Suddenly, the urgency to settle Kosovo’s political status in the form of “supervised independence” is on the US imperial agenda. After years of neglect following the US-led NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999 (the 78-day bombing operation was called “Merciful Angel”) and merely a year of “negotiations” between representatives of Serbian government and an Albanian delegation from Kosovo, it was announced that the time had come for an imposed “solution”.
The part of this US-endorsed solution that the Albanian community in Kosovo (the real name of this Serbian province is Kosovo and Metohija) likes is “independence”. But what does the qualification “supervised” amount to? While former Finish President Martti Ahtisaari’s plan, developed on behalf of “international community,” offers Kosovo Albanians some cosmetic (though perhaps substantively insignificant) attributes of independence such as a distinct flag, seal and anthem, “key international stakeholders” in the form an “International Civilian Representative (ICR)” would be the true rulers, vested with the power to annul laws adopted by the local democratic institutions or dismiss democratically chosen officials who fail to tow the line. More importantly, the Ahtisaari plan would leave basic economic policies in the hands not of an “independent” Kosovo or its government, but to the “free market,” or its institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank and the EU Commission, in other words to the outsiders. Consequently, “supervised independence” amounts to an insulting “paternalism by arrogant foreigners” of the kind now perpetuated in Iraq and Afghanistan, having been perfected for eleven years in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
If one is to believe US officials, in their search for an adequate settlement in Kosovo they were guided by the interest in securing “regional stability”. Since it is hard to see how “supervised independence,” explicitly and unashamedly favoring one side, could deliver in this regard—as unlike in Bosnia and like in Iraq and Afghanistan the fake independence of Kosovo will likely trigger a violent backlash against foreign dominance by well armed Muslim fighters—let us consider what would be the result of an approach honestly concerned with stable peace in the region. The obvious and inexpensive solution is to partition Kosovo between Serbs and Albanians by the process in which Serbia would exercise expulsive secession. The Serbian part of Kosovo would then become a part of Serbia proper while the Albanian part would become independent. Albanians have made it abundantly clear that they want nothing short of full independence. If possible, this genuine desire ought to be satisfied at least to a degree. Some give and take would be necessary, however, but partition is the only natural way to go. What would it take to accomplish this?
First, the myth that Serbs would not find this option palatable must be rejected. In fact many Serbs, including members of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU), and in particular the former President of Yugoslavia, the novelist Dobrica Cosic, have long advocated this sort of solution. Back in 1996 SANU President Despic in a newspaper interview recommended partition. What exactly it should amount to is another matter, but it is a feasible step for both Serbs and Albanians.
In fact, convincing Serbs that a specific partition is good will seem less of a problem than divorcing the Kosovo issue from the Republika Srpska issue. And this is where the key policy may lead to a happy return of foreign servicemen and women (including Americans) from both Kosovo and Bosnia. A carefully crafted package of financial incentives and policy of compensating the Serbs' loss of territory in Kosovo with empowering Republika Srpska to join Serbia would provide a long term security and stability solution for the puzzle that the Balkans have presented until recently. This proposal would have to be further fine tuned, such as offering a provision that the UN guarantees that the holly Orthodox sites which remain in Albanian dominated Kosovo would enjoy protection from destruction and access secured to all Serbian pilgrims.
The policy of partitioning Kosovo along with the unification of Republika Srpska with Serbia offers long term security and stability for the region. Also, it is no less natural an outcome than the unification of Germany, for example. Once NATO and EU troops pull out of Bosnia, Serbs in Republika Srpska will be safe from possible attack coming from the Muslim and Croatian Federation as the strength of the Serbian Army will function as a decisive deterrent. On the other hand the Muslim and Croatian side would have nothing to fear from a democratic government in Belgrade. Similarly, after partition of Kosovo KFOR can pull out without worry of a renewed full-scale war between Serbs and Albanians there. A small contingent of NATO troops (preferably Americans, because of their credibility) would have to maintain a long-term presence in Macedonia to prevent a conflict erupting in the western part of the country where Albanians have a majority similar to the Kosovo situation. Albanians there might be tempted to repeat a Kosovo style uprising. American troops in Macedonia would guard against this, further contributing to the long-term security of the Balkans. The cost would, however, be an insignificant fraction of the current costs of maintaining both the Bosnia and Kosovo missions.
This entire enterprise is likely to provoke fierce resistance only from one side: the ethnic Muslims in Bosnia. However, American diplomats should have no serious problem convincing them to go along, as Muslims have enjoyed American protection and favors from the beginning of Yugoslav crisis. While Croats were supported by Germany and Serbs supposedly by Russia, Muslims in Bosnia were the side the US chose to favor. Perhaps the honor of carrying out the implementation of this comprehensive and long-term security solution could fall on the son of the President who began the destructive US meddling in former Yugoslavia in the first place.
Aleksandar Jokic Associate Professor - Department of Philosophy Portland State University
Conférence 'Italie/Europe: La démocratie en danger' avec Beppe Grillo, 6 février 2010 - Paris Marianne Ranke-Cormier, directrice de publication de Newropeans Magazine présente Franck Biancheri, président de Newropeans, un des pères fondateurs du programme Erasmus et directeur de recherche de LEAP2020.
2010 bis 2020: Gold erringt K.O.-Sieg über den DollarThursday, 04 February 2010 | Leap/E2020Die US-Zentralbank ist nicht mehr in der Lage, ihren Jahrzehnte langen Kampf gegen Gold unter dem Schlagwort vom „Überbleibsel aus barbarischen Zeiten“ führen, mit dem die alles überragende Stellung des Dollars im internationalen Währungssystem... Weiter lesen
[Conferenza] LA DEMOCRAZIA IN PERICOLO - Italia - Europa - I cittadini resistonoThursday, 04 February 2010 | Newropeans
Il bisogno di democrazia in Europa è sempre più forte. Le forze democratiche tentano di ridurre i nostri diritti impedendoci di poter scegliere liberamente mantenendo così al potere, nei nostri paesi e sul nostro continente, un élite corrotta... Legga più
Kapuscinski: ritratto e autoritratto di un esploratore di animeThursday, 04 February 2010 | Damiano Mazzotti “Kapuscinski. Opere” è la meravigliosa biografia del più grande reporter di guerra (1932-2007), con la raccolta degli scritti più preziosi e “magici” di uno dei più grandi interpreti di culture (Mondadori, 2009). Legga più
Página española
Zapatero, Galeano y HaitíThursday, 04 February 2010 | Alberto Montero SolerMientras la comunidad internacional alerta sobre la ocupación militar estadounidense de Haití realizada bajo la excusa de la ayuda humanitaria, al presidente Zapatero no se le ocurre otra cosa que decir en el Parlamento Europeo que “ver... Lea el artículo
[Europese gedachten] De schijndemocratie van het burgerintiatiefThursday, 04 February 2010 | Chris AalbertsBinnenkort begint eindelijk de Europese directe democratie. In het verdrag van Lissabon is de mogelijkheid van een burgerinitiatief opgenomen: burgers kunnen een voorstel doen aan de Europese Commissie om een wetsvoorstel te maken op een bepaald... Lees meer
Het kost een paar centen.... Thursday, 04 February 2010 | Veronique SwinkelsVolgens de Brusselse professor Matthijs hebben wij in Nederland het op een na duurste koningshuis van de wereld. Alleen de Britse koningin leeft op grotere voet. ... Of we goedkoper uit zouden zijn met een President is natuurlijk ook maar de vraag.... Lees meer
The three post-war scenarios regarding EU-US relations
On March 17th 2003, seven years ago, on the eve of the US invasion of Iraq, Franck Biancheri published three scenarios attempting to describe the war's possible consequences. Among the three he qualified one as most likely to happen. Because of its striking anticipation of what is indeed happening today, we have decided to put it online again. Upon whom will the ashes of Baghdad fall down?The three post-war scenarios regarding EU-US relations
292 - 5 millions - 2 milliardsThursday, 21 January 2010
292 morts, plus de 5 millions de personnes vaccinées au 1er janvier… et une facture de 2 milliards d’euros. Tel est le coût estimé de 3 mois de... + Full Story
We all are Icelanders, fed up to pay for the banks failures! In any case, to prove that all Europeans are not like the British and Dutch governments, Newropeans is launching a petition called « We all are Icelanders, fed up with paying for banks failures» and aiming at gathering popular support for the Icelandic resistance to the current outrageous 'financial order'.
► SIGN HERE
Nous sommes tous des Islandais, ras le bol de payer pour les banquiers! Pour prouver que tous les Européens ne sont pas à l'image des gouvernements britannique et néerlandais, Newropeans lance la pétition "Nous sommes tous des Islandais, ras le bol de payer pour les banquiers! " pour rassembler un soutien populaire à la résistance des Islandais à l'inique "ordre financier" actuel. ► SIGNEZ LA PETITION ICI
Suddenly, the urgency to settle Kosovo’s political status in the form of “supervised independence” is on the US imperial agenda. After years of neglect following the US-led NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999 (the 78-day bombing operation was called “Merciful Angel”) and merely a year of “negotiations” between representatives of Serbian government and an Albanian delegation from Kosovo, it was announced that the time had come for an imposed “solution”. 
The three post-war scenarios regarding EU-US relations
