“Marty’s report devastating blow to Kosovo”

Why a blow? No, it only confirms the common public opinion about Kosovo, or, better, about its (re-)elected leaders. Their mafia and crime conenctions were known from files made by several foreign intelligence services. The organ harvesting thing is only the tip on the iceberg.

About election fraud: the only surprising thing is the blatant stupidity it has been done with. Even kids from school should know that it's impossible that 147% of the eligible voters casting the ballots ;-)

“If it is ever proven that Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, whom former British Prime Minister Tony Blair backed, was really a mafia boss, murderer and traded in human organs, then the history of the campaign for Kosovo's independence will have to be rewritten – and the gloss put on it by Blair will vanish,” he noted.
-
This is the reality kids. Kosovo's independence will have HAVE TO BE re-written. There was never a doubt about this, just patience everyone. These crime bosses in Kosovo will soon have there homes, and offices ransacked.

Tim Judah...blast from the past. Just like Misha Glenny, who also re-emerged recently. I wonder what these guys are doing for work these days?

Anyway, the last paragraph probably says it all. The West knew some bad (bleep) was going down but in true machiavellian fashion (not unusual in these situations, by the way -- recall that Jovica Stanisic was alleged to be on the CIA payroll), turned a blind eye in the interest of bringing at least a little less chaos to the region.

Serbs would certainly call this policy short-sighted, and they would be absolutely right, but what could they realistically expect?

One thing I've noticed over the years is that a lot of Serbs seem to think that they were entitled to have their cake and to eat it, too. In other words, that they could play such a major part in horrific ethnic conflicts in Europe (not Africa or Asia) and actually not expect outside parties to not just intervene, but to do so in flawless fashion. (I'm not even going to discuss the common Serbian accusation that these outside parties actually provoked war, because I view that as complete nonsense.)

Politicians, if nothing else, always seek the most expedient option. I hate to tell you, but Clinton and Blair had a lot on their plates (especially Clinton), and weren't willing to allow the Kosovo situation to go on endlessly. There was plenty of intelligence at that time to suggest that Milosevic was up to no good, and in fact, he'd been warned about his treatment of Albanians there by the Bush (Sr.) administration as far back as late 1992. Serbs were given chance after chance to lay off during 1998-1999 and simply refused to do so. NATO bombing had shown to be effective in the broader effort to get Serbs to sue for peace in BiH in 1995 and naturally remained an option for Kosovo. It presented minimum casualty risk for NATO forces and strong reassurance to citizens of NATO countries of the military might of the alliance. It also provided an opportunity to use some of the hardware produced by the multi-billion-dollar government contracting industry, but perhaps I'm being a tad bit cynical here.

In any case, bombing was a relatively quick and easy option -- and in just 78 days, forced Milosevic out. How many NATO forces were killed?

Similarly, the UNMIK cleanup process was guaranteed to be far from perfect because what UN missions are ever truly successful? There's alway political infighting (Russia and China pitted against the West on the Security Council), limited political will (especially when there is a major casualty risk), and hugely limited resources. Inefficiency guaranteed.

Could a bunch of UN troops -- most of whom probably had little sympathy for either side of the conflict -- truly be expected to challenge a bunch of well-entrenched KLA thugs? They couldn't get help from Serbian thugs because there weren't any left! Would guys like Clinton and Blair have tolerated the slaughter of their UN forces?

Of course they settled for the status quo. They probably hoped conditions would quickly get better, too, but weren't truly focused on leading efforts to make that possible (Clinton was an out-going head of state).

Anyway, none of this organ harvesting business comes as any surprise to people who have any awareness of recent Balkan events and I can assure you, it changes nothing.

"The allegation ..."

Dick Marti needs to prove its allegation in Court otherwise he need to be checked mentally.

"Ha! Name on leader that is *not* accused of being connected to the mafia, corruption or 'tycoons' in the Balkans?"
(Kujto, 19 December 2010 19:10)

You might be right. But in case of Kosovo, the leaders are connected to mafia, corruption and tycoons - all three of it. And this makes it a unique case in Europe.

Great miracle is looming. Judah blindness is over. Welcome to reality. Albanian atrocities over the Serbs in Kosovo are real burden. No more oreols of victims for Albanians and KLA,obviously they are not only innocent fighters for freedom. I hope that humanity in western journalism reporting,now will prevailed.

I agree, it's a perfect hit piece to destabilize by Dick Marty, a Serbian stooge, that already had formed opinions against Kosova and KLA. But things will eventually clear up as all the charges are with zero proof as Tim Judah makes it clear (did you miss that part B92?):
-----
"The EU's police and justice mission in Kosovo, known as EULEX, has also looked at the case of the so-called "Yellow house" in Albania where some of the organ-harvesting operations are said to have taken place. But unlike Mr Marty, it notes that "to date, our prosecutors have found no evidence or intelligence that would lead us to believe that 'organ harvesting' took place at this location." "
------
Now the Western intelligence agencies will start to chip away from Dick Marty and Thaci is forced to sue him. Let's see how Dick does.

The good news is that all the important counties know that the organ allegations are 100% false (through their intel agencies) and know why Dick, Russia and Serbia did it.

@Nenad...

I can appreciate well thought out verses (and i'm not harbouring any resentment), but there's alot of face value comments that you present, that don't have much to do with the story header to say the least, and doesn't justify getting your point across.

There's more than enough evidence chronicled (and unfortunately by people like you) forgotten about the West's involvment in the breakup of Yugo. Western governments use of NATO has been turning a blind eye since the Krajina war. It's not a Kosovo thing...

And i don't understand your "cake and eat it too" comment??
Do you not realize, that whatever happened in Krajina, and RS, was no different than in Kosovo?
Except that the Serbians were at the wrong end of the State Department stick?

Front end, quick story history shows the Milosevic being heavy handed with the Albanians in Kosovo, but anybody with half a brain knows, that the fires of nationalism, and breakup of Yugo were kindled and sparked in Kosovo, ever since Tito's death. It was burning so slow, that nobody else noticed.

Unlike Serbia, Albanian nationalism down there had no state mechanism. It was homegrown inside houses and cafes, and with the US's help, finally realized..

Yes, i'll agree with you that the US had lots of info. on Milosevic's heavy handed tactics, but Milosevic had alot of info. on US's build up before the bombing..Heck, anybody living near army bases in the US could see that something was ramping up well before Ramboulliet.

You seem to think that 78 days of bombing were swift and easy? For who praytell?? I think it was anything BUT..

(Nenad, 19 December 2010 20:34)

Great post, Nenad. Thank you!

"Their mafia and crime conenctions were known from files made by several foreign intelligence services"

Ha! Name on leader that is *not* accused of being connected to the mafia, corruption or 'tycoons' in the Balkans? Sanader in Croatia arrested, who funds the parties in Serbia, who is Montengro's leader, ask EU about Bulgaria and Romania, not to mention Albania... Check their properties, real and declared and see.

So EU knows about all these, it's all part of doing business for now. Dick to get attention used the organ harvesting lie and lumped the rest--they everyone knew and no one asked him to 'investigate.' Ya shall pay Dick

The Dick's report is certainly not charming and in that way how it is used (no proofs, but a lot rumors) not helpful. But in the long run (not even now) a real threat to the existence of the independence of Kosovo since it is based on the free will of the people there and not bound to the faith of a single person.

Albanians only defended themselves. The rest is barely propaganda. The ones who committed atrocities on a large scale are Serbs not Albanians,

Pijetro:

I think my comment was relevant to the story header -- my point being that the Marty report is not a devastating blow to Kosovo.

Kosovo was deeply challenged as a state before the report and will continue to be so regardless of the investigation of the organ harvesting allegations.

I'm not sure what your point is about NATO in the Krajina war. Are you referring specifically to Flash and Storm in 1995 (ie, the training of Croats by retired military personnel)? Or perhaps Udbina airfield in 1994?

Yes, NATO was no doubt involved in Krajina against Serbs, but it was all part of the same plan (ie, compel Milosevic to end war). And by the way, in the eyes of the West, there was little distinction between RSK and RS. They were all part of the same club that (not so) secretly included Serbia itself and also Montenegro early on in the wars.

In any case, I hardly need to mention that my point in comparing NATO's involvement elsewhere against Serbs was simply to demonstrate that NATO believed that there had been prior success in the use of bombing to achieve their strategic objective. Are you aware that Milosevic called Washington begging for final peace negotiations in late August/early September 1995 after NATO bombing in BiH?

My "cake and eat it too" paragraph definitely could have used some editing but what I was trying to say is this:

1. Serbs first of all complain that the West ever chose to involve itself in an effort to end hostilities in ex-Yu. But how could Western countries not? How could they stand by and witness the brutalities taking place in Croatia and Bosnia and do nothing? This was all happening right next door and everyone knew about it. It wasn't some conflict in a distant corner of the world for Europeans. Not to mention that countries like Italy, Germany, UK (and America, too, across the pond) faced the prospect of large numbers of refugees from ex-Yu.

2. When evaluating Western (particularly American) involvement as it happened, Serbs always comment on just how flawed that intervention was (such as in Kosovo when this organ harvesting was allegedly taking place). My point here was that Serbs would have been foolish to expect much care in the planning and execution of NATO/UN involvement in Kosovo (or anywhere else in the Balkans), because as important as the conflict was for them and Kosovar Albanians, it wasn't very important for countries like America, which had a million other priorities (one of which being a sitting president faced with impeachment over a sex scandal). And this was really the crux of my argument, which, by the way, is entirely relevant to what the article discussed.

I appreciate your comment about Kosovo as a conflict slowly brewing over decades but I would argue that the whys and wherefores of the fires of nationalism weren't the real factors that resulted in Serbs being branded as the primary culprits in every single war they fought in the 1990s. It was their well-known military buildup ahead of the fighting (Belgrade and Knin were linked as early as 1989 and Croatian intelligence tapped the phone calls between Milosevic and Karadzic from summer 1991); their brutal assault on Vukovar, Dubrovnik, Bijeljina, Sarajevo and Srebrenica (to name a few); their rape/concentration camps; their insane politicians and military leaders (pick one) with whom it was nearly impossible to do business (Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic were all frequently described as drunk/hungover at important meetings, and Milosevic himself accused Martic of being an alcoholic)...

Serbs were victims, too, and this organ harvesting atrocity might well have happened. But in the eyes of the West, Serbs swung the biggest stick thoughout the conflicts and could have chosen peace.

OK, maybe nationalism in Kosovo was home-grown. But was the answer to strip away its automomy -- particularly at a time when the governments of Vojvodina and Montenegro were being overthrown, and hugely inexperienced "leaders" like Bulatovic and Djukanovic being installed in the resulting Milosevic puppet regimes? What were Western countries supposed to think about Milosevic and the ever increasing number of Serbs supporting him -- a million of them calling for weapons at Gazimestan in 1989?

Getting back to 98-99, of course military bases were being ramped up before Rambouillet. What difference did that make? Bombs fell after negotiations fell through. I would remind you that the Russians put missiles in Cuba in 1961 but never used them after Kennedy talked them down.

Anyway, you can argue State Department bias against Serbs all you want but that really wasn't the issue. The problem for Serbs was that they refused to play by the big boys' rules and they lost. I'm certain the rules weren't entirely fair, but nothing in the world ever is. A good politician works for the best result he can get for his people.

To your last comment, strictly speaking in terms of the accomplishment of a military objective for NATO, i reiterate that the 78-day campaign was swift and easy (hardly any casualities). Bad for Serbs, though, and not fantastic for Albanians (but I'm sure they're happy to be living under their own goverment, at least).

''It was a political victory, not a military one. All you need to do is have the patriotic media onside. ''

Aleks, if what NATO achieved was 'merely' a political victory, i wonder what is greater than a poltical victory in a civilised world...the chinese art of war , developed thousands of years ago, suggests that supreme exellence consists in breaking enemy's resistence without fighting...bombing former yugoslvia, i m sure that was the last step, western countries were willing to take....the apaches were sent to Albania to patrol Albania, not to intervene in Kosovo, actually JNA attacked Albanian border in 1999 before the nato bombings, but a single Albanian battalion deployed in Kukes was able to stop it...

This is the reality kids. Kosovo's independence will have HAVE TO BE re-written. There was never a doubt about this, just patience everyone. These crime bosses in Kosovo will soon have there homes, and offices ransacked.
(trudsaam, 19 December 2010 20:35)

Watch what you wish!

1-2-3 and you will see in k-vo a new p-dent clean not like thaci but oh, such nice ppl here all russian stalinist from china and he will crush nkorea so you cant protect mladic by evil blgrd regime.

Again, a good and elaborated comment Nenad. Bravo!

NATO was on the verge of failure in Kosovo. It was neither swift nor easy for them despite suffering few losses.

a) they rapidly ran out of military targets = switching to infrastructure targets and thus general targeting of the civil population;

b) they had little affect on FRY forces in the field (Kosovo), the much vaunted apache helicopters never made it over the mountains from Albania and their bases had to be heavily protected. NATO estimated there were ~25,000 JA troops in Kosovo. 40,000 withdrew in good order at the end of the war. This is a major intelligence failure.

c) despite having FAC's on the ground with the KLA (i.e. NATO's 'ground force') it was still heavily beaten;

d) NATO was tearing itself apart behind the scenes (as anyone who has bothered to properly look into it). It was a war by committee and many people within NATO say that themselves.

e) the 'humanitarian crisis' that NATO said it wish to avoid was preciptated exactly by NATO's bombing. Creditable reports since by many organizations have shown that despite thousands of displaced persons of all backgrounds in Kosovo before the war, the situation was manageable.

f) it is precisely the myth that 'NATO bombing in Bosnia brought peace' that lead to the disastrous idea amongst the politicians (and this has been much written about by NATO generals) that bombing is not a solution without men on the ground and it is not an easy fix, yet the pols refused to take this on board believing the likes of Thaci and co that they would be effective ground forces despite being told by the generals that this was bs.

g) conveniently forgotten, the war in Kosovo ended because Yeltsin withdrew support for Serbia and it has been reported many times this was after Wesley Clark (and no doubt backed up by Clinton/Holbrook) that they would 'carpet bomb Belgrade' - i.e. a direct threat of war crimes against a civilian population.

This NATO 'victory' was a victory snatched from the jaws of defeat and only that because of betrayal. Some people actually still believe that NATO destroyed thousands of tanks and other JA equipment! It was a political victory, not a military one. All you need to do is have the patriotic media onside.

Whose fault is it that the Cutilhero plan years earlier was nixed? Izebegovic rejected it with the support of the US.

Good god, I'm amazed that supposedly informed persons are still peddling the old myths.

Nice try, but in the final analysis, Serbs withdrew to the cost of few (if any) NATO lives. It's true that there was much disagreement amongst NATO leadership and that many elements of execution were botched (sometimes tragically), but the goal was to drive the Serbs out of the province and that happened (and in a fraction of the time taken up by fighting between Serbs and Albanians to that point). You're implying that Milosevic capitulated on threat of bombing -- well, the point is, he capitulated. The carpet bombing of Belgrade never happened.

The bombing didn't work. You said it did. As for a 'fraction of the time' and 'swift and easy' these comments are meaningless if they so restricted to mean only NATO casualties and with no reference to other NATO/US operations. 10,000 dead? A great success indeed.

You make a lot of loose claims but they just don't add up, rather like the tired old propaganda you repeat about 'concentration camps' in Bosnia.

The publicly claimed goal was to get the serbs around the table as albright and clinton and others have written since that they thought a few days of bombing would bring the serbs to the table or that NATO unity was stretched to breaking point? There was no chance at Rambouillet as Albright wrote, the US deliberately "set the bar too high" for the Serbs to accept (appendix B of the Rambouillet agreement). The KVM who were accepted into to calm Kosovo in 1998 were there collected targeting data for the bombing and very little else apart from ride around in their orange humvees.

I suppose you also missed after the bombing failed to produce success after a few days the many press statements by NATO and public comments by officials that this war was about the "credibility of NATO". It was a disaster and they were not prepared for 78 days even if they did threaten their laughable propaganda that they would invade by land.

Which part of "Yeltsin withdrew support for Serbia" either of you not understand? Milosevic did not "capitulate to the threat of bombing" but because Moscow left him hanging. Does this not compute?

As to the apaches Iliri, what do you mean "patrol albania"? From what? Dangerous cows and sheep? NATO provided aircover, the apaches were neither properly equipped, pilots sufficiently well trained in night flying etc. It was big PR that turned into joke. The US military was strongly against sending apaches. Only a-10 saw (v. little) action at low level. And please, enough of the kla propagana victories. They failed and failed badly.

You're actually claiming that there weren't camps in Bosnia at which non-Serbs were raped and tortured?

And I'm the one spouting propaganda?!

Oh, man. I think your perspective is rather skewed, to say the least.

"The allegation ..."

Dick Marti needs to prove its allegation in Court otherwise he need to be checked mentally.

I agree, it's a perfect hit piece to destabilize by Dick Marty, a Serbian stooge, that already had formed opinions against Kosova and KLA. But things will eventually clear up as all the charges are with zero proof as Tim Judah makes it clear (did you miss that part B92?):
-----
"The EU's police and justice mission in Kosovo, known as EULEX, has also looked at the case of the so-called "Yellow house" in Albania where some of the organ-harvesting operations are said to have taken place. But unlike Mr Marty, it notes that "to date, our prosecutors have found no evidence or intelligence that would lead us to believe that 'organ harvesting' took place at this location." "
------
Now the Western intelligence agencies will start to chip away from Dick Marty and Thaci is forced to sue him. Let's see how Dick does.

The good news is that all the important counties know that the organ allegations are 100% false (through their intel agencies) and know why Dick, Russia and Serbia did it.

"Their mafia and crime conenctions were known from files made by several foreign intelligence services"

Ha! Name on leader that is *not* accused of being connected to the mafia, corruption or 'tycoons' in the Balkans? Sanader in Croatia arrested, who funds the parties in Serbia, who is Montengro's leader, ask EU about Bulgaria and Romania, not to mention Albania... Check their properties, real and declared and see.

So EU knows about all these, it's all part of doing business for now. Dick to get attention used the organ harvesting lie and lumped the rest--they everyone knew and no one asked him to 'investigate.' Ya shall pay Dick

The Dick's report is certainly not charming and in that way how it is used (no proofs, but a lot rumors) not helpful. But in the long run (not even now) a real threat to the existence of the independence of Kosovo since it is based on the free will of the people there and not bound to the faith of a single person.

Albanians only defended themselves. The rest is barely propaganda. The ones who committed atrocities on a large scale are Serbs not Albanians,

This is the reality kids. Kosovo's independence will have HAVE TO BE re-written. There was never a doubt about this, just patience everyone. These crime bosses in Kosovo will soon have there homes, and offices ransacked.
(trudsaam, 19 December 2010 20:35)

Watch what you wish!

1-2-3 and you will see in k-vo a new p-dent clean not like thaci but oh, such nice ppl here all russian stalinist from china and he will crush nkorea so you cant protect mladic by evil blgrd regime.

Why a blow? No, it only confirms the common public opinion about Kosovo, or, better, about its (re-)elected leaders. Their mafia and crime conenctions were known from files made by several foreign intelligence services. The organ harvesting thing is only the tip on the iceberg.

About election fraud: the only surprising thing is the blatant stupidity it has been done with. Even kids from school should know that it's impossible that 147% of the eligible voters casting the ballots ;-)

“If it is ever proven that Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, whom former British Prime Minister Tony Blair backed, was really a mafia boss, murderer and traded in human organs, then the history of the campaign for Kosovo's independence will have to be rewritten – and the gloss put on it by Blair will vanish,” he noted.
-
This is the reality kids. Kosovo's independence will have HAVE TO BE re-written. There was never a doubt about this, just patience everyone. These crime bosses in Kosovo will soon have there homes, and offices ransacked.

(Nenad, 19 December 2010 20:34)

Great post, Nenad. Thank you!

Tim Judah...blast from the past. Just like Misha Glenny, who also re-emerged recently. I wonder what these guys are doing for work these days?

Anyway, the last paragraph probably says it all. The West knew some bad (bleep) was going down but in true machiavellian fashion (not unusual in these situations, by the way -- recall that Jovica Stanisic was alleged to be on the CIA payroll), turned a blind eye in the interest of bringing at least a little less chaos to the region.

Serbs would certainly call this policy short-sighted, and they would be absolutely right, but what could they realistically expect?

One thing I've noticed over the years is that a lot of Serbs seem to think that they were entitled to have their cake and to eat it, too. In other words, that they could play such a major part in horrific ethnic conflicts in Europe (not Africa or Asia) and actually not expect outside parties to not just intervene, but to do so in flawless fashion. (I'm not even going to discuss the common Serbian accusation that these outside parties actually provoked war, because I view that as complete nonsense.)

Politicians, if nothing else, always seek the most expedient option. I hate to tell you, but Clinton and Blair had a lot on their plates (especially Clinton), and weren't willing to allow the Kosovo situation to go on endlessly. There was plenty of intelligence at that time to suggest that Milosevic was up to no good, and in fact, he'd been warned about his treatment of Albanians there by the Bush (Sr.) administration as far back as late 1992. Serbs were given chance after chance to lay off during 1998-1999 and simply refused to do so. NATO bombing had shown to be effective in the broader effort to get Serbs to sue for peace in BiH in 1995 and naturally remained an option for Kosovo. It presented minimum casualty risk for NATO forces and strong reassurance to citizens of NATO countries of the military might of the alliance. It also provided an opportunity to use some of the hardware produced by the multi-billion-dollar government contracting industry, but perhaps I'm being a tad bit cynical here.

In any case, bombing was a relatively quick and easy option -- and in just 78 days, forced Milosevic out. How many NATO forces were killed?

Similarly, the UNMIK cleanup process was guaranteed to be far from perfect because what UN missions are ever truly successful? There's alway political infighting (Russia and China pitted against the West on the Security Council), limited political will (especially when there is a major casualty risk), and hugely limited resources. Inefficiency guaranteed.

Could a bunch of UN troops -- most of whom probably had little sympathy for either side of the conflict -- truly be expected to challenge a bunch of well-entrenched KLA thugs? They couldn't get help from Serbian thugs because there weren't any left! Would guys like Clinton and Blair have tolerated the slaughter of their UN forces?

Of course they settled for the status quo. They probably hoped conditions would quickly get better, too, but weren't truly focused on leading efforts to make that possible (Clinton was an out-going head of state).

Anyway, none of this organ harvesting business comes as any surprise to people who have any awareness of recent Balkan events and I can assure you, it changes nothing.

Pijetro:

I think my comment was relevant to the story header -- my point being that the Marty report is not a devastating blow to Kosovo.

Kosovo was deeply challenged as a state before the report and will continue to be so regardless of the investigation of the organ harvesting allegations.

I'm not sure what your point is about NATO in the Krajina war. Are you referring specifically to Flash and Storm in 1995 (ie, the training of Croats by retired military personnel)? Or perhaps Udbina airfield in 1994?

Yes, NATO was no doubt involved in Krajina against Serbs, but it was all part of the same plan (ie, compel Milosevic to end war). And by the way, in the eyes of the West, there was little distinction between RSK and RS. They were all part of the same club that (not so) secretly included Serbia itself and also Montenegro early on in the wars.

In any case, I hardly need to mention that my point in comparing NATO's involvement elsewhere against Serbs was simply to demonstrate that NATO believed that there had been prior success in the use of bombing to achieve their strategic objective. Are you aware that Milosevic called Washington begging for final peace negotiations in late August/early September 1995 after NATO bombing in BiH?

My "cake and eat it too" paragraph definitely could have used some editing but what I was trying to say is this:

1. Serbs first of all complain that the West ever chose to involve itself in an effort to end hostilities in ex-Yu. But how could Western countries not? How could they stand by and witness the brutalities taking place in Croatia and Bosnia and do nothing? This was all happening right next door and everyone knew about it. It wasn't some conflict in a distant corner of the world for Europeans. Not to mention that countries like Italy, Germany, UK (and America, too, across the pond) faced the prospect of large numbers of refugees from ex-Yu.

2. When evaluating Western (particularly American) involvement as it happened, Serbs always comment on just how flawed that intervention was (such as in Kosovo when this organ harvesting was allegedly taking place). My point here was that Serbs would have been foolish to expect much care in the planning and execution of NATO/UN involvement in Kosovo (or anywhere else in the Balkans), because as important as the conflict was for them and Kosovar Albanians, it wasn't very important for countries like America, which had a million other priorities (one of which being a sitting president faced with impeachment over a sex scandal). And this was really the crux of my argument, which, by the way, is entirely relevant to what the article discussed.

I appreciate your comment about Kosovo as a conflict slowly brewing over decades but I would argue that the whys and wherefores of the fires of nationalism weren't the real factors that resulted in Serbs being branded as the primary culprits in every single war they fought in the 1990s. It was their well-known military buildup ahead of the fighting (Belgrade and Knin were linked as early as 1989 and Croatian intelligence tapped the phone calls between Milosevic and Karadzic from summer 1991); their brutal assault on Vukovar, Dubrovnik, Bijeljina, Sarajevo and Srebrenica (to name a few); their rape/concentration camps; their insane politicians and military leaders (pick one) with whom it was nearly impossible to do business (Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic were all frequently described as drunk/hungover at important meetings, and Milosevic himself accused Martic of being an alcoholic)...

Serbs were victims, too, and this organ harvesting atrocity might well have happened. But in the eyes of the West, Serbs swung the biggest stick thoughout the conflicts and could have chosen peace.

OK, maybe nationalism in Kosovo was home-grown. But was the answer to strip away its automomy -- particularly at a time when the governments of Vojvodina and Montenegro were being overthrown, and hugely inexperienced "leaders" like Bulatovic and Djukanovic being installed in the resulting Milosevic puppet regimes? What were Western countries supposed to think about Milosevic and the ever increasing number of Serbs supporting him -- a million of them calling for weapons at Gazimestan in 1989?

Getting back to 98-99, of course military bases were being ramped up before Rambouillet. What difference did that make? Bombs fell after negotiations fell through. I would remind you that the Russians put missiles in Cuba in 1961 but never used them after Kennedy talked them down.

Anyway, you can argue State Department bias against Serbs all you want but that really wasn't the issue. The problem for Serbs was that they refused to play by the big boys' rules and they lost. I'm certain the rules weren't entirely fair, but nothing in the world ever is. A good politician works for the best result he can get for his people.

To your last comment, strictly speaking in terms of the accomplishment of a military objective for NATO, i reiterate that the 78-day campaign was swift and easy (hardly any casualities). Bad for Serbs, though, and not fantastic for Albanians (but I'm sure they're happy to be living under their own goverment, at least).

Great miracle is looming. Judah blindness is over. Welcome to reality. Albanian atrocities over the Serbs in Kosovo are real burden. No more oreols of victims for Albanians and KLA,obviously they are not only innocent fighters for freedom. I hope that humanity in western journalism reporting,now will prevailed.

@Nenad...

I can appreciate well thought out verses (and i'm not harbouring any resentment), but there's alot of face value comments that you present, that don't have much to do with the story header to say the least, and doesn't justify getting your point across.

There's more than enough evidence chronicled (and unfortunately by people like you) forgotten about the West's involvment in the breakup of Yugo. Western governments use of NATO has been turning a blind eye since the Krajina war. It's not a Kosovo thing...

And i don't understand your "cake and eat it too" comment??
Do you not realize, that whatever happened in Krajina, and RS, was no different than in Kosovo?
Except that the Serbians were at the wrong end of the State Department stick?

Front end, quick story history shows the Milosevic being heavy handed with the Albanians in Kosovo, but anybody with half a brain knows, that the fires of nationalism, and breakup of Yugo were kindled and sparked in Kosovo, ever since Tito's death. It was burning so slow, that nobody else noticed.

Unlike Serbia, Albanian nationalism down there had no state mechanism. It was homegrown inside houses and cafes, and with the US's help, finally realized..

Yes, i'll agree with you that the US had lots of info. on Milosevic's heavy handed tactics, but Milosevic had alot of info. on US's build up before the bombing..Heck, anybody living near army bases in the US could see that something was ramping up well before Ramboulliet.

You seem to think that 78 days of bombing were swift and easy? For who praytell?? I think it was anything BUT..

"Ha! Name on leader that is *not* accused of being connected to the mafia, corruption or 'tycoons' in the Balkans?"
(Kujto, 19 December 2010 19:10)

You might be right. But in case of Kosovo, the leaders are connected to mafia, corruption and tycoons - all three of it. And this makes it a unique case in Europe.

Again, a good and elaborated comment Nenad. Bravo!

''It was a political victory, not a military one. All you need to do is have the patriotic media onside. ''

Aleks, if what NATO achieved was 'merely' a political victory, i wonder what is greater than a poltical victory in a civilised world...the chinese art of war , developed thousands of years ago, suggests that supreme exellence consists in breaking enemy's resistence without fighting...bombing former yugoslvia, i m sure that was the last step, western countries were willing to take....the apaches were sent to Albania to patrol Albania, not to intervene in Kosovo, actually JNA attacked Albanian border in 1999 before the nato bombings, but a single Albanian battalion deployed in Kukes was able to stop it...

NATO was on the verge of failure in Kosovo. It was neither swift nor easy for them despite suffering few losses.

a) they rapidly ran out of military targets = switching to infrastructure targets and thus general targeting of the civil population;

b) they had little affect on FRY forces in the field (Kosovo), the much vaunted apache helicopters never made it over the mountains from Albania and their bases had to be heavily protected. NATO estimated there were ~25,000 JA troops in Kosovo. 40,000 withdrew in good order at the end of the war. This is a major intelligence failure.

c) despite having FAC's on the ground with the KLA (i.e. NATO's 'ground force') it was still heavily beaten;

d) NATO was tearing itself apart behind the scenes (as anyone who has bothered to properly look into it). It was a war by committee and many people within NATO say that themselves.

e) the 'humanitarian crisis' that NATO said it wish to avoid was preciptated exactly by NATO's bombing. Creditable reports since by many organizations have shown that despite thousands of displaced persons of all backgrounds in Kosovo before the war, the situation was manageable.

f) it is precisely the myth that 'NATO bombing in Bosnia brought peace' that lead to the disastrous idea amongst the politicians (and this has been much written about by NATO generals) that bombing is not a solution without men on the ground and it is not an easy fix, yet the pols refused to take this on board believing the likes of Thaci and co that they would be effective ground forces despite being told by the generals that this was bs.

g) conveniently forgotten, the war in Kosovo ended because Yeltsin withdrew support for Serbia and it has been reported many times this was after Wesley Clark (and no doubt backed up by Clinton/Holbrook) that they would 'carpet bomb Belgrade' - i.e. a direct threat of war crimes against a civilian population.

This NATO 'victory' was a victory snatched from the jaws of defeat and only that because of betrayal. Some people actually still believe that NATO destroyed thousands of tanks and other JA equipment! It was a political victory, not a military one. All you need to do is have the patriotic media onside.

Whose fault is it that the Cutilhero plan years earlier was nixed? Izebegovic rejected it with the support of the US.

Good god, I'm amazed that supposedly informed persons are still peddling the old myths.

Nice try, but in the final analysis, Serbs withdrew to the cost of few (if any) NATO lives. It's true that there was much disagreement amongst NATO leadership and that many elements of execution were botched (sometimes tragically), but the goal was to drive the Serbs out of the province and that happened (and in a fraction of the time taken up by fighting between Serbs and Albanians to that point). You're implying that Milosevic capitulated on threat of bombing -- well, the point is, he capitulated. The carpet bombing of Belgrade never happened.

The bombing didn't work. You said it did. As for a 'fraction of the time' and 'swift and easy' these comments are meaningless if they so restricted to mean only NATO casualties and with no reference to other NATO/US operations. 10,000 dead? A great success indeed.

You make a lot of loose claims but they just don't add up, rather like the tired old propaganda you repeat about 'concentration camps' in Bosnia.

The publicly claimed goal was to get the serbs around the table as albright and clinton and others have written since that they thought a few days of bombing would bring the serbs to the table or that NATO unity was stretched to breaking point? There was no chance at Rambouillet as Albright wrote, the US deliberately "set the bar too high" for the Serbs to accept (appendix B of the Rambouillet agreement). The KVM who were accepted into to calm Kosovo in 1998 were there collected targeting data for the bombing and very little else apart from ride around in their orange humvees.

I suppose you also missed after the bombing failed to produce success after a few days the many press statements by NATO and public comments by officials that this war was about the "credibility of NATO". It was a disaster and they were not prepared for 78 days even if they did threaten their laughable propaganda that they would invade by land.

Which part of "Yeltsin withdrew support for Serbia" either of you not understand? Milosevic did not "capitulate to the threat of bombing" but because Moscow left him hanging. Does this not compute?

As to the apaches Iliri, what do you mean "patrol albania"? From what? Dangerous cows and sheep? NATO provided aircover, the apaches were neither properly equipped, pilots sufficiently well trained in night flying etc. It was big PR that turned into joke. The US military was strongly against sending apaches. Only a-10 saw (v. little) action at low level. And please, enough of the kla propagana victories. They failed and failed badly.

You're actually claiming that there weren't camps in Bosnia at which non-Serbs were raped and tortured?

And I'm the one spouting propaganda?!

Oh, man. I think your perspective is rather skewed, to say the least.