They were easily turned into separate apartments. In theory, she the kids and her new husband could live in her apartment, my new wife and I - in the other. The law alowed it. But there are other, unwitten laws of life that made this impossible. So I had to abandone my apartment in benefit of my children and go into debt to buy a new home.
Serbia had all legal rights to cling on to Kosovo. But in reallity the K. Albanians were to many, too different, indeed too hostile to remain within one body politic with the Serbs. So a negotiated divorce was the only solution. Painful as it may be! Serbian governments stonewalled all demands for independence betting only on legal grounds. Did they really imegine living happily ever after with the K.Albanians under one roof.
The promises made by NATO and EU for fast track accession as a reward for solving the Kosovo problem also failed. So the West had little choice. Eather to isolate the whole Western Balkan region, or to accept the questionable UDI.
The Russians responded. It should have been wxpected. What choice did they have. Eastern Europeans were offered integration with the West. But the Western leaders after 1989 never had a good idea what to do with Russia?

"Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Priština to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory.”"

this sentence pretty much says it all. that´s the future-direction.

not only the Shanghai-states are against the illegal puppet-entity, now with Indonesia even an important muslim state has joined the phalanx of defenders of international law.

I would recommend the K-albanians to make use of their autonomy quite carefully and to take care about the Serbs in the southern serbian province and to protect them.

Extremely well put. NATO has gone beyond their initial purpose. Good for Russia! I hope th erest of the world sees what NATO is doing.

Nice article. However, it has it wrong when it comes to the negotiations. Ahtisaari has made it clear that he started the negotiations with the principle that Kosovo should never again come under Serbian rule. Besides that he adopted the Contact Group principles that among others forbade a partition of Kosovo. According to him the only thing to negotiate was the position of the Serbs in Kosovo. But in fact his "principles" put the Serb delegation in a negotiation position without any power so that were delivered to whatever the Albanians and their American friends wanted to offer.

The final outcome - the Ahtisaari Plan - looks nice on paper. But in lawless Kosovo all its guarantees don't mean very much. And Ahtisaari refused to include stronger guarantees like autonomous areas.

It would have been better when the international community had accepted Belgrade's Finland proposal and dropped all those "principles". That would have put the Albanians in a position where they had something to loose and would have provoked real negotiations.

Excellent article, and a clear argument that beneath all the rhetorical bluster and visual spectacle that is the West, it is led either by a bunch of bumbling incompetents who are blinded by their own self-inflated sense of importance, or by a group of sycophantic megalomaniacs who feel some justification of acting as bailiff, judge, and juror over the lives of others. Either way, we are led by individuals who should never be given that much power and influence. The fact that the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and Serbia was in many cases a planned policy of many foreign interests from the beginning negates all efforts at justifying any of their actions as falling within any legal or moral grounds.

Albano

You need to check your history. Before the Slavic migration in the 6th century, there was NO Catholic church around to build anything in the Balkans. The only Church at the time was Constantine's church. The Great Schism occurred half a millenium later, so it's literally IMPOSSIBLE for Catholic churches to have preceded the Slavic migration.

Ron, if 800,000 Albanians were ethnically cleansed from Kosovo then how come the Albanian population of Kosovo is 90% while Serbian only 10%.

It was 200,000 K-Serbs who were ethnically cleansed under the noses of NATO and nobody wants to mention that fact except journalists like John Pilger who has the guts to tell the truth no matter how unpopular the truth is in the west.

The more you talk about ethnic cleaninsing of Albanians from Kosovo the more ridiculous you sound. The figures are so over inflated and there is not one bit of evidence to support your claim. Experts have been over that are and I am still waiting for the proof of mass graves, exterminations of Albanians etc.
One question only reimains.
How come there are 90% Albanians in a place where they were ethnically cleansed from?

Russian hegemonic plan is being implemented in face of the scepticism of the EU and the United States, with the latter being focused on the internal elections for the White House.
By manipulating with the Kosova case and by presenting Kosova, through unmatched propaganda, as a world precedent, Moscow staged the foretold play with Georgia's separatist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Following a sudden occupation of the Georgina territory by the Russian troops, those two provinces declared their independences, and Russia rushed to recognize them. On the other hand, the international community has immediately expressed disagreement with such a policy of Russia.
But, has Kosova's independence produced real effects on the Russia-Georgia conflict?
In fact the pretext was excellent for Moscow, but the reality is completely different.
The independence of Kosova was strongly supported within hours by the United States and reputable European Union countries, while the reaction we have seen with the case of the independence of Georgia's territories has been very disapproving.
This international stance suggests immediate isolation and refusal to recognize those two unsustainable countries created solely as a result of Russia's expansionist policy.
After the recognition by Russia of South Ossetia, Abkhazia, it will be interesting to see Serbia's position, which has not recognized Kosova yet. Now after those two separatist regions seceded from Georgia and after they were recognized by Russia, Belgrade will be left without a key argument it has continuously used. Now it will be easier for them to recognize us as a state. But, at the same time there is fear with regard to the unstable north of Kosova. With its policies, Serbia may provoke extremist activities, and one should not rule out efforts for secession of that part of Kosova. For this reason the international community and Kosova institutions should be very cautious and efficient in the north of the country.
We should not allow South Ossetia and Abkhazia happen in Kosova. In such a case the consequences would go beyond the Republic of Kosova borders.

Not a bad article, although it leavs much to be desired. It has it wrong on peace negotiations as Wim noticed. But, it has it wrong on other things too.
Here is one example.

"Arguing that something between crimes against humanity and genocide was under way - and citing reports that between 10,000 and 100,000 Kosovo Albanians were missing or had been killed - NATO launched a campaign designed to stop the killings."

Not true at all. They launched campaigne first, on pretext that Serbia refused to sign military occupation, called Rambulliet Agreement. There was no refugees until well into a bombing campaigne. Then NATO started claiming 10,000 and 100,000, etc. and quickly named war "humanitarian" - to stop the killing and return refugees home.

"They did not, however, find that mass murder on the order of the numbers claimed had taken place."

At least guys from Stratfor know that much.

Not the first time, though.
Dec 20 2007

http://www.b92.net/eng/insight/opinions.php?nav_id=46346

"...and later that 10,000 had been killed and bodies were being dissolved in acid. The post-war analysis never revealed any atrocities on this order of magnitude."

And there are other things too. But, nevermind that now.

To Veton Rugova.

I can never stop being amazed with people like yourself, who base their oppinion only on what "reputable" people do or "approve of".

" The independence of Kosova was strongly supported within hours by the United States and reputable European Union countries, while the reaction we have seen with the case of the independence of Georgia's territories has been very disapproving."

There you have it. Judgement is there.
I'm sure that in your oppinion bombing of hospitals in Serbia in 1999 was not a war crime, because it was done by United States and "reputable European Union countries"

Who needs things like Geneva Conventions, etc. when we could simply be all like Veton Rugova and a lot of his "compatriots", and base our oppinions solely on what somebody approves of or not.

Cultivate your own oppinion, Veton. Thinking for yourselfv doesn't hurt.

But, the truth is that situation in Central Asia is more complicated, with lots of powers having their say.
This is from "China Daily"

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-08/28/content_6978391.htm

Shanghai group meeting opened yesterday (coincidence?).

Shaghai group is comprised of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Mongolia, Pakistan, Iran and India are observers of the organization. Organization doesn't make it a great secret that it wants to be major player in energy distribution out of Central Asia, and it will be something that will have to be taken into account.

It's going to be interesting to see how things develope from here.

Sreten,
As always you are very knowlageble but you miss the big Dilema. The world is once again getting divided and Serbia

must choose fast where it belongs!In the East tha state is keeping its primate, in the West the citizen's rights are

about to go far beyond the national borders. If Serbia chooses the East, it will preserve its sovereignity in a much

larger degree, but it will be an isolated outpost, with strictly controled borders. If it chooses the West, it would

loose,indeed share, much of it's sovereignity, its borders will be diluted. In the first case it will be a

landlocked enclave, in the second Serbs will roam free from the Black Sea to the Atlantic, eventually beyond!
Many Serbs don't see how the Kosovo war and its UDI fits with those lofty principles?
Well, they do.
wor is considered to be the continuation of politics by other means. Only when those means are exhausted, war is

permisible.
The Kosovars by a large majority, over 90% majority demanded independance. Had this been the desire of a small

minority of them, no matter how violent, the West would have stood firm by Serbia's side.But mo matter what

political means the Kosovo's majority population used, the Serbian side, using legal mumbo-jumbo, sounding in the

ears of the K. Albanians the same way as the claims of king Goerge III sounded to the 13 American colonies, blocked

the politiocal solution.
Some may say: Why accept independence as the only political solution? Why not a wide ranged autonomy. Why not blame

the K.Albanians for blocking a potential political solution by their declaration that they would accept independence

and nothing else!
As a get tired of explaining, independence, painful as it may be offers a solution. Keeping the two communities that

hate each other's guts under tha same roof is only a prelude to more and more problems. Divorce is certainly a bad

thing, but if there are irrecoverable differences, every judge will grant divorce.
Is the situation if Abkhazia and South Ossetia any different?
May be not. Both abkhazians and South Ossetians lived fore decades in a big country where the Russian language was

the main meanse of communication. May be they found it rediculous to end up in a small Georgian language country.

Were the Georgians right to try to reassert their sovereignity?? Yes, at least in the case of Abhazia, there was a

Georgian speaking majority before 1992.
one way or the other, the Georgeans had to be smart enough to realise that their great goal, to become part of the

West required some sacrifices - letting the two provinces go!