US Foreign policy - Change please

United States Foreign policy during last decades could be described as series of strategical errors. When Soviet Union splintered, the US saw possibility to widen its influence through breakaway republics and former satellites, do whatever want in the rest of world and feed her powerful military-industrial complex. Supporting on one hand nationalist/populist leaders (Georgia, Ukraine, Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo) and with one hand elsewhere dictatorships (Asia, South & Middle America); making alliances with terrorist groups (Al Quida, KLA) shows that the aim was only reach short term tactical gain. Attacks to Serbia and Iraq were made on base of fabricated information/propaganda and probably also the intelligence from Afghanistan was not better.

From polarization to dialogue

All above mentioned has now lead to polarization of world and confrontation between Russia and the US. When the US has acted (lunatic style) as one's own discretion one effect is that UNSC has been guided to sidetrack. United States policy in the Balkans has been dysfunctional, characterized by cynicism, duplicity and short term tactical gain and at world level as series of strategical errors. Let's hope that those errors are not duplicated any more in Caucasus.

I see that the only way out from today's confrontation is that the Great Powers start dialogue from empty table with equal basis, one output could be the restoration of UNSC as a forum for global conflicts. The global challenges e.g. environment, poverty, 3rd world conflicts etc.are so big that no individual power can solve them. These challenges should be top priority, not short term wins of private armies, military industry and shortsighted politicians.

Change in US election?

I have considered Obama as good alternative to McCain with hope to see some change with US Foreign policy. However when he selected Biden as his running mate based e.g. Biden's experience about foreign affairs I doubt his judgement. Selecting a man on the record for stating that “all Serbs should be placed in Nazi-style concentration camps” during Senatorial deliberations in 1999 over NATO aggression on Serbia, and that United States ought to conduct a fascist, “Japanese-German style occupation” of Serbia. My expectations are now below zero level - unfortunately.

AriRusila's Blogarchive
balkan
caucasus
ari rusila
Bookmark this on Delicious

Is Transnistria the next follow up of Kosovo UDI?

Federation Council, the upper chamber of the Russian parliament, is backing independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia - Georgia's two rebel provinces. The vote came after a brief war between Russia and Georgia following Georgia's assault on the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali Aug. 7. Both countries won de-facto independence in the 1990s after wars with the government in Tbilisi. The road which started from Kosovo UDI seems to continue long because it is estimated that there is about five thousend ethnic groups on globe.

After Georgia's separatists my bet is that in Europe Transnistria could be the next breakaway province. Let's look this maybe next new state closer:

Pridnestrovie - also known by the unofficial name, Transnistria - is a new and emerging country in South Eastern Europe, sandwiched between Moldova and Ukraine. Although widely seen as part of Moldova, historically, Pridnestrovie and Moldova were always separate. Throughout 2500 years of history, the Dniester River forming the current border has been a traditional border between Slav lands (Scythia, 450 B.C.) to the East and Romanian lands (Dacia) to the West.

The population is some 550.000. The inhabitants of Pridnestrovie are for the most part Slavic. This is in stark contrast to Moldova, on the other side of the Dniester River, where 4/5ths of the population are of Romanian descent and where ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians only make up 6 to 8 percent, respectively.

Pridnestrovie meets the requirements for sovereign statehood under international law, as it has a defined territory, a population, effective elected authority, and the capability to enter into international relations. It is currently seeking international recognition of its de facto independence and statehood.

The economy of Pridnestrovie is a mixed market-based economy. Following a large scale privatization process, most of the companies in the country are now privately owned. The economy is export-oriented and based on a mix of heavy industry and manufacturing. According to the latest data from the nation's Customs, Pridnestrovie - which is also known as Transnistria, or Transdniester - now trades with 99 foreign countries.

Source and more info abou Transnistria e.g. from The Tiraspol Times

AriRusila's Blogarchive
caucasusbalkan
Bookmark this on Delicious

Georgia - out from confrontation

Caucasus suffers about US Cowboy policy

Georgia is one again failed example about US Foreign policy which aims to create classical “banana republic” to Eastern Europe where US controls crucial foreign and/or domestic policies of another nation through ties with its military and intelligence institutions. EU's military, political, and corporate elites have already increasingly become dependents or confederates of the US military-industrial complex. While Russia wishes to safe its "inner courtyard" - sc "Russian World" US is doing the same with its MacWorld. However today it seems that those two worlds have more and more common zone: Many ex Soviet republics have joined or are dreaming of joining NATO, missiles and radars are coming closer and closer Moscow - it feels that new cold war, old polarization/confrontation, is coming.

The bluff of US Foreign Policy has normally been "western democracy" etc. However the record in Georgia was questionable. In one report, Human Rights Watch asserted that “the fragility of Georgia’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law were revealed on Nov. 7, 2007, when government forces used violent and excessive force to disperse a series of largely peaceful demonstrations in the capital, Tbilisi.” In the other report even (the Western nearly governmental elite lobby group) International Crisis Group warned of a creeping authoritarianism in Georgia and urged Western governments to pressure the regime in Tbilisi to respect democratic principles.

To show his admiration for the U.S. president, Saakashvili even renamed the main road to Tbilisi’s airport George W. Bush Street. It is good to think globally but better act locally. Like in Balkans before Caucasia is today suffering US cowboy policy which is creating unnecessary confrontation with Russia. There is maybe way out from banana republic status when local governments start to develop their policies more from domestic needs without too much adoring transatlantic short term games.

3rd way out

As a Finn I would like to ask if third way could be possible also elsewhere. Finland has over 1000 km common border with Russia, number of wars has been between us and Russia/USSR but also lot of good times like Autonomy time 1806-1917 as well last decades with increasing economic cooperation. With this background today more Finns are against than pro to join NATO and our dear neighbours in Sweden have similar results in opinion pools.

This neutral - unallied - position makes it possible to approach world politics, human rights, economical issues etc with critical way be that critics to east or west I do not mean that critics should be end in itself or the top priority for Caucasian countries. However I am from old school and believe that real progress can be made only after fresh debate, dialogue or at least tolerance between local stakeholders not copying values or practices e.g. from Bruxelles bureaucrats.

The unallied position is same time open to all kind of cooperation to all directions. The statements about world events are our own; they are not coming from Washington or Moscow. Personally I like this third way, is it possible also for Caucasus – I hope local stakeholders can decide.

For economical development EU has e.g. its Neighbourhood programmes for non-member states. EU can also make any kind of individual agreements such as customs, visa regime etc with non-members so they can enjoy many EU benefits without membership.

Realism?

I do not know if my proposal is realistic. I know that my mother was fleeing from home when USSR occupied that part of Finland during WWII. I also know that I have found some of my best friends from Russia. Lesson learned - one can forget past wrongdoings and look forward. Dialogue and tolerance at local level is in my opinion the best quarantee for sustainable solutions. Collecting guns on the borders is from my point of view the worst scenario excluding use of them.

AriRusila's Blogarchive
balkan
Bookmark this on Delicious

Spark, fire and water: Kosovo & Georgia

Bearing in mind the risks for Poland's allies in the Caucasus, Georgia above all, Warsaw's recognition of the Kosovo Albanians' secession was described as an irresponsible move by Nobel Peace laureate and former Polish president, Lech Walesa. "Recognizing Kosovo will bring nothing but trouble. No one can be denied the right to self-determination, but only within the bounds of common sense," he was quoted as saying at the time. Walesa stressed in his statements to the Polish media that Kosovo was "with its irresponsible behavior, causing new divisions in Europe and globally and undermining international relations". Jiri Dienstbier, former UN human rights rapporteur for former Yugoslavia and former Czech foreign minister has stated that "It is clear and certain, after all that’s been said and done, that Kosovo will never, but really never, be a legal and legitimate independent country.”

Spark & fire

Making references to both prestigious politician Mr Obrad Kesic from UPI has made quite interesting analysis with name "Kosovo spark, Ossetia fire" published in Middle East Times Aug. 13th. He claims that "Kosovo's independence came about in large part through an arrogant and reckless attitude in Washington, as well as in some EU capitals, that the positions of Serbia and Russia could simply be ignored".

Mr.Kesic continues: "The U.N. Security Council and international law could be bypassed simply by arguing that the Kosovo problem was "unique" and easily quarantined from other similar ethnically motivated disputes over territory. There was a mistaken belief that if American and EU diplomats, officials and leaders repeated the official mantra that "Kosovo is unique" and that "Kosovo is not a precedent" that this would suffice to contain any possible repercussions from a policy that was hastily endorsed as "the only possible" option. American and some European diplomats grew fond of saying that Serbia and Russia should accept "reality" and the "facts on the ground" in Kosovo."

Water

The one exit way from current crisis is the one I fully can agree. Mr. Kesic states:

One option is to admit the EU and U.S. policy on Kosovo was a mistake and attempt to manage the Georgian crisis in light of this. That would mean freezing Kosovo's independence by returning complete authority over the province to the United Nations and by restarting negotiations between Serbs and Kosovar Albanians under U.N. sponsorship. For Georgia this would signify the only hope that Russia would lose its moral ground for further military escalation and that it could return to the status quo prior to its own military actions on Aug. 6. This would also allow for the United Nations to regain credibility and legitimacy for new peace talks on South Ossetia and Abkhazia and for any possible peacekeeping role.

If American and EU officials continue to ignore the new international reality that they have helped create by backing Kosovo's independence, they will have chosen a road that will lead to new separatist conflicts well beyond the Balkans and the Caucasus.

Mr Kesic really hit the nail on the head - nothing to add!

balkan

Bookmark this on Delicious

Power in service of ethics

Originally published 14/08/2008

During last twenty years war for humanitarian reasons has came quite popular in political vocabulary e.g. in Balkans and now with Georgia case. The ideal to use power in the service of ethics is good. The problem is the low level of ethics when US is using her power in world. I remember their actions in Chile to establish dictatorship, their support to killing squads in middle and south America. In 1983, U.S. troops invaded Grenada because it – a tiny island with 110,000 inhabitants - represented a military threat to the USA. In Balkans US made alliances first with Serb leaders (who later came ICTY wanteds) and after with KLA (which before was described as terror organization), al Quida (1^st ally then one element in “axis of terror”) etc.

US started to bomb Serbia – without UNSC approval and based purpose-oriented reports from field - supporting separatist movements. Later US repeated the same in Afghanistan and Iraq (again based false reports). Before 9-11, the US was supportive of the Chechen rebels, suddenly after 9-11 radical Islam, was the new enemy. This is regardless of whatever Chechen terrorists were doing to Russia on their own.

In Europe the Kosovo question highlights the core problem of EU - uncritical following of US foreign (cowboy) policy . Some times I ask if it is EU, only UK or ex-Sovjet lapdogs the 51st state of USA. To me it is alarming, that this US policy has been made both during democratic and republican US presidents. Future shows if the change will come with new president, will he change old advisers also. And will US succeed to gain support for these actions either through the use of NATO or by persuading the European Community or the newly emerging states of Central and Eastern Europe to get on side. I hope that change will come and different actors both sides of Atlantic could have debate from more equal base than before.

Bosnian X-files opening

Originally published 12/08/2008

Very interesting interview of former Hague Tribunal spokeswoman Florence Hartmann popped to my eyes from newspaper Blic. Referring the arrest of Radovan Karadzic she told, that "information about the fugitives' whereabouts was abundant, however, it would always turn out that one of the three countries – the U.S., Britain or France – would block arrests." She adds that former Bosnian secret police chief Momir Munibabi? was sacked on former High Representative Paddy Ashdown's orders, "for being efficient in his search for Karadži?, and for sending information to Del Ponte". "Now that Karadži? has finally been arrested, he can tell a lot about secret deals that led to the fall of Srebrenica. His testimony represents a great risk for the great western powers," Hartmann is convinced.

These statements of ICTY insider arouse few associations to my mind, such as

• Is the Holbrooke-Karadzic deal existing, like the accused has said ( Karadzic claims that his going into hiding formed part of a deal with Holbrooke, which included his withdrawal from public life in exchange for not being arrested).


• Was the secret deal made about Srebrenica (Bosnian Government and the Bosnian Serb party, possibly with the knowledge of one or more Contact Group States, had an understanding that Srebrenica would not be vigorously defended by the Bosniacs in return for an undertaking by the Serbs not to vigorously defend territory around Sarajevo. The capture of Srebrenica made it easier for the Bosniacs and Serbs to agree on the territorial basis of a peace settlement. The result of the tragedy in Srebrenica contributed in some ways to the conclusion of a peace agreement — by galvanizing the will of the international community, by distracting the Serbs from the coming Croatian attack, by reducing the vulnerability of UNPROFOR personnel to hostage-taking, and by making certain territorial questions easier for the parties to resolve).


• Are we finally getting more clear wider picture about connections between numbers (Srebrenica figure game), reports (as mean of one-sided propaganda) and political PR marketing considering events in Balkans during 1990's?

One can have different opinions about bias of ICTY but from my point of view it offers so far best forum to get some answer to questions mentioned before when both prosecutor and defence have made their case. Anyway the statements of Mrs.Hartmann - as well the book of her former boss del Ponte describing e.g. organ trafficking of Serb civils by Albanian mafia - are giving quite disgusting picture about "realpolitik" behind noble statements of international community.

balkan
Bookmark this on Delicious
AriRusila's Blogarchive

Kosovo -> South-Ossetia -> Abkhazia ->

Originally published 09/08/2008

Georgia launched a major military offensive against South Ossetia on Friday in a bid to regain control of its breakaway province. The attack started few hours after declared ceasefire, just before opening Day of Olympics. The death toll can already be as high as 1400 including some Russian peacekeepers.Kosovo's unilateral proclamation of independence from Serbia last February played a key role in these developments. There may be endless disputes over whether this has created a legal precedent or not, but realpolitik takes its course regardless. The claim of Great (western) Powers that Kosovo is an absolutely unique case showed be a joke almost immediately when UDI based to their orchestration opened the Pandora box.

Moscow and quite a few other capitals considered the move a serious step toward the degradation of international law and the triumph of arbitrary approaches to the resolution of global problems. Nonetheless, Russia has chosen a course of compromise. Russia's leaders could not ignore what happened in the Balkans, but they chose not respond by recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia, even though they believe that after Kosovo was proclaimed independent they had every right to do so.

Pandora box starts to open

• Armenian political expert Stepan Grigoryan says that Yerevan should recognize Serbia’s Kosovo province as a precedent for its recognition of Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh.


• The Silesian Autonomy Movement has sent a petition to Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk asking him to allow all regional communities to gain autonomy status. If he does not agree, the Silesians say they are ready to raise the issue of separation, according to media reports. The movement officially declares its support for the autonomy of Silesia. The association was founded in 1991 and is based mainly in the Polish part of Upper Silesia.


• On May 4, the oil-rich department (province) of Santa Cruz held a vote on autonomy - that is, declaring its independence from the rest of Bolivia. Bolivian government calls the actions of separatist movement as the Kosovo strategy - an American attempt to destabilize a national government it cannot control.


• The potentially destabilizing consequences of this precedent have been much discussed with reference to other unhappy portions of other internationally recognized sovereign states with strong separatist movements practicing precarious but effective self-rule, such as Transniestria, Bosnia's Republika Srpska, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Kashmir, Tibet and Kurdistan.

Exit strategy

The root of the problem is that the international community cannot agree on rules for the independence of small regions. Russia said that granting independence to Kosovo would set a dangerous precedent. I agree with those who said, that Kosovo status - as well other conflicts - can be determine only by negotiations, not by imposition.

From my point of view the best exit strategy from Pandora box is to return to Kosovo case from where all today's development started. The steps forward could be following:

1. Starting real negotiations between local stakeholders with support interested Great Powers and without determined outcome (which was not the case with Status Talks lead by Ahtisaari nor Troika).


2. Accepting the deal made by local partners be it anything they can agree.


3. The international community (and donors) should then support implementation of this deal made by negotiations.

Similar steps could be applied other conflicts also. The possible outcome can be based e.g. to Westphalian order (Westphalian sovereignty is the concept of nation state sovereignty based on two principles: territoriality and the exclusion of external actors from domestic authority structures).

Results can vary from case to case. The form of deal can be e.g. independence with or without partition, federation, confederation, some of autonomy models such as Aland (Province of Finland) or Hong Kong model. At its best the solution can be like"velvet divorce" of the Czechs and Slovaks. And also the worst scenario probably is better than situation today.

balkan
AriRusila's Blogarchive

Forgotten pogrom - Operation "Storm"

Originally published 05/08/2008

Today 13 years has went since the massive ethnic cleansing of more than 250,000 Serbs from Krajina in Croatia. Thirteen years ago, on August 4 1995, 200,000 Croat army and police troops from Croatia and the Croat Defense Council from Bosnia-Herzegovina, under the command of Franjo Tudjman, attacked the United Nations protected zones (safe havens) with Serbian population in northern Dalmatia, Lika, Kordun and Banija. They were helped on the Bosnian side by the Bosnian Muslim fighters and had the operation backed, coordinated and logistically supported by the leading Western powers.

A day later, on August 5, Croat troops have entered the ethnically cleansed town of Knin which was under the heavy missile barrage earlier where, prior to the “Storm”, more than 90 percent of the population were Serbs. In a few days, the complete Serbian population from Krajina in Croatia was forced to flee towards Serbia and Republic of Srpska. Columns with over 250,000 expelled Croatia Serbs were under constant assault of Croat artillery and under fire from the fighter jets which followed them on their collective exodus from Croatia.

According to the data of the Documentation-information Center Veritas, in the pogrom by the Croat army close to 2,000 people were killed, while the Croat Helsinki board claims that during the “Operation Storm” 670 Serbian civilians were killed.

After the “Storm” which, according to Croat president, successfully finalized the ethnic cleansing of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, Tudjman cynically described the pogrom of Croatia Serbs at the opening of the Military school Ban Josip Jelacic in Zagreb, on December 14 1998: “We have, therefore, resolved the Serbian question! There will no longer be 12 percent of Serbs, nor 9 percent of Yugoslavs [mostly Serbs who were declaring themselves as "Yugoslavs" during the censuses], as before.

There are many stories about ethnic cleansing in Balkans. The (western) mainstream media has mostly described how Serbs have tried to cleanse their neighbor regions. This one sided picture is regrettable common even today. people are forgetting, that one explanation to brutalities made by Serbs is their response to brutality others made against them. Also one should remember that Serbia has today more refugees than any other country in western Balkans and international community does not have a slightest attempt to help them return back to their original homes.

As source describing Storm background I have used article published in http://www.byzantinesacredart.com/blog/

AriRusila's Blogarchive

Nazi's Funeral shadows Croatia's past

Originally published on 01/08/2008

Israel's ambassador to Croatia, Shmuel Meirom, harshly criticized on Thursday 31 July 2008 the funeral given to a head of a World War Two concentration camp in Zagreb, saying also that it insulted the memory of those killed in the camp run by Croatia's Nazi-allied Ustasha regime. Sakic died aged 87 on July 20 while serving 20 years in prison for war crimes he committed as head of the notorious Jasenovac camp, the worst of about 40 camps run by the then Nazi puppet regime of Croatia. According to Croatia's Vecernji List daily, Sakic was buried in the Ustasha uniform and described by the priest at the funeral as "a person Croats must be proud of"'.

"I'm convinced that the majority of the Croatian people are shocked by the way the funeral of the Jasenovac commander and murderer, dressed in an Ustasha uniform, was conducted," ambassador Meirom said in a written statement to the state news agency Hina. "At the same time, I strongly condemn the inappropriate words of the priest who served at the funeral and said that Sakic was a model for all Croats"Meirom said.

Dinko Sakic's funeral was an "outrageous display of unrepentant racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia," the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Israeli branch director, Efraim Zuroff, said in a letter on July 30 addressed to President Stipe Mesic. Sakic fled Croatia when the pro-Nazi state was crushed in 1945. He was extradited from Argentina in 1998 to face trial in Croatia, where he was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Jasenovac

The Ustasha's Independent State of Croatia (abbreviated as NDH) was proclaimed on April 10, 1941; territories besides those which were traditionally settled by the Croats were grafted into this state, including all of Bosnia- Herzegovina and parts of Serbia. There were more than two million Serbs living in the newly created puppet state, who made up one third of the entire population of the NDH. There were also significant numbers of Jews, Romanies and members of other national groups. As soon as the NDH was proclaimed, the leader of this Italo-German fabrication, the head of the Ustasha named Ante Paveli?, began to carry out the Ustasha's program of the creation of a "purely Croatian area for living" and a "pure Croat nation".

A very small number of Gypsies was filed, only a few hundred, while it is known that all 25,000-35,000 of them from the NDH were killed in Jasenovac. The Jewish community in Yugoslavia has established the number of 20,000 Jews that were killed in Jasenovac. The numbers of killed Serbs are truly varied. The sources from abroad mention numbers from 300,000 to 700,000. Anyway most of the people killed in Jasenovac were Serbs.

Ante Pavelic

Ante Pavelic was the original Butcher of the Balkans. He was the leader of the Nazi puppet government of the "Independent State of Croatia" who died peacefully in Madrid in 1959. The mass murderer survived the Second World War and never faced a war crimes tribunal unlike Slobodan Milosevic whose alleged crimes pale in comparison. Instead Pavelic was offered sanctuary by the Vatican and became a security advisor to Juan and Eva Person before retiring to fascist Spain.

Recent history

Tudjman, the late blood stained ruler of Croatia, was a proponent of returning Pavelic to Croatia and indeed Pavelic would be pleased to find many new public monuments to his loyal Ustashe springing up like toadstools after a spring rain in democratic Croatia.

At the end of September 1991 (beggining of civil wars in Tito's Yugoslavia, ed. n.), the Croatian Army entered the Jasenovac memorial park by force. According to the Hague Convention on the protection of historical and cultural monuments, the Croatian Army severely broke the agreement by entering the protected area. Although the international public informed about desecration of the memorial park. there was not much of a response. The Serbian forces liberated Jasenovac Memorial Park on October 8, 1991. During the withdrawal the Croatian Army placed explosives (and) blew up the bridge on the Sava River which connected the two parts of the Memorial Park; they also blew up the graves, destroyed the Museum artifacts and stole the Museum equipment. Due to the courage and enthusiasm of individuals who worked at the Memorial Park, some historical materials and objects were saved.

As sources of this article I ave used following links/portals:

• www.vaticanbankclaims.com (Alperin v. Vatican Bank was originally filed in Federal Court in San Francisco in November 1999. The plaintiffs are concentration camp survivors of Serb, Jewish, and Ukrainian background and their relatives as well as organizations representing over 300,000 Holocaust victims and their heirs.The plaintiffs seek an accounting and restitution of the Ustasha Treasury that according to the US State Department was illicitly transferred to the Vatican, the Franciscan Order and other banks after the end of the war)
• www.jasenovac.org (The Jasenovac Research Institute is a non-profit human rights organization and research institute committed to establishing the truth about the Holocaust in Yugoslavia and dedicated to the search for justice for its victims. The JRI promotes research and activities designed to enlighten the world to the crimes of genocide committed at Jasenovac and wartime Yugoslavia against Serbs, Jews and Romas and provides assistance to all groups and individuals who likewise seek justice for these victims.)
• www.jasenovac-info.com (Jasenovac Committee of the Holy Assembly of Bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church)
• www.balkaninsight.com

AriRusila's Blogarchive

Belgrad riots & wider perspective

Originally published on 30/07/2008

This night I was watching news from Belgrade where some 15.000 demonstrators were involved running battles with riot police after a Belgrade rally in support of Radovan Karadzic. In every capital one can find hardliners, extremists or simple hooligans so this event itself is not very dangerous. However the serious question from my point of view is, that according to my rough estimate more than a half of average Serbs in some degree is against the government's plan to extradite Karadzic to the UN war crimes tribunal.

I can find few reasons why one opposes the extradition Mr. Karadzig:

1. The picture of crime itself has changed during his 13 years on the run. Even today's headlines are describing Srebrenica with slogan "worst civilian massacre in Europe since WWII", there is also many arguments about political PR game behind exaggerated death numbers, misrepresentation of early reports and manipulated pictures. Probably a massacre happened but maybe not like that picture which main stream media has offered.
2. ICTY is widely seen as partial "winner's justice" and indeed Haague can not deal with warcrimes made by US or Nato. Thereby there is not so much confidence for fair judicature in ICTY among Serbs.
3. ICTY's reputation with internal - Balkan - matters is also not very good. Everybody remembers the release of Ramus Haradinaj who was indicted warcrimes against Serb, Albanian and Romani civilians in Kosovo and also Muslim Mujahediin commander Naser Oric walked this Summer as a free man from Haague. Serbs (Croatian, Bosnian and Serbian) instead have got some long sentences.
4. Government's motivation to extradite Karadzic is not accepted among many Serbs who look that again only one more act to please EU to get membership status in coming years. Without this EU perspective the trial could as well taken place in Belgrade. Besides attraction of EU heaven gains support only slight majority of population.

My conclusion is, that

• there is indisputable arguments to accuse Mr. Karadzic about warcrimes etc.,
• there is strong argumentation not to extradite Mr. Karadzic to ICTY, and
• warcrimes of all actors - including Bosniacs, Croats, Serbs, US/Nato - should get punishment.

Bulgaria wrestles for EU funds and credibility

Originally published on 23/07/2008

The European Commission is set to withdraw the accreditation of two Bulgarian agencies and bar them for using EU funds after details of a European Commission report on Bulgaria’s fight against corruption and organised crime will be officially issued on July 23. Two agencies under the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works and the Finance Ministry will lose their permits to operate with EU funding under the bloc’s pre-accession programme PHARE. This could deprive Sofia of about €600 million. Two other agency/programme can meet the same procedure.

Some average reader could think that some clever crocks have put nice sum in their pockets because the report highlights corruption, organized crime and economical fraud activities in Bulgaria. Undoubtedly this kind of crimes has happened. However the question about administration of EU funds is more complex than simple crimes. I have worked some 15 years with EU projects and would like bring forward some other aspects from fieldlevel of project management.

EU has some 500-800 different programmes from where individual projects can have 10-100 % financing of their costs. There is some general guidelines, but nearly every programme has also individual regulations, practice and details. For administration it is huge task to manage, coordinate and implement this puzzle.

EU funding/payment can be delayed or revised e.g. if project manager has offered coffee to participants during training session in one programme when this is allowed with other EU programme. Also he can make mistake using real exchange course in payment claim when only monthly average course is allowed. Most projects need own or SME financial contribution but sometimes according one programme rules it comes from too big company, or company is wrong side of municipal border while implementing regional development project. In payment claim some costs can be in wrong budget line or project manager has forgot to ask amendment/revision decision from Management Authority to do so. Some times it is also difficult to interpret if part of project partners´administrative work is its normal development work (uneligible cost) or strictly project development work (eligible cost).

So there is different regulations which are eligible costs in each project depending from which programme main financing is coming. Many times while programme period changes even the EU officials do not know all details which to apply on the beginning of programme period - how then the project manager or province/state level managing authority could forecast them.

Before mentioned boring details can give picture about bad project management, when similar details occurs with most of the projects one can judge situation as bad programme/EU fund management. But one can also see, that this kind of details are far away from organized crime scene.

What is crime from my point of view is that most EU officials/Management Authorities are more interested about small financial details than the outcome of programme/projects. It is possible to keep budget lines, make a perfect financial report where every cent is in right place without any impact on the field. It is as well possible to implement project with excellent results, superb beneficiary feedback, with many spin-offs and follow-ups which following an insufficient financial report will be doomed as failure.

In accordance of my opinion EU should shift the emphasis of the activity from financial nitpicking to goal orientated approach and the first question from EU officials should be the results on the field. The priorities could be e.g. following:

• Is there any sence in proposed Logical Framework of programme/project
• What are the results, are they verified and real
• How the results were achieved (not to estimate justification of costs but to find best practices for similar cases in other regions/fields)
• How much were the costs (to compare relation of results to investment)

In case of Bulgaria I do not know how much the question is corruption, organized crime etc. and how much simply problems with applying complex EU bureacracy new member state. However as taxpayer I would like to see EU concentrating to big lines in real world instead detail hooning between specialists about topics those influence to average citizen are close to zero.

Balkan Future?

Originally published 18/07/2008

One may have noticed that I have had here as well in some discussion forums quite negative or critical comments about today´s Balkan events and politics. In one forum a question was made if I belief Balkan region to have any future. Yes I do.

Western Balkans will have a future and at least following scenarios can be seen:

• "Laizez faire" /frozen conflict -model: West does not revise its politics, East keeps positions. EU will "supervise Kosovo some 20 years backed with Nato, north part lives its life integrated to Serbia - same case with Bosnia. Maybe the most realistic and easy (no one needs to do anything) scenario.
• Deal scenario: US revises its foreign policy after elections and withdraws recognizing of Kosovo, real talks are starting and ending to bitter compromise (e.g. partitioning Kosovo, applying Hong Kong model ...), Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia are independently concentrating more to economical/social questions instead of quarreling borders. Pragmatic result, needs hard work from all stakeholders.
• Crisis scenario: West try to implement "independent" Kosova in the whole territory forcing puppet authority to north pat of province, Serbia sees it occupied territory, Gaza model of conflict. About this scenario the only winner would be organized crime and I really can not think that so stupid policy would attract anyone else or Great Powers who have other real problems.
• Diversity model: All Balkan countries have their own development paths - some countries are going to join fast to EU (Croatia), some are going to do it later (Macedonia, Albania), some are maybe looking alliances from other directions (Serbia), Kosovo will be international protectorate also next decade; Bosnia will totter between breakup, federation/confederation, state, protectorate depending inner politics and exterior influences.

So I indeed think that western Balkan states will have good future (most my probable scenarios were positive side) - especially if one compares it to past decades. My forecast is that in Balkans conflicts will be in smaller scale than before, tolerance and economy are growing and people are starting think more future than past.

Donors & field: Will Kosovo rise with 2 bn bucks?

Originally published on 11/07/2008

A European Union-hosted donors' conference for Kosovo hopes to collect up to 1.5 billion euros on Friday to start turning from an aid-dependent protectorate to a viable economy. USA is throwing in some 400 m$ and Germany with 100-200 m€ are probably the biggest donors at country level so it is fair that their taxpayers know a little bit where the money goes as well people in Kosovo have right to know what to expect.

Here some remarks based to my own experiences in Kosovo:

Long travel from conference to field

• Donors´conference ends to statement or promise to give some estimated sum of money to Kosovo. If this promise will be kept or not we shall see, anyway in many similar conferences the implemented figures have been more or less short f original ones.
• When some sum of donor money actually will be paid from donor so in most cases the donating country takes some percentage for donors own administrative costs before sending rest to management authority.
• When management authority (receiving country, outside agency, consultant ...) gets the charges deducted sum, they are taking off their administrative costs.
• Depending about programme or management practice there can also be some intermediate organizations or middlemen with their administrative costs.
• After this the rest part of donor money is near for the beneficiary and how much money goes all the way depends local administration practice, level of corruption, price fixing/cartel, previously agreed contracts and different needs by local interest groups.

Money goes, report arrives

There is big gap between original donors´ideas and real effects of their donation on the field. EU has gaved some 500-800 m€ during years 1999-2007 to Kosovo power plant. People in Kosovo still suffer power cuts etc. like before despite of army of different international management groups (first managers are already in jail, some should be), consultants, development projects, training activities, infrastructure investments and reports. The new power plant is probably the biggest investment in future with todays donor money.

Earlier some donors gave money to build school in some Kosovo village. School was ready, nice photograf for donors´media was taken, report confirmed that building was made ok, also tendering procedures were made with some standards, audit did not find anything special. So perfect project to satisfy donor? no one pointed attention to a small detail that there was no pupils for the brad new school. Similar examples are bridges, roads and swimming pools middle of no where, housing for returns (empty because people are not returning or going away immediately).

The lesson learned is that perfect report does not mean that something positive development has happened on the field. Reports are describing how money is spend. More effective is concentrate to challenge what to do with donations. Time is also one dimension - needs during donors´conference are not necessary the same than those when money actually arrives to destination.

My point of view is that money is only one of means - one part of resources. the more important parts are vision, objective, strategy, implementation, feed back and especially commitment of beneficiary groups and project management.

Some improvement

Some improvement can be made applying Logical Framework Approach through the process. LogFrame is used in most EU projects, but individual donors have their preferences. LogFrame describes obejectives, action lines, how individual projects are implementing the objective and how the success can be measured. There is also some flexibility according fed back during implementation. Special need at individual project and local level is also use there Participatory Planning methods so that all stakeholders can commit to actions. These two practice does not remove problems mentioned before but they can make the impact of donor money more desired at destination.

I doubt that Serbia was invited to Fridays donors´conference. However Serbia is one of the biggest donors in Kosovo distributing their aid mainly Serb populated areas. In this case there is a good possibility to integrate aid to national and local development programmes. In case of donors´conference the challenge is much more bigger because first the diversity of donors and secondly because of th huge chaos in Kosovo administration between numerous international organizations and local administration. The bottom line is anyway to know how to use resources what ever money is arriving on the field.

U.S. is satisfied with the progress Kosovo ?

Originally published on 05/07/2008

This week U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried said that the U.S. is satisfied with the progress Kosovo. He also add that:

“It is a place completely independent, regardless of whether a UN resolution says that exists or not. It is independent. Kosovo has been recognized by two-thirds of the EU sates, Europe, Japan and Australia. It is as an independent country. I feel sorry that Russia has chosen to make this thing more difficult rather than to ease it, risking the stability but also the European future of Serbia”.

Few comments:

• Completely independent must be a joke. Kosovo is UN protectorate where UN and EU are arguing who has authority to supervise it, Kosovo is occupied by KFOR troops owns one of the biggest Nato bases in its territory and has all symptoms to come next “failed state” in World.
• Recognizing as argument fails also: 40 countries is not the world, some World´s biggest countries - Brazil, China, India, Russia have not recognized it are not planning to do it before new negotiations about status.
• Russia has indeed made thing more difficult because it has defended UN Charter and international law which US&allies have been breaking last decades.
• Strong arguments could be made that US Balkan policy has been risking the Balkan stability by creating a precedent to some 5000 ethnic groups scattered across the globe.

James Bisset was Canada’s ambassador to Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania. He is widely recognized as one of the foremost authorities on Balkan politics. I agree with most of his analysis and quote one of them here:

“United States policy in the Balkans has been dysfunctional since March 1992 when their Ambassador, Warren Zimmerman, persuaded Izetbegovic the Islamist leader of the Bosnian Muslims to withdraw his signature to the Lisbon Agreement. This decision which led to US acceptance of the results of an illegal referendum and recognition of the first Muslim state in Europe triggered civil war in Bosnia and led directly to the death and destruction that followed. In the following years US decisions have proven to be equally disastrous for the region.

The decision of the United States government to support the cause of the terrorist KLA in its armed rebellion to secede from Yugoslavia is another example of US policy making gone wrong.Their current policy supporting independence for Kosovo is but another chapter in an unfolding series of strategic errors.

United States policy in the Balkans has been characterized by cynicism, duplicity and short term tactical gain. By backing Islamist aims in the region and supporting terrorist groups in Kosovo there might be the immediate advantage of establishing a large military base in Kosovo or appeasing further Albanian demands by advocating independence for Kosovo but in the long term it will backfire.”

To me it is alarming, that this US policy has made both during democratic and republican US presidents and not only in Balkans but e.g. in Iraq also. Future shows if the change will come with new president, will he change old advisers also. And will US succeed to gain support for these actions either through the use of NATO or by persuading the European Community or the newly emerging states of Central and Eastern Europe to get on side.

ICO & EULEX & Legality

Originaly published on 02/07/2008

This Monday Head of the International Civil Office (ICO) Pieter Feith expressed his optimism that EU Rule of Law Mission (EULEX) would soon have access to the entire terriory of Kosovo, including the northern Serb-dominated area. He also said that an Assembly of Serbs - established last Saturday - with representatives of 24 municipalities in Kosovo, has no legal effect. This statement came after forth meeting of the international Steering Group (ISG) which is described as an international body with the authority to supervise Kosovo´s independence.

Reading this kind of statements I feel, that words as International, Law, Legal, Authority and Independence are used quite flimsy in mainstream media. Let´s look more some definitations:

• ISG and ICO as international body consists of 25 member countries that have recognized Kosovo´s independence . ISG is like an self-named association more than international body. If e.g. 100 countries those do not have recognized Kosovo´s independence would create similar association it could claim the same authority than ISG.
• Highest international authority so far is UNSC and in Kosovo case its resolution 1244. Resolution says that UNSC "Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2"
• Mentioned Annex 2 e.g. says about interim administration, that "Establishment of an interim administration for Kosovo as a part of the international civil presence under which the people of Kosovo can enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, to be decided by the Security Council of the United Nations."
  
• So in conclusion: Kosovo´s Independence is not legal, ISG/ICO administration does not have legal authority under International Law
• Instead Assembly of Serbs was result of legal elections in Serbian territory and can have some justification at least representing local population in Serb-dominated areas.
• If EULEX is acting like its name obliges, so it can act lawfully only under UN umbrella and the same is case with ISG/ICO actions in Kosovo.

ISG/ICO and EULEX are in Kosovo case now in headlines. One should remember, that more legal international authorities in Kosovo actions are UN/UNMIK and OSCE which both still are acting status-neutral way.

Western Balkans and European perspective

All non-EU states in western Balkans have been sad to have European perspective e.g. that sooner or later BiH, Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Macedonia, Albania and even Kosovo - inside or outside Serbia - would be future EU members. I can not avoid some questions, like

• Can EU any more absorb new members and simultaneously keep alive some its ideas?
• Are European perspective and EU membership the same?
• Are benefits from joining to EU bigger or less than being outside it?
• Is there any alternative strategic alliances to EU?

Today´s EU

EU was meant to be an association of independent regions that pursue their own policies and serve the interests of their people. Today´s EU has Parliament sitting and travelling between Strassbourg and Brussels with zero power and authority. Instead Commission, their army of bureaucrats, lobbyists from different interest groups are keeping EU as their playground. Due the high risk of corruption EU tries to limit damages with Auditors (In Brussels I once heard that there is more auditors in EU than people who are really implementing some practical task). The Parliament´s Puppet democracy is showed by interpreting all speeches/documents to all EU languages and verse, sad that no one is listening or reading them.

EU is today already so big that democracy and efficiency are in constant conflict. When Ireland last week said no to Lisbon Treaty in democratic referendum it same time paralysed EU structure. If EU is enlarging even more the decision making mechanisms and maybe the tasks of EU should be reconstructed again - it should find the core functions again and cut off extra branches, trim the budget and administration. Today EU member states are paying more or less their taxpayers money to common budget and are receiving more or less back through some 500 different EU programmes. When common bureaucracy, Puppet democracy and corruption are taking increasing share so on the field one sees less money and actions. The bottom line is that EU´s ability to absorb enlargement is questionable and even if it could come bigger what´s the idea to join to it.

European perspective vs. EU membership

One common custom is to equate European perspective and EU membership. I totally oppose this equivalence. Almost half of Europe´s territory and 30 % population is not EU members. Does anyone believe, hat e.g. Switzerland and Norway have less European perspective than member-states. Western Europe shows only one part of wholeness of our continent, eastern Europe and also Byzantium are part of continent´s history. Perspective can point East as well than West.

EU has brought many benefits to its citizens - visa-/passport-free traveling and healthy competition over borders, more market economy instead protectionism, comprehensive multidimensional standards numbers of public and private fields. EU has also offered a forum to manage conflicts with peaceful manner.

However some of these benefits can be applied also without EU. For instance one can travel from Finland or Sweden (EU) more easy to Norway (non-EU) than from Hungary to Romania (both EU). Some standards outside EU can be better than worse than inside but one should remember that those standards are decided closer in one state and are not some compromise made in Brussels.

Being outside EU does not mean to be outside EU financing. EU has e.g. its border programmes with neighbors to finance transnational projects and also some inside programmes are open to non member-states. Economically inside EU each member has different case if they have surplus or deficit and how much with their EU budget, the same is valid future new members.

With this article I have highlighted some negative aspects with EU. In case of my home-country Finland I must confess that I have enjoined about many positive things EU has brought to my country, many projects and wider view which could be impossible without membership. Critical questions I have arised to break simple black and white picture which is familiar in simplified mainstream media in western Balkans. The question is too important to let it only to join or not level.

Some options for strategic alliances

So big question is if there is any alternative strategy to joining EU? I would like to see following options to taken into consideration in all non-member-states of western Balkans :

• Strategic linkages to the BRIC countries - Brazil , Russia , India , China. These countries are representing rising economical, cultural and political powers (and markets) in three continent while Western Europe and USA are more and more going towards stagnation or moderate development at most.
• Association Agreement without goal to come member-state could be good alternative and realistic also. Because EU can not absorb Turkey this kind of arrangement can be the most used alternative to enlargement by membership. Every country can negotiate their own association and cooperation agreement and highlight those topics which are important each individual state. Cooperation can be very wide with most of EU member benefits, of course also EU gains its share about cooperation e.g. with logistics through trans-European transport (roads, railways, energy, telecommunication ...) corridors.
• European 'Free Port Zone' - models could be e.g. Kaliningrad, Singapore, Luxemburg, San Marino. This position can make non-member state popular with people who want to live in Europe but do not like high taxes and with businesses that engage in international manufacturing, trade and commerce.

EU is not miraculous power which brings economic and other development with membership status. More important is what people are doing in each western Balkan state. They can develop their societies with or without EU depending individual needs and priorities. If they can develop good country for themselves (not because EU) it can be good country also for outsiders and e.g. diaspora can start to invest back to their old home-country like one can see now for instance in Russia.

Bolton comments on Kosovo/US recognition

Very interesting interview of John Bolton, former US Undersecretary of State and Ambassador to the United Nations popped to my eyes today. The highlights of his comments in Interfax interview were e.g. following:

* US recognition of severed Kosovo province was a serious mistake, leading to an escalation of tensions, instead of calming down the situation in the Balkans.

* "support to the independence of Kosovo is an atavism that might have made sense 15 years ago, but makes no sense today."

* "consensus boils down to the fact that nobody knows where Kosovo is"

Extract from the interview you may find from

http://byzantinesacredart.com /blog/2008/06/bolton-kosovo-mistake.htm

and original interview from

http://www.interfax.com/17/406278/Interview.aspx

Mr Bolton really hit the nail on the head. I also think that the cause to the main problems in Kosovo is hesitation to admit old mistakes. The solution would be starting from clean table. Shall we wait US elections or does someone courage start earlier.

Kosovo administration from chaos to pragmatic new deal

Year 2008 has showed the chaotic stage of international Kosovo administration. Local administration has been in same situation already earlier due parallel institutions, corruption, ethnic tensions, tribe dynasties etc.

When Albanian majority declared Independence Feb. 2008 the idea was to transfer international administration from UN to EU. However the only internationally accepted resolution 1244 - which says that Kosovo is part of Serbia - stayed valid. So that about independence which in mistake was was accepted through some 40 countries.

The unclear situation between UN and EU has now came conflict also between Nato and EU in relation cooperation between Kfor troops and EULEX-mission. Already earlier Kosovo status as special case has served as example to many other ethnic conflict around the world.

Isn´t it now finally time to confess the made mistakes and start new chapter through local stakeholders in stead of quackery by outsiders. I think that the best international crisis management would be to create opportunities for local agreement by means of stick and carrots. This could make it possible to transfer focus from legal nitpicking to long lasting development of economy and democratic process.

One option could be, that UN may decide co-rule Kosovo with Serbia. This option is possible according resolution 1244. Practically it would mean, that Serbia would run vital services in Kosovo's Serb populated areas. The UNMIK-Serbia partnership could be areas like bordercontrol Serbia-Kosovo boundary, customs, police, transport and telecom, justice and protection of Serbian cultral heritage. Already today e.g. education and health care north of Ibar river are integrated to Serbia.Under UN/UNMIK EU could implement in some degree their EULEX so this option can be a realistic solution to this frozen conflict.

This kind of functional division would de facto mean partition but so what if this is pragmatical, long lasting and peaceful solution acceptable to local stakeholders.

Serbia´s National Programme for Integration of Serbia into EU

An outstanding document named as "National Programme for Integration of Serbia into EU" has been published on Serbain government´s web-site (you may find it from my main blog's document library ). This massive work - total 817 pages - outlines activities which Serbia is planning to undertake in all sectors of it society politics and law in order meet challenge/goal to integrate EU.

Serbia (then Yugoslavia) started its EU integration with Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) in November 2000 and Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) was signed April 2008. Parallel to the SAA negotiations Serbia started its National Strategy for the whole process of European integration with goal to reach membership status by 2012. If/when Serbia gets status of an EU membersip canditate the mentioned National Programme is coming one of the key documents of the government for future. It serves as reform guide, base of Government´s anual work plans etc. but most of all well prepared and detailed information on planned reforms not for European Commission/EU but for the Serbian society.

National Programme structures constitute six basic chapters:
1. Political criteria
2. Economic criteria
3. Ability to assume obligations resulting from membership
4. Administrative and judicial capacities
5. Preparation of the national version of acquis
6. Financial requirements and budget funds.

All chapters are describing legal and institutional framework, present situation and especially the planned actions for future and needed resources to implement them. One could forecast, that this document will be one of the most important policy programmes for policy makers in Serbia but more important is that actions through it will have effect to all citizens in Serbia - not only at state level but on the countrary at local level both in public administration, services and private sector development, NGOs and individual citizens.

My articles June 1st to 15th 2008

Kosovo quasi-independence and it´s economical base
Published June 15, 2008 BalkanBlog 0 Comments Edit
Tags: crisis management, economy, EULEX, EUSR, Kosovo, self-governance, Serbia, UN, UNMIK

Today Kosovo had proclamation of it´s constitution. The mainstream media has highlighted conflicts of administration between UN and Kosovo institutions as well between UN and EU. The fact is anyway that the highest authority is the UN resolution 1244, which says that Kosovo is part of Serbia
(ex-Yugoslavia). Indepence declarations, local constitutions, Ahtisaari plan and EULEX are only at secondary level.

More important factor by my opinion for future of Kosovo is the economical base of this province. Official statistics from year 2006 shows that export from Kosovo amounted to 71.3 millon Euro while import increased to 1,241.7 million Euro (u by 802 million Euro compared with 2005). So the increase of import was more that the whole export.

From where is money coming to this consumption. The estimate is that when export brings mentioned 71 million Euro the organised crime (mainly drug trafficing) brings 1 bilion Euro, diaspora gives 500 million Euro and international community 200 million Euro.

If border control will bemore effective and when donations rom diaspora and international community are decreasing (like they have during last years) the basic question is how to reinforce the economical base of province.

Public debatte between UN and local politicians or between UN and EULEX is covering mentioned economical fact under. In my opinion Kosovo needs more economical development mission than rule and law mission. The later can be implemented trough UNMIK and Interpol. The future self-governance in Kosovo should have healthy economical base.
Full chaos with Kosovo administration
Published June 13, 2008 BalkanBlog 0 Comments Edit
Tags: crisis management, EULEX, Kfor, Kosovo, Nato, Serbia, UN UNMIK, western Balkans

Year 2008 has showed the chaotic stage of international Kosovo administration. Local administration has been in same situation already earlier due parallel institutions, corruption, ethnic tensions, tribe dynasties etc.

When Albanian majority declared Independence Feb. 2008 the idea was to transfer international administration from UN to EU. However the only internationally accepted resolution 1244 - which says that Kosovo is part of Serbia - stayed valid. So that about independence which in mistake was was accepted through some 40 countries.

The unclear situation between UN and EU has now came conflict also between Nato and EU in relation cooperation between Kfor troops and EULEX-mission. Already earlier Kosovo status as special case has served as example to many other ethnic conflict around the world.

Isn´t it now finally time to confess the made mistakes and start new chapter through local stakeholders in stead of quackery by outsiders. I think that the best international crisis management would be to create opportunities for local agreement by means of stick and carrots. This could make it possible to transfer focus from legal nitpicking to long lasting development of economy and democratic process.

Co-rule as new option to open Kosovo deadlock
Published June 10, 2008 BalkanBlog 0 Comments Edit
Tags: Kosovo, Serbia, conflicts, politics, UN, UNMIK, EULEX, EU, crisis management, South Eastern Europe, EUSR, western Balkans

Albanian dominated Kosovo government is planning to start implement their quasi-independence 15th June, when UN should transfer administration to EULEX mission. Without new UN SG decision this is not realistic option so the the meaning of whole international administration, UN legacy and EU civil crisis management is in question.

One reasent option came public last week: UN may deside co-rule Kosovo with Serbia. This option is possible according resolution 1244. Practically it would mean, that Serbia would run vital services in Kosovo’s Serb populated areas. The UNMIK-Serbia partnership could be areas like bordercontrol Serbia-Kosovo boundary, customs, police, transport and telecom, justice and protection of Serbian cultral heritage. Already today e.g. education and health care north of Ibar river are integrated to Serbia.

Under UN/UNMIK EU could implement in some degree their EULEX so this option can be a realistic solution to this frozen conflict.

This kind of functional division would de facto mean partition but so what if this is pragmatical, long lasting and peaceful solution acceptable to local stakeholders.

Elections in FRYMacedonia
Published June 3, 2008 BalkanBlog 0 Comments Edit
Tags: crisis management, EU, EU enlargement, Kosovo, Macedonia, politics, South Eastern Europe

Elections in FRYMacedonia showed from my point of view two factors typical in Balkans: 1st how fragile is peace orchesterated by outsiders and 2nd what kind of “powderkek” Balkan area is. Outsiders have coerced peace also in Bosnia and Kosovo which both have continuening problems. However divorce between Serbia and Montenegro was peaceful, because both states acted according their agreement and honored the result of referendum. This kind of approach - outsiders out, locals in - could bring more peace also to other frozen conflicts.

My profile

Ari RUSILA's Resume

• Ari Rusila is a development project management expert from Finland with a special interest in the Balkan region. His other interests include civil crisis management issues and middle East.
  

Contacts

• Name: Ari RUSILA

• Address: Polttolinja 17 B 10, FIN-40520 Jyväskylä, FINLAND, EU

• E-mail: rusilaari@yahoo.se

Personal

• Home: Jyväskylä, FINLAND

• Nationality: FIN

Work history:

• 06/2004-06/2007 Project manager, Jyväskylä university of Applied Sciences/INR/NorWat project. Total progress and financial responsibility of NorWat funded by EU Intrerreg IIIB NPP. Locations in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Scotland. Budget > 1.2 MEUR


• 01/2000-10/2002 EU Municipal Expert, European Agency for Reconstruction (EAR). Seconded to UNMIK in Leposavic, Mitrovica Region, Kosovo, SCG. Capacity building of local administration, project management/ coordination, business registration; youth, culture and sport sectors


• 06/1998-12/1999 Project co-ordinator, Municipality of Salla. Project Coordinator (Lead) of Tacis CBC TSP 55/97 project. Creating the project plan and application before start. Managing the project from start to end. Location Kovdor, Murmansk Region, Russia


• 11/1983-05/1998 Economic Development Officer, Municipality of Salla. SME developing, strategy and sectoral planning at local and regional levels, project management (EU programmes and Interreg), cross border cooperation with Russia, Barents cooperation.

Education:

• Master of Arts Social Science,University of Jyväskylä, Finland
  


• Secondary upper education in Jyväskylä Lyceé, Finland

Training (e.g.):

• Pinnacle Public Relations, Communications seminar, 19.10.2005 - 21.10.2005


• NPP JPS, Training for lead partners from Interreg IIIB Northern Periphery Programme, 02.02.2005- 04.02.2005


• EU TaskForce Kosovo, Training course for EU experts in Kosovo, 15.01.2000 - 25.01.2000


• SVYS, Russian trade course for officers of Lapland, 29.09.1998 - 25.05.1999


• Lingua center, Murmansk, Russian intensive course, 21.09.1998 - 25.09.1998


• Lingua center, Murmansk, Russian intensive course, 27.06.1996 - 06.07.1996


• Oy Rastor Ab, Russian Trade training programme, 15.01.1993 - 16.06.1993


• European Democratic Studens, 3rd European Summer University, München, BRD


• European Democratic Studens Org., 2nd European Summer University, Valencia, Spain

Languages

• Mother tongue: Finnish
  


• Other: English (C1), German (B1), Swedish (B2), Russia (A2)

Skills and competences

· Team work experience also with multicultural teams

· LogFrame Approach and experience of Project Cycle management at all it’s levels

· Implementing experience with Participatory Planning Methods and Goal Orientated Project Planning methods

· Ability to survive and solve problems in crisis-/post-crisis societies

· Capacity building and SME developing at local and regional level is familiar to me with nearly 20 years experience

Qualifications:

· Field experience 1: My work in Kosovo gave me clear picture of problems in Balkans

· Field experience 2: My work in Russia trained me to make practical solutions between anarchical field work and western regulations

· Field experience 3: My work in Lapland (FIN) trained me all aspects of project management from ideas and strategies through action plans to implementation of individual projects