Radical Islamists arming their selves in Balkans

Radical Islam is again in headlines thanks for recent attack in Mumbai. Already during battle discussion had started about foreign connections of terrorists. Besides Pakistan also British and Bosnian connections were mentioned. The question is mostly related to Muslim immigrants living in West. As far as Bosnia or western Balkans is concerned the core problem is created after mid-90s when region started to transform to safe haven for radical Islam.

Background

In my article “Radical islamist network spreading in Balkans” (28/09/2008) I summarized that

Radical Islam has enforced and widened their activities in Balkans last 15 years. During Bosnian war many foreign Islamists came to fight in mujahedeen brigade also many Al Quida figures - including Osama bin Laden - were supporting Bosnian Muslims 1990's. Later they gave their support to KLA/UCK (Kosovo) which leaders now are leading Kosovo province based on US and EU support. After bombing campaign 1999 radical Islam has been one major donor in Kosovo and Wahhabi schools and former secularized Kosovo Muslims are displaced by radical Islamic movement. During Balkan wars e.g. Bosnia was acting as Europe’s leading training camp for domestic and foreign Islamists and their supporters. So it is easy to see the real or exaggerated connections between Britain, Bosnia and Afghanistan/Pakistan.

British-Pakistan connection

In an article of one British publication(Telegraph.co.uk 29/11/2008) is a pithy description over Brit-Paki way to Radicalism.

The path from Britain to the terror training camps of Pakistan is a well-trodden one, with dozens of young Muslim extremists from this country travelling abroad to learn their deadly trade. In most cases they make the journey after being radicalised by preachers in Britain, who tell them that Islam is under attack around the world and that they cannot stand by idly or simply raise money for the cause. Some claim they only wanted to fight against the enemy in Kashmir or Afghanistan, or to learn how to defend fellow Muslims in other warzones such as Bosnia or Chechnya.

Radical Islamists arming their selves in Bosnia

Western Balkans is known as junction of different kind of trafficking. Biggest profits probably are coming from drugs arriving from Afghanistan to be distributed in EU area. Related to issue of terrorism the arms trafficking is now alarming not only because their selling in EU but because their planned use in Europe by radicals.

Last week an article in Serbianna (24/1/208) gave more light to topic. A group of radical Islamists that is ready to engage in terror activities is based in Bosnia, says Bosnia's police chief Zlatko Miletic. "Wahabis have become the synonym for that sort of terrorism, but here is matter is about salafis as well," says Miletic. He continues that 4 different groups operate in Bosnia, all of interest, because of their views of the world. Most concerning, says Miletic, is that these groups are buying suicide vests adding that early in 2008, Wahabis and other groups sympathetic to al-Qaeda are moving large quantities of explosives and weapons to Croatia. Islamic terrorists believe that Croatia will soon become a member of the EU which would allow an unimpeded weapons transfer from Croatia and into Europe.

Wahabi trial in Serbia

At the regional conference on security held in October in Slovenia's city of Kranj, Serbia's security minister Ivica Dacic stressed that there is evidence of presence of the international and domestic terrorism in Serbia citing Albanian terrorism in the south and the influence of Wahabis in the Raska area, referred to as Sandjak by the Muslims. End of November 2008, a trial of 15 Wahabis started after Serbia's police broke up the group involved in a plot to bomb buildings across Serbia and the US Embassy in Belgrade. One of the Wahabis, Ismail Prentic, escaped to Kosovo where local Albanians gave him sanctuary. Prentic was later apprehended but died in a shoot out with the police. According sources the Wahabis secretly train, mobilize, inspire and train recruits from the converts to be experts in explosives.

The prosecution at the trial of 15 Wahabis charged that they have plotted terrorism has shown Osama bin Laden videos that have been found on the laptop confiscated during a raid on the Wahabi camp earlier this year. Many security analyst note that al Zawahiri’s (probably N:o 2. in al-Qaeda) brother was dispatched to the Balkans to establish al-Qaeda cells in regions dominated by Muslims such as Bosnia and Raska and Kosovo regions in Serbia. (Source Serbianna 29/11/2008)

Croats in Bosnia under attack

In my article “Islamic terror in Bosnia” (13/10/2008) I described how a Croatian NGO Libertas made public statement in which it says that Croatians in Bosnia are victims of Bosnian Muslim terror and are asking Bosnian Croat political leadership to initiate a plan that will break up the Bosnian Federation entity and form a Croatian one.

The tensions have continued since October. E.g. police in Mostar, Bosnia-Herzegovina, are still on alert, although eight days have passed since Muslim and Croat students engaged in a fierce clash.Five days ago, local police prevented a mass free-for-all of some 300 students. The date and time for the fight was set in advance via an internet portal, and was to take place between Croat and Muslim youths on the line which divides the town of Mostar to its eastern and western parts. (Source B92 29/11/2008)

Bottom line

The Wahabism is "alien" not only to Bosnia and Kosovo but in the entire south-eastern Europe, where secularism has been common until last decade. The issues of Wahabism could quickly disturb the harmony of the Kosovo Albanian patriarchal family structure dominated by honor and vendettas.

The Radical Islam is relatively new phenomenon in Balkans. It has good connections to other relevant players on scene and motivation enough to die for their case. Is it now with more arms progressing on new more aggressive stage shall be seen.

More over Balkans and Caucasus in my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
ari rusila

UN adopts 6-point plan for Kosovo - bye bye independence experiment

A week ago I wrote here an article “UN deciding over plan for Kosovo – which plan to select?”. On the table was a 6-point plan negotiated between UN and Serbia, and a 4-point plan, a declaration by Kosovo’s separatist government. Now we know the answer – 6-point plan was selected unanimously in UNSC. Next question would be the consequences of decision.

The Decision

The UN Security Council on Wednesday 26^th Nov. 2008 in New York unanimously adopted the UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon's report on the reorganization of the civil mission in Kosovo. Ban’s spokesman Brenden Varma told B92 earlier today that the secretary-general’s report welcomes the positive outcome of the talks on the six points of the UNMIK reorganization and Belgrade’s decision to accept the agreement.

Serbia’s Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić welcomed Ban's Kosovo report, saying

"The explicit language of the report confirms the status neutrality of EULEX's engagement, which is a guarantee that no part of its mandate can be devoted to the implementation of the Ahtisaari Plan for Kosovo's independence-rejected by the Republic of Serbia, and 'never endorsed by the Security Council,' in the words of the report that is before us today." (Source B92)

"EULEX will fully respect Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) and operate under the overall authority and within the status-neutral framework of the United Nations," Ban Ki-moon said in the report to the UN Security Council. By working within the framework of the resolution, the mission in Kosovo will not imply any recognition of the territory's independence. (AFP)

The consequences

Analysts in Priština have noted, that accepting the 6-point-plan for would mean that the Kosovo officials would formally lose their sovereignty over North Kosovo, though this sovereignty does not exist essentially. One could think that latest UNSC decision does not change anything. My opinion is that some change will come and that decision opens also new possibilities for future status arrangements. The follow-up could include following aspects:

• The immediate impact will be that finally EULEX rule of law mission can be deployed throughout Kosovo. This means that some 2.000 experts is coming to secure his sector in Kosovo and hopefully also to make develop local capacities.
• International administration today in protectorate is a big mess – International Community Office, Eulex, EU Kosovo delegation and Kfor are twisting arms who is doing what and where, in addition there is a group of other powerful actors such as OSCE and liaison offices of foreign countries. The decision streamlines international administration and chain of command at least partially.
• The local administration will coordinate with internationals in Albanian majority regions and with Serbia in Serb dominated regions. However if the local stakeholders want administer more themselves without international supervision now they have possibility to negotiate future status between Pristina and Belgrade and without artificial time limits.
• If Pristina and Belgrade want Kosovo to be more than UN protectorate forever they can now adopt some of countless amount of different territorial autonomy models, develop a totally new one between themselves or agree some partition of Kosovo. One could predict that what ever compromise or outcome will mutually be agreed it will also be accepted in UN and other international bodies.

From frozen conflict to frozen independence

UN decision clarifies situation which escalated by Kosovo’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence. This came in right moment before Kosovo would developed to next “failed or captured state”. Probably also local population in Kosovo has noticed during short independence experiment that for state more is needed than only flag and anthem. Now – when e.g. EU still is pumping money to province – is time to build own administrative capacity, hopefully democratic practices and sustainable economy. As UN protectorate – even formally still as one province of Serbia – and by backing of EU funds the population in Kosovo has leverage peacefully, without time limits and predicted outcome to develop its autonomy and next future status.

More my views one may find from my Archives:blog

balkan
belgrade
EULEX Kosovo
ari rusila

War crime selected – organ harvesting from Serbs by KLA

One of the most macabre recent war crime is harvesting organs from captured Serbs by Kosovo Albanian guerrillas during Kosovo conflict 1998-99. The story was kept undercover by western mainstream media until last April 2008 before former UN war crimes prosecutor Carla del Ponte opened her mouth. New reportages was made e.g. by German Der Spiegel magazine and justice departments from Albania and Serbia have started high level cooperation for case. Council of Europe has decided to re-examine the case, which maybe has also link to illegal organ transplant clinic raided in Pristina, Kosovo, early November 2008.

The Guardian article

A new article by Paul Lewis appeared in the Guardian on Nov. 25^th 2008 giving a quite complementary picture of events. His story includes also a video clip over trip of Mr. Lewis to “slaughterhouse” a country house in northern Albania's mountain region near town Burrel.

Here a comprehensive quote about background:

Of all the many atrocities that human rights groups want investigated from the 1998-99 Kosovo conflict, the alleged harvesting of organs from Serbian soldiers by ethnic Albanians is one of the most gruesome. Hundreds of Serbian families have for a decade been demanding what happened to those who disappeared during and after the war. In April, Carla Del Ponte the former UN war crimes prosecutor, gave greater credence to suggestions of a macabre operation, in which as many as 300 Serbs were allegedly abducted and transported to Albania to have their organs removed. In a memoir, she wrote: "Victims deprived of only their first kidney were sewn up and confined again inside the shack until they were killed for their vital organs."

UN examination 2004

After Mrs. Del Ponte’s sensational disclosure started a work to verify her statements. For example UN had made some checking based ICTY testimonials. However, the UN examination, commissioned by Del Ponte, was previously believed to be missing. Now the Guardian has obtained the report of a UN forensic examination, by a UN expert, José Pablo Baraybar of the Katuci house – aka "yellow house" aka "Burrel house" aka "slaughterhouse" – and it can be found from here.

Baraybar, the former director of the UN's missing persons and forensics unit in Kosovo, said his team found "highly indicative evidence" that pointed to organ removal at the Burrel house, and prosecutors received testimony from eight witnesses. They comprised "foot soldiers" who claimed to be present during the surgery, he said, and a driver who claimed he brought small groups of Serb soldiers to the house from across the Kosovo border. The driver then described taking conspicuous packages to Tirana airport, bound for flights to Turkey. The surgeon conducting the operations was identified as a Kosovan doctor from Pec, Baraybar said.

Re-examination and a new link

The Council of Europe has decided to re-examine the organ case. A special investigator Dick Marty and his team are starting their work by gathering data from Belgrade, Pristina and Tirana.

Marty's investigation could gain additional impetus from the recent discovery of an illegal organ transplant clinic in neighbouring Kosovo. Police there raided a clinic in the suburbs of Pristina three weeks ago, arresting two doctors and the country's acting permanent secretary at the ministry of health, Ilir Rexhaj. Interpol is helping to search for a third doctor, Yusuf Ercin Sonmez, a notorious Turkish surgeon who they believe was behind the operation. (Source the Guardian article).

Selected war crimes – Why?

Why these events are coming public now after ten years? My claim is that only selected war crimes go forward. Some reasons for this from my point of view are following:

• The Anglo-American mainstream media selected its side in Balkan wars already middle 90s . The partly fabricated reports about brutalities of Serbs were published almost real-time; same time and later too the media was silent about the opposite reports of investigations or brutalities made by other sides.
• Politically it was not reasonable to change this created one-side picture about the Serbs as “bad guys” too soon to secure ground for further development of western interests in Balkans.
• The “good guys” were allies of western powers and gained local political leadership e.g. in Kosovo so of course Misters Thaci, Ceku and Haradinaj could not be guilty for some war crimes – they were representing poor Albanian victims (before side selection – middle 0s - US was treating their organisation as terrorist and criminal one).
• The witness protection in Balkans is too weak in pressure of tribe society and criminal – now political clans to get any sentence like it as case in Hague with Mr Oric (leader of Mujahedeen brigade in Bosnia) and with Mr. Haradianj (KLA leader and later PM of Kosovo).

Now the one-sided picture is slowly starting to crack, more comprehensive picture e.g. over Srebrenica case will came public when both prosecutor and defence of Karadzic have made their case. The today’s criminal activities of freedom fighters are coming public and their earlier war crimes will get new light. The big players – e.g. USA with its use of depleted uranium in Kosovo and probably other places also – will of course escape again due the immunity granted in international courts.

More my views over Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
ari rusila

Two Images of Transdnistria

When I sometimes in my blogs wrote about Transdnistria (officially Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic – PMR) the most common feedback has been following:

“Transnistria is a refuge for the criminal organizations being engaged in the illegal sale of weapons, in the contraband and in the money laundering, its also a rogue state.” One could conclude that for western public has quite a bad if any image of Transdnistria. Having criticised earlier western mainstream media picture about Balkan events I wanted to check if the tradition is repeating itself same way in case Transdnistria.

Transdnistria

(Map Source - http://pridnestrovie.net)

Nato

Nato Parliamentary Assembly’s sub-committee on east-west economic co-operation and convergence published 7^th October 2007 its report over Moldova and stated:

Transnistria remains a haven for organised criminal groups, which are engaged in illegal arms sales, smuggling, and money laundering. It hosts the largest post-Soviet army depot in Kolbasna, the Russian (formerly Soviet) 14^th Army and several Soviet era armament factories.

Reading this kind of statements makes me really wonder the level of intelligence and analysis of Nato. The least I could hope would be, that the decisions are based to more comprehensive material.

The views of UNDP, EUBAM and OSCE are different

A) UNDP

The 2006 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report (SALW Survey of Moldova, SEESAC/UNDP 2006-07-01, note: SALW = Small Arms and Light Weapons) states that there is currently a degree of transparency and good levels of co-operation with Pridnestrovie in the field of weapons control. It also says that the

Evidence for the illicit production and trafficking of weapons into and from Transdniestria has in the past been exaggerated. While trafficking of SALW from the territory controlled by the Transdniestrian authorities is likely to have occurred prior to 2001, there is no reliable evidence that this still occurs. The same holds true for the production of SALW, which is likely to have been carried out in the 1990s primarily to equip the Transdniestrian security forces.

B) OSCE

The OSCE and European Union officials state that there is no evidence that Transnistria has ever, at any time in the past, trafficked arms or nuclear material. The OSCE mission spokesman Claus Neukirch spoke about this situation: "There is often talk about sale of armaments from Transnistria, but there is no convincing evidence."

C) EUBAM

Since EUBAM began its work in 2005, it has been unable to document any of Moldova's charges against Pridnestrovie over alleged arms trafficking. Before the arrival of European Union monitors on Pridnestrovie's border, Moldovan government officials routinely claimed that Pridnestrovie (or Transnistria, as the state is referred to in Moldova) was "a black hole" in which numerous criminal acts took place. The work of the EUBAM mission since 2005 has been able to disprove these claims as mere anti-Pridnestrovie propaganda.

From EUBAM PressPack (http://www.eubam.org/files/300-399/323/press-pack-eng-jan08.pdf) following quote:

The Mission is aware that there have been rumours related to arms-trafficking from the Transdniestrian region of Moldova. Obviously we are not in a position to speak about the period of time before the opening of the Mission but we have made clear on several occasions that the EUBAM is not aware of any significant arms find since the operation of the Mission.

The bottom line

It seems that earlier maybe fabricated image still holds when opposite evidence meets the silence in western media. If one likes conspiracy theories s one could be, that the motive of disinformation is to cover other operations. Few years ago USA made pressure to Moldovan authorities to accept use of Moldova’s air space for arms trafficking from Bosnia to Iraq with V.Butt’s company (an arm dealer in trial now in Thailand). Moldova has also served as logistical base for many arm trafficking operations to Africa to different sides which maybe have not been noted while the view has been focused to Transdnistria.

More my views over Caucasus one may find form my Archives:Blog

Depleted Uranium from Nato bombs killing people in Balkans

I was just reading an article "Nato Still killing People in Kosovo" related to an issue of use depleted uranium during Nato bombings against Serbia. This topic was discussed years ago when e.g. I was working in Kosovo, however any proof then did not came to my hands. I also do not know if depleted uranium is used other conflicts in Balkans or elsewhere. Anyway if this is not a war crime so what is? Now we can have more information and I was so upset about that article published in Croatian "Javno" News portal that I quate it as such here without more comments:

NATO Still Killing People in Kosovo Back in 1999 NATO carried out a 78-day shelling of Serbia and Kosovo. They allegedly used depleted uranium which continues to kill people.Nine years after NATO’s bombing of Serbia, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is still taking lives in Kosovo, Serbia’s Pressonline reported. The NATO allegedly used shells with depleted uranium which are still today causing an increase in the number of cancer patients.Prior to 1999, the number of Serbs who suffered from malignant tumours was three times lesser, according to the statistics of Serb hospitals. In Kosovo’s Kosovska Mitrovica in 2005 there were 38 percent more cancer patients than in 2004.In those two years, a total of 3,500 cancer cases in Kosovo Albanians were diagnosed.Globally, six people out of a thousand suffer from malignant tumours on average. In the Kosovska Mitrovica hospital, there are 200 cancer patients to 1,000 people. NATO used weapons banned by international conventions? After 2000, groups of experts in atomic energy tested water, food, air, plants and animals to establish the damage caused by radiation from NATO shells. Beta and Gamma radiation was higher than the permissible level and radiation was discovered in the soil, water, plants and animals. After it gets into the soil, it takes some 250 years for depleted uranium to degrade. The conclusions of the studies were that the environment on 100 locations in Kosovo was not safe for animals or people, but no bans or moving of the population was carried out. European peace troops stationed in Kosovo knew there was great danger of radiation in these areas. Italian military experts concluded in 2005 that 34 soldiers had died from leukaemia and various malignant tumours. Since then 150 soldiers from Kosovo were sent home. In mid-2000 NATO published a map with 112 marked locations that had been shelled with depleted uranium. Over the 78 days of NATO bombing, a total of 31,000 shells with depleted uranium, weapons banned by international treaties, were dropped in Kosovo. Objavljeno: 17.11.2008. u 12:04h

Global Trends 2025 & Europe

I just took a glance at very interesting new report published on 21^st November 2008 by the United States National Intelligence Council - Washington's main intelligence body. The report, Global Trends 2025: A World Transformed, is published every four years to give U.S. leaders insight into looming problems and opportunities. This agency of agencies, formed in 1979, brings together analysis from each of America's multiple intelligence organizations to develop mid- to long-term strategic thinking for the country's security community.

Highlights

Here only few highlights of this 120 pages analysis:

• The whole international system—as constructed following WWII—will be revolutionized. Not only will new players—Brazil, Russia, India and China— have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.
• "Europe by 2025 will have made slow progress toward achieving the vision of current leaders and elites: a cohesive, integrated, and influential global actor," but not be a major military player. The European Union will be a "hobbled giant" crippled by internal bickering and a eurosceptic citizenry.
• "Europe will remain heavily dependent on Russia for energy in 2025, despite efforts to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy and lower greenhouse gas emissions."
• "Crime could be the gravest threat inside Europe as Eurasian transnational organisations - flush from involvement in energy and mineral concerns - become more powerful and broaden their scope."
• By 2025 "One or more governments in eastern or central Europe could fall prey to their domination," the authors believe about Eastern European organised crime.

(The full report can be downloaded from http://www.dni.gov/nic/PDF_2025/2025_Global_Trends_Final_Report.pdf)

My view

Intelligence Services do not have very high respect in my mind, but this report anyway has some noteworthy observations or views for further consideration.

The future of EU can very well be like forecasted in report – big economic and weak military player on globe suffering same time from gap between EU (eurosceptic) citizens and EU bureaucracy. I personally think that EU structure will develop in circles. First there is a core around old big players France-Germany, second circle will be the rest EU member states who have strong national interests or exceptions to core’s politics, third circle would be EU’s cooperation neighbours under Northern or Mediterranean dimension (including e.g. Turkey which EU probably can not absorb as member state) and forth circle will be the rest of he world with different cooperation schemes (Partnership agreement with Russia, transatlantic cooperation with USA etc).

The picture of EU’s energy dependency on Russia is surprisingly realistic having in mind EU’s ambitious “Supergrid” plan published mid-November 2008 and US’s and EU’s recent marketing for “southern energy corridor” - Nabucco-line.(More in my article “Powergame in EU-Russia summit” on 14.11.2008 in my Archives:Blog).

Organized crime indeed can be also big thread and my bet is, that Kosovo – if regarded as a state - has good change be first “captured” state; the local government already is leaded by drug lords and crime tribes in the centre of Balkan route.

More my views over Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
EULEX Kosovo
ari rusila

UN deciding over plan for Kosovo – which plan to select?

Some 5.000 to 10.000 Kosovo Albanians protested on Wednesday in Pristina against the UN plan on the reconfiguration of Unmik. Last week, the United Nations put forward an amended 6-point plan for the deployment of the EU's EULEX mission. The United Nations’ six-point plan, negotiated between the UN Secretary General, Serbia and the European Union has been rejected by Kosovo leaders who argue it compromises Pristina’s sovereignty. On 18^th Nov.2008 Kosovo’s separatist government offered own 4-point plan, saying final "no" on 6-points.

Background

Straight after Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence EU launched its rule and law mission EULEX. The idea was to deploy a new civilian mission in Kosovo to replace the UN administration. However UNSC did not replace resolution 1244 - which was adopted in 1999 when the international administration and peacekeepers enter the province and confirms Serbia’s sovereignty over the province - so new mission’s legal base was in doubt.

Six-point-plan

To deploy EULEX the Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon of UN proposed on July 2008 technical negotiations between UN and Belgrade and Pristina authorities over six issues – police, customs, judicial system, traffic-infrastructure, borderline and Serbian cultural heritage.

Serbia outlined three conditions under which it would accept deployment - that

• Eulex secure UN security council approval,
• be neutral with respect to Kosovo's status and
• not implement the Ahtisaari Plan, which also lacks security council authorisation.

Few weeks ago agreement with Belgrade was reached. The amended six-point plan of the UN secretary-general, which Serbia declared it would support, also envisages an autonomous police force for Serb-majority areas, which would receive directives from the UN's mission in Kosovo (Unmik); with Eulex responsible for policing structures in majority-Albanian areas.

Four-point- plan

Analysts in Priština have noted, that accepting the 6-point-plan for would mean that the Kosovo officials would formally lose their sovereignty over North Kosovo, though this sovereignty does not exist essentially. This view Kosovo’s separatist government shares.

The rival plan unveiled by President Fatmir Sejdiu is argued by Pristina to be in accordance with Kosovo’s constitution and the UN plan for Kosovo’s independence drafted by ex-UN envoy for Kosovo’s final status, Martti Ahtisaari. “First – We back the very swift deployment of EULEX in Kosovo according to the mandate foreseen in the declaration of independence, Ahtisaari’s Plan and the Constitution of the Kosovo Republic.” “Now Kosovo has its own four point plan which is a blueprint for EULEX’s extension all over the territory of the Republic of Kosovo,” added Kosovo’s head of government. (BalkanInsight 18/11/2008)

The proposed plan includes four points (Source New Kosova Report 18/11/2008):

• the Government of the Republic of Kosovo support the quick deployment of EULEX in Kosovo in based on Independence Declaration, Ahtisaari document and Kosovo Constitution;
• institutions of the Republic of Kosovo reject entirely the Six-Point Plan;
• institutions of the Republic of Kosovo will closely cooperate with EULEX in the entire territory of Kosovo; and
• institutions of the Republic of Kosovo will cooperate as always with the United States of America, the European Union and NATO.

From my point of view word plan is exaggerated in this case, declaration or statement could describe beter the content.

USA decides …what?

Kosovo leaders continued 18^th Nov. 2008 talks with the US State Undersecretary for Eurasia Daniel Fried and EU officials on finding a solution for the deployment of EULEX on the whole territory of Kosovo. After talks Kosovo leaders informed that USA is backing their 4-point plan.

However on 20th Nov. 2008 US Ambassador to Serbia Cameron Munter says Kosovo officials have been informed of Washington’s support for the UN six-point plan, and Pristina is also urged to back the plan. The ambassador said Pristina was told that it should take into consideration that an agreement with Belgrade has been reached over the (6-point) plan and that Washington, which has been instrumental in supporting Kosovo’s efforts to gain independence from Serbia, deems the plan acceptable as well. (Source: BalkanInsight 20/11/2008)

Prima facie the 6-point and 4-point seems to be mutually exclusive, but hey are not when understanding 4-point to valid south of Ibar river and 6-point north of that.

To be continued

The session of the UN SC on Kosovo at which the Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon is expected to submit his report might be held on coming week. Until then, Belgrade has interrupted all further talks waiting for the Ban Ki-Moon’s report. If conditions set by Belgrade are precisely defined in that report (status neutrality of the EULEX deployed in Kosovo under the UN umbrella and not implementing Martti Ahtisaari’s plan), Serbia shall give the green light for deployment of the EULEX in the whole territory of Kosovo.

Accepting 6-point-plan does not change the actual situation on the ground. Southern part will continue its life under EU supervision implementing Ahtisaari plan, northern part will formally continue to be an UN protectorate de facto integrated to Serbia.

More over topic one may find from my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
EULEX Kosovo
ari rusila

Croatia's and Serbia’s ‘Genocide’ Case To Proceed

Last century was marked deep ethnic tensions between Croats and Serbs. These tensions erupted most violent way during WWII and Yugoslavia’s breakup wars early 1990s. Now this brutal past is going on tables of international courtrooms while Croatian lawsuit against Serbia and Serbia’s countersuit will be heard in Haague.

ICJ

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on Tuesday 18^th Nov. 2008 that it can hear a Croatian lawsuit filed against Serbia for genocide during the war in the early 1990s. The verdict of the 17-member trial chamber at the United Nations’ highest court was delivered by Court President Rosalyn Higgins at a public session. The trial chamber officials voted 10 to seven in favour of Croatia.

Earlier Belgrade claimed that the International Court of Justice has no authority in the case. However the court ruled that Belgrade recognised the jurisdiction of the ICJ during the 1990s by responding to suits filed against it by Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, and by filing charges against the NATO alliance for its bombing of Serbia in the spring of 1999.

Since an out-of-court settlement is highly unlikely, the next expected step is the confirmation of the suit being filed by Croatia, after which the Serbian legal team would be given at least a year to prepare both its defence and the countersuit announced by its legal representatives for the alleged genocide committed by Croatia against ethnic Serbs during the war. (Source BalkanInsght).

Croatia

Croatia filed the suit in 1999, claiming that Belgrade participated in the ethnic cleansing of Croats, through its command over the armed forces, information agencies and paramilitary units that perpetrated war crimes in Croatia. Serbs in Croatia set up their own entity in 1991 in response to Croatia’s declaration of independence from Yugoslavia, forcing thousands of Croats out of the area referred to as the Republic of Serb Krajina.

However, the breakaway state was defeated in 1995 in a Croatian military offensive known as “Operation Storm,” pushing thousands of ethnic Serbs out of Croatian and forcing them to seek refuge in Serbia.

Serbia

Serbia will file a lawsuit against Croatia for ethnic cleansing and war crimes committed during the so-called Op Storm, FM Vuk Jeremic said late on Tuesday 18^th. "Croatia did not appropriately respond to the hand of reconciliation which Serbia repeatedly offered, with a desire to leave the past behind and turn to our common future in Europe. A lawsuit will now be filed against Croatia in order for the truth finally to be found out," the minister told the state television RTS.

Jeremic said that Croatia had refused to face the fact that 250,000 ethnic Serbs had been ethnically cleansed from the territory of Croatia in 1995. "We will do all in our power to have our case appropriately presented to the court. We will review all developments in the 20th century, World War II and Independent State of Croatia. We will turn to history to find out the truth for the sake of our common future," the foreign minister stressed.

My point

It is quite clear that both sides have made brutalities, ethnic cleansing, war crimes etc to each other. On the one hand these events also include a part of myths or one-sided propaganda for political purposes, on the other hand the full picture or true story is still waiting for its paragon. While the process in ICJ will take at least some two years I am in doubts if this is the right way to complement the history. I think that a better way could be a “Truth Commission” like implemented in South Africa after apartheid. Due the lack of verdicts this kind of forum can go deeper to issues on the ground, it can also make base for mutual understanding better than some technical court procedure far away.

About Croatian/Serbian conflicts I have published few articles earlier, such as "Operation Storm" 5/8/2008 and 22/9/2008, "Nazi's Funeral shadows Croatia's past" on 1/8/2008, which can be found from my Archives:Blog.

balkan

belgrade

ari rusila

UN struggling with Kosovo's parallel structures

New Kosova Report - a non-profit information portal about Kosovo/a - got hold a secret facsimile from the former UNMIK chief Joachim Rücker sent to the United Nations' Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Jean-Marie Guéhenno on 15 October 2007. The letter describes how the Serb government was increasingly building parallel structures/services while the province was meant to be under authority of international administration according UN resolution 1244.

From my point of view Rücker’s letter highlights some aspects of recent Kosovo administration such as colonial attitude, ineffectiveness and contradictory actions of international community.

Partition with help of parallel structures

Rücker states that

accelerating partition prejudices ongoing political developments by creating a fait accompli where the K-Serbian-inhabited areas of Kosovo are both separated from the rest of Kosovo and made increasingly reliant on Belgrade. At the current pace, areas inhabited by K-Serbs will soon be capable of consuming basic utilities provided directly from Serbia without any communication with the rest of Kosovo or any respect for Kosovo's laws and regulations.

The letter is followed by a catalogue of buildings housing security, transportation, public administration, justice, healthcare, telecommunication, energy and financial institutions which are counterparts to the Serbia ones.

Rücker complains, that UNMIK's ability to respond to this situation is limited due in large part to our reliance on the willingness of KFOR participating states to utilise force to achieve objectives beyond providing a Safe and secure environment. Rücker original letter with appendix (catalogue) can be found from here.

Colonial thinking

Reading Rücker’s complains one could think that he is envious of Serbia that it is making (better) his job by offering services to local population. His attitude is represents normal colonial top-to-bottom thinking where important is who has formal power and credit about actions.

UNMIK has had full executive power some nine years in Kosovo with huge financial resources (biggest per capita of all missions in the world) and support of majority of local population. In spite of this it has end up in a fiasco regarding its human rights and capacity building efforts more or less both majority and minority ethnic groups.

Administration for the people

While Rücker conception represents centralism and formality where important is who provides services – and gets credit of that – the total opposite way of thinking could be to take up a position of local stakeholders – view of a beneficiary of public services.

Besides political game the bottom-to-top reasons for parallel structures could be, that

• there is not an alternative public services available,
• the services provided by by parallel structures are better than official ones,
• there is no access to official public services, or
• local people are afraid to go to use services they perceive hostile or are situated in hostile environment

Contradictory actions

One observation about contradictory actions I can make from my personal experiences. In Rücker’s catalogue was many buildings with parallel institutions which were not created only with help of aid from Serbia. Many schools, health centres, education, sport and culture facilities as well infrastructure projects got financing from USAID, EU, OSCE, DFID and even UN when they were working exactly same way than during Rücker’s time.

On the other hand international administration was building facilities and on the other hand they complain the use of them. The good thing with all this mess is that KFOR did not started military operations to destroy these public services even they are managed by “wrong” administrators.

More my views over Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
ari rusila

Grumbling in puppet state

In Kosovo fifteen movements and different non-governmental organizations have announced a demonstration for Wednesday (19/11/2008) in Priština against the six-point Serbia-UN plan, which basic idea is to agree EULEX mission deployment to Kosovo. " We invite all citizens of Kosovo to join us an in a demonstration and oppose in a peaceful way the six points which affect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Kosovo," reads the joint statement.

"The six points proposed by the UN and modified for Serbia , aim to divide Kosovo in two: 1/3 of the territory will be given to Serb parallel structures, which means effective control by Serbia. These points reduce Kosovo's institutional development by deploying Serb parallel institutions in the elements most important for the working of state sovereignty, especially in policing, courts and customs. This is unacceptable", the statement said.

KLA considering violent actions

A bit more harder line represents former Albanian terrorist organization Kosovo Liberation Army and “war veterans”, which have issued a threat of war against the international community that is preserving peace in this Serbian province. Xhavit Jashari - a chief representative of the KLA said, that “when you gain something by war, a war is required to take that from you".

Jashari also noted that the KLA will consider the years after the war only a cease-fire phase and that they will take their arms if Kosovo's "statehood" is questioned as is being done by the EU's civilian plan to bring rule of law to Kosovo.

About legal base

Different Kosovo organizations have come together to express their dissatisfaction and defend the Kosovo conceptualized on Article 1, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the country. This article announces the Republic of Kosovo ‘an independent state, sovereign and democratic, unified and indivisible.’ This is a constitutional obligation and Kosovo will become so,” reads the statement.

However a wider framework is international law, UNSC resolution 1244, which states that Kosovo is part of today’s Serbia, temporary under international administration like UN protectorate, before new resolution will replace the existing one. While the resolution is based to agreement with Serbia it is self-evident that UN will negotiate with Serbia about implementation details of resolution.

Pragmatic point of view

Analysts in Priština have noted, that accepting the plan for would mean that the Kosovo officials would formally lose their sovereignty over North Kosovo, though this sovereignty does not exist essentially. This view I totally agree.

In fact, on the ground, today’s Kosovo is a quasi-state with good change to become a “failed” or “captured state” if international community does not have firm grip over province. A state normally needs statehood structures, executive power over own territory and sustainable economy. Two first elements are on hands of international outsiders and the export of province can cover 5-10 % of import - the rest is covered mainly by international aid and drug money.

Instead of demonstrations and war threads it could be wiser to Kosovo Albanians to concentrate building their society and economy with international donors and let Kosovo Serbs to do the same.

More my views over Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:Blog

balkan
belgrade
EULEX Kosovo
ari rusila

Powergame in EU-Russia summit today

EU summit meeting with Russia in France is designed to reopen talks on a pact of cooperation after the crisis in relations caused by the Georgia conflict on August 2008. Before meeting hard words have been changed over Kaliningrad missiles, Nato radars and EU/OSCE monitors in Georgia. However the core question can be the energy game. A day before summit EU came out with its supergrid plan and Russia questioning Baltic Pipe. Southern energy corridor is an other battleground.

Power supergrid plan

EU’s Power supergrid plan is partly designed to decrease EU’s dependence about Russian gas. The Timesonline got look about plan and describes it as follows (Source: Timesonline):

The building blocks of the proposed supergrid would be new cables linking North Sea wind farms, and a network patching together the disparate electricity grids of the Baltic region and the countries bordering the Mediterranean, according to a blueprint drawn up by the European Commission. EU states will also be asked to pay for at least two ambitious gas pipelines to bring in supplies from Central Asia and Africa. The plans also call for a Community Gas Ring, or a network allowing EU countries to share supplies if Russia turns off the taps.

The EU Energy Security Plan notes that Europe imports 61 per cent of its gas, a figure projected to rise to 73 per cent by 2020. Russia sells about two-fifths of the total, including the entire supply of several countries.

The EU Energy Security Plan notes that Europe imports 61 per cent of its gas, a figure projected to rise to 73 per cent by 2020. Russia sells about two-fifths of the total, including the entire supply of several countries.

How the supergrid will work is described in graphic europesupergrid2(Source Timesonline)

Same time in South…

One part of energy game is the southern energy corridor. During 2008 Russia has put also the southern corridor pipeline in doubts. Gazprom has override “Nabucco” with its rival “SouthStream” project. Same time GUUAM Group in Caucasus – cooperation body supported by US energy giants and military-industrial-complex - is breaking up as well rest of US “Silk Road Strategy”. (More about this in my previous artcles ”War on pipes” 9/9/2008 and “Is GUUAM dead” 4/11/2008 from my Archives:Blog)

…and in North

Also a day before Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has questioned the construction of the Nord Stream pipeline for the first time since the signing of the agreement with Germany to establish the gas delivery network, as gas is set to become cheaper along with the drop in oil prices.

"Europe must decide whether it needs this pipeline or not," Mr Putin told Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen on Wednesday (12 November) at a meeting in Moscow. "If you don't, we will build liquefaction plants and send gas to world markets, including to European markets. But it will be simply more expensive for you," he added.

The Baltic states and Poland strongly oppose the project, concerned they would be cut off from existing gas infrastructure with Russia, as Moscow would probably channel most of the gas deliveries through the direct pipeline to Germany. Sweden also opposes the project due to environmental concerns, echoed by MEPs, who have called for a new investigation into the pipeline's impact on the environment. Finland, one of several EU states that has a say in approving the project, will conduct an environmental review of the plan next year, Mr Vanhanen said after the meeting with his Russian counterpart on Wednesday. (Source EUobserver.com)

So for Baltic states and Poland Nord Stream is more political and partly economical question, for Germany mainly economical topic and for Sweden and Finland mostly environmental question.

The bottom line

It is interesting to see how the power game will be developing. How big share gas, oil and wind will claim from energy markets? Where the pipes will be? How environmental and economical aspects will match with political aims? The game is still open.

More my articles one may find from my BalkanBlog

Collapsing Bosnia

Bosnia-Herzegovina as independent state was created by the Dayton peace agreement 1995 after bloody Bosinian war 1992-95. Besides ending war the aim of Deaton agreement was to build strong state institutions for newcomer and international community indeed has invested billions of euro for this capacity building. The outcome of this huge aid – compared that population in Bosnia is some 4 million – however is poor. Instead of strong state institutions the state itself is tumbling down. The causes of potential collapse are at least the background before Dayton agreement, the agreement itself, culmination of ethnic and religious tensions during and after the war and today’s (geo)political situation in West Balkans. One factor not to be underrated is also the lack of national Bosnia-Herzegovina identity.

The background

When nazi-Germany occupied Yugoslavia on 1941, Bosnia-Hezegovina came under Croatian Ustasha movement. Part of Bosnian Muslims supported this ultranationalist administration which killed hundreds of thousands Serbs, Jews and Roma civilians during WWII. After war the ethnic tensions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, one of the six Republics in Yugoslavia federation, were formally nonexistent according President Tito’s ideals, however they still lived in peoples memories.

The breakup wars of Yugoslavia had started from Slovenia and Croatia and after Bosnia the next conflict started in separatist Serbia’s Kosovo province. From former Yugoslavia republics Macedonia and Montenegro came independent peacefully according mutual agreements between them and Serbia - the heir of Yugoslavia.

Secret discussions between Franjo Tudman and Slobodan Milosevic on the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina between Serbia and Croatia were held as early as March 1991 known as Karadordevo agreement. When Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independency, the Serbs attacked with aim to secure those lands where Serbs had a majority, eastern and western Bosnia. The Croats also had aim of expanding Croatia's borders. Bosnian Muslims, the only ethnic group loyal to the Bosnian government, were an easy target, because the Bosnian government forces were poorly equipped and unprepared for the war.

War 1992-95

When extremely brutal war in Croatia between Croats and Serbs was ongoing the some 44% of population in Bosnia were sc. Bosniaks, 31 % Serbs, 17 % Croats and 6 % others. Bosniaks were Muslims, Serbs Orthodox and Croats catholics.

The Serbs received support from Christian Slavic fighters from countries including Russia and Greece. Some radical Western fighters as well as numerous individuals from the cultural area of Western Christianity fought as volunteers for the Croats including Neo-Nazi volunteers from Germany and Austria. The Bosniaks received support from Islamic groups commonly known as "holy warriors" (Mujahideen) and e also several hundred Iranian Revolutionary Guards were assisting them. United States used both C-130 transports and Islamist groups to smuggle weapons to the Bosnian government forces via Croatia. NATO involvement took place during the 1995 when they attacked to Serb positions in wars final stages.

In an attempt to protect the civilians in Bosnia-Herzegovina was also international peacekeepers – UNPROFOR - which role was to protect the "safe havens" like Srebrenica. On the ground their actual role was as bystander. Various paramilitary units were operating in Bosnian war: The Serb and Croat paramilitaries involved volunteers from Serbia and Croatia, and were supported by nationalist political parties in those countries.

Up till 1993 the Croats and Bosniaks had been fighting side by side against the Serbs. Then the Croat-Bosniak alliance started to break and most famous event took place in Mostar when in the early hours of May 9, 1993, the Croats attacked against Bosniaks using artillery, mortars, heavy weapons and small arms and destroying a the famous 16^th century Turkish bridge.

Characteristic to Bosnian war was widespread killings, the siege of towns, ethnic cleansing, torture in detention centers conducted more or less by all ethnic parties. The most recent research places the number of victims at around 100,000–110,000 killed (civilians and military), and 1.8 million displaced.

Rising radical Islam

Shaul Shay, an officer in the military Late intelligence of the Israeli Defense Forces and expert on international and fundamentalist Islamic terrorism, analyzes in his book "Islamic Terror and the Balkans" the growth of radical Islam in the Balkans. He shows how the war in Bosnia and the war in Kosovo provided the historical opportunity for radical Islam to penetrate the Balkans.

“After 9/11, when the US started examining the financing of terror organizations, it discovered that many of the Islamic charities that operated during and after the war in the Balkans were channeling “terror” money . A big chunk of that money that was supposed to be used for humanitarian purposes went to finance those [Islamic terror] infrastructures, ” Shay stated.

Radical Islam has enforced and widened their activities in Balkans last 15 years. During Bosnian war many foreign islamists came to fight in mujahedeen brigade also many Al Quida figures - including Osama bin Laden - were supporting Bosnan Muslims 1990's. It was reported that Muslim authorities had issued a Bosnian passport to Osama bin Laden at the Bosnian embassy in Vienna in 1993.

Later radical Islam groups gave their support to KLA/UCK (Kosovo) which leaders now are leading Kosovo province based US and EU support. After bombing campaign 1999 radical Islam has been one major donor in Kosovo and Wahhabi schools and former secularized Kosovo Muslims are displaced by radical Islamic movement. While supporting Albanian Kosovo US and EU are securing a safe haven both to islamic terrorists and leading heroin cartel to say nothing of smaller threads. This short-sighted policy should be reconsidered once again.

Dayton agreement

Brutal and bloody Bosnian war (1992-95) had almost finished ethnic cleansings/transfer of populations so that it was possible to draw administrative boundaries according ethnical groups. This made Dayton Agreement possible. The agreement split Bosnia into two semi-independent entities – the Serb Republic and the Muslim-Croat Federation and three ethnic groups – Croats, Serbs and Bosniaks – are trying to lead state together and separately. Entities are united by weak central institutions, administration is quite heavy loaded with some 170 ministers and whole system is supervised by international presence. (Note: Dayton Agreement one may find from here.)

Bosnia was the crucible in which the EU's foreign policy instruments were created. With an EU military force still here, a EU special representative with executive powers, a huge EU aid budget and a full-scale EU police mission, the EU has more leverage in Bosnia than in any other country.

Besides huge international administrative and security representation Dayton Agreement made base for triple local administration. There are 180 ministers and three parliaments in one federal republic. One can easily understand what a challenge the management of this administration is when same time the ruling class is composed from people who used to be enemies.

Three roads to separation

Based to increasing ethnic divide and nationalism as internal factor and Dayton Agreement as outside framework year 2008 has shown that separatism is gaining strength.

Serbianna news headline on 11^th Oct.2008 is quite informative - “Islamic terror victimizing Bosnian Croats”. The statement of Croatian NGO Libertas claims that "After several denary terror attacks on Croatian returnees in central Bosnia, after several murders of children of which the last was in Sarajevo and after the latest murder of Croats in FIS Vitez and relentless attacks on Croatian property in Bosnia, why hasn't anyone been held accountable,". Libertas made public statement in which it says that Croatians in Bosnia are victims of Bosnian Muslim terror and are asking Bosnian Croat political leadership to initiate a plan that will break up the Bosnian Federation entity and form a Croatian one.

On 3^rd November 2008 came information, that the government of Bosnia’s Serb-dominated entity of Republika Srpska, has hired a US law firm to deal with the Office of the High Representative (OHR) and upcoming key reforms. Republika Srpska Premier Milorad Dodik said that the firm, Dewey and LeBoeuf, will advise his government on relations with the international community and all other legal matters. So far, the OHR was the ultimate interpreter of the Dayton peace accord and hence the main interpreter of its own mandate. But by hiring a United States law firm specialised in international law, Dodik’s is seen as moving his arguments against the OHR onto legal grounds.

In addition to hiring the US law firm, Dodik has recently confirmed that his government has hired a US lobbying company that was supposed to represent Republika Srpska in Washington and other western countries. Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) officials complained that this, as well as the opening of Republika Srpska offices abroad, showed that Republika Srpska continue taking responsibilities which belong to the state. Some Bosniak officials also complained that Dodik is strengthening its representation abroad as a part of lobbying that should soften world powers to the idea of Republika Srpska’s eventual declaration of independence.

So Croats and Serbs have started their separation process which leaves Bosniaks left. They also have more nationalistic agenda which however is not separatist but rather conquering. Chairman of the Bosnian Presidency Haris Silajdžić has frequently made statement on the need to abolish the two entities that comprise Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the need to create an undivided country not made up of federal units. Poisonous relations and clashes between the Bosniak and Serb leaders are at the heart of the current crisis in Bosnia-Hercegovina, which is why fears have revived that were the basis for the start of the war in 1992.

Is Bosnia-Herzegovina collapsing?

On end of October the EU Enlargement Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said that that “…progress can be achieved and crises overcome, when the political will exists”. “However, this consensus has since collapsed and reforms halted”. On 27th Oct. 2008 EU’s foreign policy chief Javier Solana said in Brussels that the EU has warned politicians in Bosnia they are jeopardising the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration with the heated nationalist rhetoric.

On 22nd Oct. 2008 the former United States diplomat Richard Holbrooke and former High Representative in Bosnia Paddy Ashdown published an article urging European Union and US leaders to reinforce their engagement in Bosnia and halt a new crisis which threatens to bring the country to collapse. The two diplomats say that Bosnian Serb Prime Minister Milorad Dodik has taken advantage of the weakness of constitutional state structures, fatigue and the international community’s saturation, as well as the inability of the EU to meet its own conditions, and over the course of the last two years has succeeded in destroying the majority of the real progress made in Bosnia-Hercegovina in the last 13 years."

The EU has presented Bosnian leaders with its bleak progress report and sent a separate letter expressing “extreme concern” with the developments in the country, media reported on 6^th November 2008. “We are extremely concerned over the political climate which is being created by your officials at all levels: boosting fears and divisions instead of associations is contrary to your European project,” said a letter sent from the French presidency of the EU, on behalf of Olli Rehn, the bloc’s Enlargement Commissioner, and Javier Solana, the EU’s foreign policy chief.

The worries of top politicians have good base. It is not anymore dispute between Serbs and Bosniaks, this year has showed serious dissension between Bosniaks and Croats which may be related to rise of radical Islam in Balkans. Many of Bosnia's Croats want a 'third entity' as a means to secure equality within Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Future

Western mainstream media (MSM) and reports of international organizations and NGOs have told many stories about capacity building of new multi-ethnic state with European perspective. The events now and earlier are forcing to ask if the picture created by MSM is the right one. I do not have that kind of illusion. Few keywords to explain my view are the past, national identity and short-sighted top-to-bottom policy approach.

The recent past of Bosnia-Herzegovina is violent and there was not only one brutal side – there was three of them. This past has its impact today and real truth behind successful propaganda about events of war 1992-95 is still unclear.

One may have seen pictures where Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) and Bosnian Croats have been busy rioting again following the defeat of Croatia by Turkey in the Euro 2008 football match. The Bosniaks supported Turkey, the Croats Croatia. Meanwhile when Serbia plays Bosnia, Bosnian Serbs root for Serbia. This gives quite clear picture about national identity and multi-ethnic ideals – or lack of them. Can any country survive without some minimal mutual self-identification across its citizens as a whole? If the shared non-ethnic Bosnian identity is taking steps backwards does this not mean that this artificial western desk-drawer plan is doomed to fail? I am afraid so but maybe it is loss only for those top level designers not for local population.

Dayton Agreement was scribbled by top western diplomats and the major problem to implement it is that, as told before, Bosnian war had many frontlines on the field. When top policy level tries widen their high ideals on the ground the commitment of local stakeholders will be in question.

The real lesson of Bosnia is that the creation of a peaceful multiethnic state with a strong central government is a dangerous mirage. Holding together an artificial state with ethnic or religious cleavages using foreign military power is unlikely to be successful anywhere.

Decentralization in both Bosnia, as well in Kosovo and Iraq, is the only hope for peace and prosperity. Sustainable development is possible only with local commitment to aims and actions. The pragmatic results can be achieved by participatory planning from bottom to top.

As bottom line short quote I can agree: "There can be no question of coercing any large areas in which one community has a majority to live against their will under a government in which another community has a majority. And the only alternative to coercion is partition." – Lord Mountbatten, explaining the need for separate states for India and Pakistan.

More my articles from Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:BalkanBlog , which includes also a document library and link list over issues related to this article.

Georgia - demonstrations and true story coming out

I was watching Friday (7th November 2008) news from Georgia's capital Tbilisi where some 10.000 demonstrators were marching against current political leadership and demanding early presidential and parliamentary elections. They were gathering also on the national parliament and the presidential residence to commemorate the events of last year, when a similar rally was violently dispersed by police. Same time also anglo-american mainstreammedia has widely published new reports about how events started on August 7th 2008. Both of these events are not very favorable to Georgia's President Saakashvili.

Demonstrators and supporters of Georgian opposition parties wanted an investigation into the August war in South Ossetia, freedom of speech and press, and the release of political prisoners. They also want the former independent television station – Imedi TV – to be returned to its rightful owners, the family of Badri Patarkatsishvili who died in London in February this year.

Like 2007

It has went a year now on last big similar protest in Tbilisi. Then the opposition was demanding Mikhail Saakashvili’s resignation, and an immediate parliamentary election. On the fifth day of demonstrations, when about 60,000 people were rallying in the capital, the police started dispersing the crowd using sound guns, tear gas and water cannons against protesters. Hundreds of protesters were injured in the clashes.

Who started war?

New information about events on 7th August 2008 came public e.g. through The New York Times and BBC. According OSCE monitors on the ground it is now in doubt that some groups from South-Ossetia had provocated Georgia's attack by firing some Georgian villages. The OSCE monitors did not find any proof about this provocation.

In Tshinvali - South-Ossetian capital - was also three OSCE monitors and they have keeped record about first hours of Georgia's attack against town. Their records show, that about half of bombings and heavy artillery fire came middle of civil neighborhood without any military targets.

Countdown for Saakashvili?

Western media has described President Saakashvili as an reliable ally, modern democrat and popular leader. The events on 7th Aug. 2008 showed an authoritarian gambler side of him. There was some doubts about fairness with last elections so maybe demonstrators have a case. Let's monitor how now started rallies are continuing - are they coming bigger, what is the response of police. Maybe the West should start to look an new ally now, before it is too late.

Media respond

An other aspect with these news about August 7th events bothers me. After three months anglo-american sc. free "investigative" mainstream press is starting to tell what really happened. These facts were in public knowledge immediately through Russian media and latest one month in European continental media (E.g. I wrote an article "OSCE report fault Georgia ..." on 3rd September based Der Spiegel article 1st September, Archive:Blog).

More my views one may find from my BalkanBlog.

Transdnistrian number game

The future status of Transdnistria – or Pridnestrovie - is again, inspired maybe the events in Georgia on August 2008, coming to negotiation tables. With local stakeholders there is some readiness to discuss further to solve this frozen conflict, however the outsiders are twisting arms about formalities. What is the content of number games 5, 5+2, 3+2, 2+1 is also designing the outcome - e.g. alternative solutions - of negotiations.

In 1992, the Moldovan government engaged in a short war with authorities in Transdnistria. Hostlities ended after a Russian military intervention by the then Russian 14^th army stationered in Transdnistria. Since then Transdnistria has de facto been on its own like independent state.

The original 5

The format created after war was 5, which always consisted of the five “full” participants:

• Moldova and Transdniestria as the parties to the conflict;
• Ukraine and Russia as mediators and also guarantor states, guaranteeing to both parties to the conflict the fulfilment and respect of (and enforcement of) whatever negotiated outcome the talks could bring;
• OSCE as joint mediator, alongside fellow mediators Russia and Ukraine.

2+1 = Kozak plan

In the spring of 2003, Russian President Vladimir Putin had named Dmitri Kozak — at that time the deputy head of his presidential administration — as his special envoy to Moldova. His task was clear - to find a solution to the frozen conflict that had emerged in 1992. Thanks to compromises brokered by him, Moldova and Transdniestria found common ground for agreement know as “Kozak plan” or Kozak memorandum.

The Basic Principles laid out in this document was about the unitary, democratic, demilitarized and neutral character of the state. The federal state had to have 2 sub-entities, PMR and the Gagauz autonomy, with their own recognized local government structures, anthems and flags.

Kozak plan was initialed page by page by both Moldova's President Vladimir Voronin and Transdniestria's President Igor Smirnov. The idea was that on 25 November 2003, the thenRussian President Vladimir Putin scheduled a surprising visit to Moldova to witness the signing of a federalization document as the solution to the conflict.

The visit was canceled by President Voronin’s last minute rejection. Moldova nixed the “Kozak plan” within hours of its planned signing as the result of pressure by hardliners in the West: The Moldovan President was informed by the then OSCE Dutch chairman Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the U.S. Ambassador to Moldova Heather Hodges and the EU Council Secretary General Javier Solana about opposition that Washington and Bruxelles had concerning the mutually agreed-upon settlement plan between the two sides.

5+2 is not 7

The two sides were then at starting point without any settlement. Transdniestria continued to act like a sovereign independent state under the name of PMR (Pridnestrovskaaia Moldavskaia Respublica). Moldova had rejected the only viable plan that both sides could conceivably agree on.

With this background the “5″-format became “5+2″ in 2005, when the European Union and the USA joined the table. They joined as mere observers, a role which they still have today. They are the “2″ add-on’s and the reason why the 5 didn’t become the 7 when they were added: Because they are not full fledged participants but are merely there to watch and, at most, give suggestions and constructive advice if asked. Some times there is also 3+2 format meetings including representatives of the mediators - the Russian Federation, Ukraine and the OSCE - as well as the European Union and the United States as observers.

1+2 = Kozak plan II

August 2008 was the turning point in negotiation process. Conflict in Georgia was in background when Russian President Medvedev first held talks with Moldova’s President Voronin in Sotchi on August 25^th and later with Transdnistria’s leader Smirnov on September 3rd. 5+2 format was replaced with 1+2 format including Moscow as mediator, Chisinau and Tiraspol as the parties of conflict.

The basic elements of new deal are probably similar like in Kozak plan I. The price of reunion will be high to Moldova because probably federation form with strong minority or veto rules would neutralize Moldova’s foreign policy related integration towards EU and Nato.

Higher price for Moldova could be even stronger sovereignty of Transdnistria with thread that also other autonomous territory of Moldova – namely Gagauz region – would follow the steps of Transdnistria.

Negotiations are now ongoing and the aim is signing the conflict-settlement documents in a Medvedev-Voronin-Smirnov meeting soon. One part of time frame is the fact that reunifying Transdnistria with Moldova could bring the win to Moldova’s current leadership in general elections in the Spring 2009.

Progress in sight 2008

Year 2008 has showed gradual progress to solve Transdnistria/Moldova conflict. However there is still the number game on table. From my point of view I always prefer bottom to top approach over opposite process. So if 1+2 format can bring a solution mutually acceptable to “conflicting parties” - i.e Moldova and Transdnistria – it should be legitimate.

EU and US are of course not pleased about today’s development and e.g. Kalman Mizsei – EU representative/Moldova – said that the approved international format of 5+2 should be followed, adding that the EU won’t accept any solution brokered outside this format. This can be seen a bitter statement of bystander but if outsiders can not facilitate constructively so let parties find solutions on their own.

The best outcome could be if a political settlement made directly in the 1+2 format by conflicting parties and Russia’s mediation would afterward be referred in 5+2 format for Western blessings so everybody could be officially happy.

More my articles over Balkans and Caucasus one may find from my Archives:Blog

caucasus
ari rusila

Bookmark this on Delicious