| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Among major world powers, both Russia and China are opposed to an independent Kosovo. Even within Europe there are nations that oppose this independence -- Spain -- and others where many are uneasy. It would have been politically possible for the American government to have thought a bit more about the implications, the consequences, of having another Muslim state -- the product of centuries of Ottoman rule -- within Europe, and to have thought a bit more about the historical treatment of the Serbs under that same Ottoman rule, and their understandable bitterness.
There is an independent Albania. Those Albanians who might wish to be in a state that politically embodies their desires could move. The notion that when Muslim populations exist, they must never be asked to endure minority status, and that only the non-Muslim populations are to be asked to do so, is wrong.
There are problems with mere head-counting. One are the tricks one can play with the region whose heads are being counted. If you rip Kosovo out of Serbia, then you will indeed have an area, “Kosovo,” where the Albanians constitute most of the population. Is that the end of the matter? I can find, and so can you, all kinds of places, now part of larger countries, where this or that minority constitute, in a particular area or city, the majority -- even if they are the minority elsewhere. So what?
Surely there were other things to consider. What has happened to Serbian monasteries and churches in places now under full Albanian control -- that is, those Albanians who are Muslim? Is there a tradition of treating non-Muslims, in this case Serbs, well or ill?
In alerting people to the attacks on Serbs, to the destruction of ancient monasteries, on the infiltration into the area of Arabs with a brand of Islam quite different from the relaxed, syncretistic, version -- not exactly full-bodied Islam in practice, because that local practice was affected by the centuries of proximity to non-Muslims, and to the effect of Communism, one is not endorsing any massacres by some Serbs. One can distance oneself -- most Serbs do, unfeignedly -- from Milosevich and those atrocities that were committed by some Serb forces. And one can also keep in mind both the exaggerations of those atrocities, and the minimizing or even ignoring not only of the atrocities committed by the Muslims, as well as the entire history of the area, the centuries of Muslim rule, the devshirme, and the deep fears evoked when Izetbegovic wrote that he intended to create a Muslim state and impose the Shari'a. Had the Western world shown the slightest intelligent sympathy or understanding of what that set off in the imagination of many Serbs, there might never have been such a reaction, and someone like Milosevic might never have obtained power.
Why wasn't there? Why didn't those in the West study what Izetbegovic said? Why didn't they read what Serb historians, and writers, including Ivo Andric (in his doctoral dissertation, recently-reprinted, "The Development of Spiritual Life in Bosnia under the Influence of Turkish Rule") were aware of, and that had never been forgotten? When Clinton ordered the bombing of the Serbs, had he heard, ever, about the devshirme? Did he know that Izetbegovic had written about imposing the shari'a? No, of course not. But had he, and had others, they might have reassured the Serbs long before, and helped to make them less panicky, less prone to give power to someone like Milosevic. The West entirely mishandled Serbia.
And right now, despite the dribs and drabs that begin to come out about the exaggerations on which criticism and bombing of Serbians was based, despite the new evidence, or the evidence no longer hidden, of past Muslim atrocities, the Western world still seems ready to overlook what is now happening. And what is now happening are attacks on Serbian villagers, and the destruction of Serbian churches, in Kosovo. Is one supposed to permanently blame Serbia, and never take its side, because of what Milosevic did? Is one to overlook the role of Bosnia as a place of training for those who could tomorrow be conducting Jihad anywhere in the world?
There is no reason not to take Serbia's side now. There is every reason -- of principle and of Infidel self-interest -- to take it.
And then there is the larger scheme of things. Does it make sense, at this moment in history, to give Muslims the sense that they are on the march, that they are establishing beachhead after beachhead in Europe itself -- even if, for all we know, that sense of triumphalism is based on a misunderstanding of the devotion to Islam of the Albanians (now "Kosovars") in question? Assuming that the Chechens have a point (and they did have a point, considering the history of Stalin's treatment of them), was that reason enough to support the Chechens against Russia, or should one have refrained from so doing, because of the larger context, in which any Muslim victory feeds the assurance that other victories are sure to come, that Islam is unstoppable?
Perhaps the rule should be, all over the Western and larger Infidel world, this: whatever makes the Umma happy, or the O.I.C. happy, is to be opposed for that very reason. That's a rule of thumb. What, after all, is Man, if not Homo pollex?
Posted by Hugh at February 19, 2008 7:25 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Very good...I'm so sickened by our brainless actions in Kosovo. What exactly are we thinking? Or are we thinking at all??
http://theantisemitismwatch.blogspot.com/2008/02/why-why-why-why-create-islamist.html
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 19, 2008 7:56 AM
very scary that our government is so far off the mark on what is happening in the world.
Posted by: thatisall at February 19, 2008 8:11 AM
"The notion that when Muslim populations exist, they must never be asked to endure minority status, and that only the non-Muslim populations are to be asked to do so, is wrong."
Remember the partitioning of India? Muslims insisted on having a state of their own since they would be ruled by Hindus. (Still some bad feelings between Hindi and Muslim. Wonder why?)
Even today, Muslims from both inside India and outside it, are planning on returning India to Sharia law.
Would the world community allow Nazis to have their own country?
Posted by: tanstaafl at February 19, 2008 8:14 AM
Julia Gorin has been blogging about Kosovo for a long time and has many excellent articles:
http://www.juliagorin.com/blog.html
This excerpt from an article she wrote recently pretty well sums up the insanity:
"Just to spell this out: We are post-9/11, and our government is about to engage the United States military against European Christians who don’t want to live under Muslim rule. We are once again on the brink of using military force against a Christian nation in order to create a Muslim state in Europe, as February 17th looms. That is the date Albanians have chosen to unilaterally declare independence, outside of international law and with full U.S. backing.
It is worth reminding the conservative blogosphere, which has chosen to ignore the region entirely or, alternately, bolster the jihadist pro-independence p0sition, that they are helping implement a Clinton-era policy, supported and co-financed by George Soros, and pursued from a pre-9/11 mindset. My fellow conservatives, you do not defend America or American policy when you support our pro-independence policy in Kosovo; you support Hillary and Bill Clinton, George Soros, and Osama bin Laden, who co-financed and co-trained the KLA troops that we and Germany co-financed and co-trained.
[…]
“I once laughed at the notion that there needs to be “balance” in the world against the lone remaining superpower, America. “America is the balance,” I would quip, “against the evil of the world.” And I wondered when Europe would realize it’s God’s laughing stock, and when a country named Russia would burn to hell and its earth be salted.
Thinking that America engaged only in necessary evil — or at least made an effort to — I didn’t think I’d live to see the day when it would be the chief purveyor of evil in a given region, when America would move from superpower to hegemon, and Russia would become a necessary check on that. Such is the perverse situation that Democrats and Republicans have created together, in a rare show of solidarity."
Atlas Shrugs also has a few posts lately about the atrocities committed against the Christian Serbs:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/02/give-em-a-state.html
And an article entitled The real Srebrenica Genocide,
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/02/kosovo-paving-t.html
at February 19, 2008 8:29 AM
another Muslim state -- the product of centuries of Ottoman rule -- within Europe
I'm not sure this statement, as applied to Kosovo, is correct. Didn't Kosovo have an ethnic Serb majority a few decades back? I would say that this new independent Kosovo is more the product of the migration of Albanians into that region from neighboring Albania.
Posted by: Bigfoot at February 19, 2008 9:14 AM
Posted by: Bigfoot
I would say that this new independent Kosovo is more the product of the migration of Albanians into that region from neighboring Albania.
It could also do with the fact that many Serbs where driven out
Posted by: shiva at February 19, 2008 9:30 AM
Yugoslavia was one of the few genuinely multicultural states in Europe. And so in the interests of multiculturalism, Blair and Clinton destroyed Yugoslavia, and replaced it with "multicultural" statelets that are of one ethnicity or religion. Ironically, it is Serbia that has a significant Muslim population - and one that was responsible for the election of the pro-EU candidate in the recent knife edge election in Serbia.
So will the Jihad against Serbia, aided and abetted by the US and the UK, stop? Not a chance. The Muslim population in Serbia, as is the norm, is increasing fast, and will eventually demand their own state. Of course, as far as the US is concerned, this will be yet again, a "unique" case. It seems "unique" cases, are cases of exemption from international law, apply only to Serbia.
Posted by: DP111 at February 19, 2008 9:52 AM
"Yugoslavia - The Avoidable War":
1. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5860186121153047571
2. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6371060303901674397
at February 19, 2008 10:01 AM
"Yugoslavia - The Avoidable War":
1. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5860186121153047571
2. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6371060303901674397
at February 19, 2008 10:06 AM
"...have thought a bit more about the historical treatment of the Serbs under that same Ottoman rule, and their understandable bitterness."
While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors are treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable'.
Posted by: Goob at February 19, 2008 10:08 AM
"...have thought a bit more about the historical treatment of the Serbs under that same Ottoman rule, and their understandable bitterness."
While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors were treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable'.
Posted by: Goob at February 19, 2008 10:09 AM
NATO's war against Serbia to dismember a sovereign state, was totally illegal, and in violation of the UN charter. The disgrace of this action is augmented by the fact, that it was done by two nations who pride themselves in the rule of law - the USA and the UK. Worse still, they are both permanent members of the Security Council. How and why should any member of the UN take any heed of these two nations, when in future they claim that their actions are founded on principle and the rule of law.
It is worth remembering that the KFOR mandate is legal only so long as it is maintained by the Security council. If Russia refuses to renew the mandate, KFOR, EU forces and other replacements, become invading and occupying forces, illegal in international law. Then any state can mount an operation, any state and any operation, with assured UN blessing, to remove the primary cause of the illegality. The US and the UK will have no piece of paper to behind - it is this sorry mess that our idiot politicians have led us into.
It is unlikely that Russia or China will let the US off this hook. In fact, it wouldnt surprise me that the Russians and the Chinese are quite satisfied to see the US get sucked in. Their actions will come to light only when the Security Council mandate is not renewed.
Posted by: DP111 at February 19, 2008 10:11 AM
I think the whole-hearted and immediate support out of our White House is a strategic ploy to help supply some legitimacy to a future Palestinian state - can't the Arabs in Gaza and/or Judea & Samaria now use this as an established precedent for unilaterally declaring their own independence and nationhood? Isn't that what Bush, et al, are pushing for?
Posted by: Godefroi at February 19, 2008 10:16 AM
Blair and Clinton (or Bush, for that matter) did not destroy Yugoslavia - Yugoslavia destroyed itself, a proof that multiculturalism is a failure. The Austro-Hungarian empire failed for the same reason. People are tribal by nature, and important minorities whose identities are too strong to be assimilated will always regret being ruled by the majority.
The problem with Kosovo is that it opens a precedent. Spain might lose the Basque country, Catalonia, and even Galicia or Andalusia. Germany might become what it was before Bismarck. The same thing can happen to Italy's dozens of cultures.
But that isn't even the worst. The worst is that Kosovo shows that crime does pay. Imagine if in a hundred years, the Portuguese population residing in France (over one million) declares independance from France. If France supported Kosovo's independance, what legitimacy would it have to deny the Portuguese immigrants the same right?
Even worse than that, what legitimacy would France have, to the deny yet the same right to the Magrebien population, the Muslims who - unlike the Portuguese immigrants - aren't assimilated into French society?
This is a time bomb waiting to explode, and explode it will.
By the way, once upon a time the United States fought a Civil War against a Confederacy that wanted nothing more than the right to Secession Most Confederates did not have slaves, many actually objected against the use of slavery, yet they fought and died for their states willingly and gallantly. How about the Indian nations within the USA? They too have that same right, and so do the Latin Americans in California, New Mexico, Texas and Florida.
History will prove that this was the beginning of a disaster, or that what applies to some does not apply to everyone. Either way, these are sad days.
And I was one of the few in my country that actually was against the NATO bombings from the very beginning, and saw the UÇK (and their Saudi mujahedeen) for what they were. The first world war started in Sarajevo, the third will start in Pristina.
Posted by: cruzado at February 19, 2008 10:36 AM
Goob,
"While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors are treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable'."
Your ancestors are your family. For most of history, in most societies, there's a cultural and social continuation -- and often personal, in terms of memories of grandparents who have memories of their grandparenst -- between one and one's ancestors that is recognized by both oneself and others. A history of poor treatment thus often suggests underlying tensions that will lead to further poor treatment.
Should the Jews shrug off the holocaust because it was just their ancestors? Or should the always remember it, mourn it, and act to fight existing antisemitism that could lead to something like it again.
Feeling bitter is a sensible response, so long as it is not a consuming bitterness. Rembering and mourning past injustice, and looking warily for repeated injustices so long as the fundamental reasons for the past ones remain unchanged, is sensible and wise. If feelings of bitterness lead to such actions, so be it.
It may be different if you are in a new situation, a historical transplant to the US, and many of the connections between you and the context of your ancestors are broken. Your great-granparents' context is not likely your children's context, then. That may be your situation, but it isn't everyone's.
at February 19, 2008 10:55 AM
Goob wrote:
"...have thought a bit more about the historical treatment of the Serbs under that same Ottoman rule, and their understandable bitterness."
While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors were treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable'.
.........................................
Goob, I would definitely agree with you if this was just a historical grievance--something that ended over 100 years ago--but it is not. Serbs are being violently driven out of Kosovo right now, and many Serbian churches and monostaries have been attacked and destroyed. Check recent articles on JW for a bit of an overview.
from the article above:
Izetbegovic wrote that he intended to create a Muslim state and impose the Shari'a.
............................
I do try to keep up on these issues, and I cetainly knew that there were an alarming number of jihadists coming in to Kosovo, but I had not heard about this explicit avowal of Shari'a.
I did some quick research, and found that Alija Izetbegovic was inspired by our old friend, the pro-Nazi Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
Here's a link:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1207682/posts
A salient quote from the Free Republic article:
Ayatollah Khomeini and Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic would be influenced by the anti-secular, anti-Western, radical Muslim nationalist movements. In his book The Islamic Declaration, (Islamska Deklaracija, 1970; republished, 1990), Izetbegovic rejected the secular conception of an Islamic state espoused by Kemal Ataturk. Izetbegovic sought to create an Islamic state based in the Sharia, a state where religion would not be separate from the state, i.e., an Islamic theocratic state. Izebegovic established close links to Ossama Bin Laden and al-Qeada and invited mujadedeen forces to join the Bosnian Muslim Army. Izetbegovic later would give Ossama Bin laden a special Bosnian passport and the mujahedeen ìfreedom fighters would receive Bosnian citizenship and passports. One of the hijackers of the second attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, possessed a Bosnian passport.
Posted by: gravenimage at February 19, 2008 10:56 AM
"'...have thought a bit more about the historical treatment of the Serbs under that same Ottoman rule, and their understandable bitterness.'
While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors were treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable.'"
-- from a posting above, commenting on a sentence in the article above
Why? Why is it wrong for the Serbs, who know what Ottoman (Muslim) rule meant, who know what the word "devshirme" means, who know what centuries of Ottoman rule did to the cultural level of the Balkans (that was the subject of Ivo Andric's doctoral dissertation in 1924), who know even that many of those who now are Muslims are merely the descendants of Serbs who were forcibly -- directly or through the pressure of enduring the dhimmi status -- converted to Islam, becoming "Bosnians" -- and that those Albanians, too, who became Muslims did so not because Islam was so wonderful, but because of the Ottoman Turkish rule -- why is it so wrong of them to be "bitter" at the miscomprehension, or indifference, in so much of the Western world, to Serbian fears, for example, of Izetbegovic's stated plan to bring Shari'a to the Balkans, and which bombed the Serbs mercilessly, and even now, continues to regard Kustenica and Tadzic in the same way, the same spirit, with which it treated, with much greater justification, the way it treated Milosevic.
The Western world has a perfect opportunity to demonstrate to the Russians that it is not out, on every occasion, to oppose them. It has a perfect way to insure that there is not a grim precedent set, that may come to haunt European nations, as their Muslim populations grow. But it has not done so, and much of the fault lies with the American government, the same government that continues to support, maddeningly and madly, Turkey's admission to the E.U.
A failure of American foreign policy. Not for the first time, when it comes to taking Islam into proper account, and not for the last.
at February 19, 2008 10:57 AM
Supporting an independent Kosovo amounts to Nato and the west punishing the Serbs for war crimes in the 1990's.
It is a fact that war crimes happened on both sides, however, the western media simply did not cover the war crimes that occurred by the Albanians against the Serbs.
Many westerners were totally misinformed about the Kosovo conflict and the Nato military (air) assault in the 1990's.
The reporting of the Kosovo conflict in the mid 1990's was a lot more balanced in Russia than the coverage in the west.
Unfortunately, Russia was a weak power in the 1990's and they did not intervene on behalf of the victimized Serbs.
Today, Russia is a lot stronger.
Russia is in a better strategical position to disrupt and intrude upon U.S. foreign policies, especially with the growing conflict over Iran and its nuclear intentions.
Is Kosovo really worth more to U.S. interests than gaining leverage against Iran?
Strangely enough, with the Bush administration calling the shots, it looks like it is.
My prediction is that Russia will now become a much sharper thorn in the side of the U.S. concerning the nuclear issue in Iran.
Supporting an independent Kosovo will come back to sting the U.S.
Expect more heat and friction between the U.S. and Russia in the days to come
at February 19, 2008 10:58 AM
"Why wasn't there? Why didn't those in the West study what Izetbegovic said? Why didn't they read what Serb historians, and writers, including Ivo Andric (in his doctoral dissertation, recently-reprinted, "The Development of Spiritual Life in Bosnia under the Influence of Turkish Rule") were aware of, and that had never been forgotten? When Clinton ordered the bombing of the Serbs, had he heard, ever, about the devshirme? Did he know that Izetbegovic had written about imposing the shari'a? No, of course not. But had he, and had others, they might have reassured the Serbs long before, and helped to make them less panicky, less prone to give power to someone like Milosevic. The West entirely mishandled Serbia."
This is critical because this is where we ordinary people in the US have a hand in the debacle.
What is wrong with our "experts"?
Is it ideology, is it bureaucratic education moulding, or selecting for, inflexible minds? Is it intellectualy laziness, unwillingnes to read materials other than the minimum necessary to look like you know what you're talking about with your boss? Is it inflexibility of the bureaucracy itself, which perhaps somehow allows so little change (since the cold war) than it has prevented, using bureaucratic incentives the people within it from following through on new information?
For all the reasons Hugh states, something is seriously wrong with our policy.
Why is this happening?
at February 19, 2008 11:07 AM
There is no reason not to take Serbia's side now.
by Hugh
There was no need ever to reach this point. It could have been stopped in its tracks if Serbs hadn't blindly supported Milosevic and the Bosnian Serbs (Karadzic, Mladic?) in their early campaigns. Their campaign for "greater Serbia" played into the hands of the Muslims, allowing them to portray themselves as victims of Serb aggression.
The West's policy of self-determination has come back to bite us. Once we accepted the breakup of the Soviet Union, with independence and UN membership for its many varied republics, could Yugoslavia be far behind? Though smaller, it was just as much a polyglot, held together by tyrannical rulers. It may have been a state but, even under Tito, it was not a nation.
Posted by: PMK at February 19, 2008 11:08 AM
bush's recognition of kosovo & virtually every other of his decisions concerning islam since the invasion of Afghanistan are leading me inexorably to the conclusion that, yes, he is consciously doing the bidding of his saudi overlords. it's simply inescapable. Why, just within the past day while in Rwanda he spoke on the importance of military intervention by the international community to prevent genocides such as the one that occurred there. But when someone raised the subject of Darfur, bush begged off, saying that that was an African matter.
Posted by: sheik yer booty at February 19, 2008 11:16 AM
US supports independence for Kosovo, but not Kurdistan? And of course, US offical support for a Palestinian state costs us billions in dollars and no good will among Muslims. Our selective endorsement of independence for certain states will haunt us for decades - if we last that long as a nation.
Posted by: HOV Dummy at February 19, 2008 11:25 AM
I am furious that the UK government has backed what is a muslim state in the heart of Europe. A state created by immigration of muslims, forcing the original inhabitants to run for their lives. My country is run by self hating idiots hell bent on destroying their own way of life and dragging our culture back 1400 years to the dark ages.
How long will it be until we have demands for a separate state within Britain, in Bradford or Birmingham, or anywhere that muslims become the majority?
Can our leaders really not know what they are doing, or are they actually complicit in the islamification of Europe? It doesn't take much to see what the intention of the islamic world is, but our leaders choose to ignore it. They create laws to protect the aggressors whilst treating the victims like criminals. The irony is that they equate criticism of muslim extremists with the persecution of the jews in Nazi Germany. The jihadists must be laughing their heads off at that one.
My country, the UK, is now a dictatorship. I know that sounds hysterical but it is sadly true. We are being dragged down by an unelected leader who ignores the wishes of the majority in order to impose his 1960's wrongheaded student thinking on both our country and the world.
How can we allow, let alone accept a separate muslim nation to be created in the heart of Europe based solely on the fact that they have immigrated in such vast numbers that they are now the majority? And what does it mean for the other EU members when they open the gates to Turkey? To allow this is tantamount to cultural suicide. "Come in enough numbers and you can have whatever country you like"?
When will my country wake up to the threat posed to them by their own Labour government? I hope it is before it is too late.
at February 19, 2008 11:38 AM
According to a story on NPR radio, there are no "minorities" in Kosovo, only "communities". If the Serb community were an official "minority", they would be entitled to rights in the EU!
at February 19, 2008 12:25 PM
"US supports independence for Kosovo, but not Kurdistan?"
The one antagonizes Russia, which is fine because Russia needs to learn to take it in the rear, as they "lost" the cold war by getting all friendly with us (Gorby was simply weak, of course; not, like, a concerned person or anything). Russia is obviously is the ultimate evil anyway, because I'm custom to thinking so. This becomes hauntingly clear by the fact that Russia occasionally dares hint that it is willing to protect its historical regional interests. Boo!
The other antagonizes Turkey, which is full of non-white Muslims, and thus of people it is very evil to antagnoize (because they are not white and are Muslim, they form another culture which we must respect at all costs, and standing up to them for the sake of people like the Kurds (or Armenians, for that matter) is akin to murdering millions of Jews in ovens: both are "racism"). And Turkey, at any rate, was on our side against the USSR back when it was Communist and interested in spreading Communism worldwide. (Which is very very important today, because my intuitions haven't changed despite the history of twenty years, and major attacks on US soil from a decidedly non-Russian source.)
Also, Turkey is our friend, because the links in my head don't reach long enough for me to put this thought about Turkey being our friend given a cold war context, together with the thought that the cold war ended--and on pretty good terms!--before were born many thousands of people now capable of legally driving, getting married, and having kids of their own.
Also, I have never heard of anything called the "good cop/ bad cop" routine, because I live in a box floating in space (wheeee!), and can't imagine that maybe there's some catch to working with the Turks and Saudis insofar as retaining access to terror intel is concerned. Even though they occasionally threaten to cut off that access if we do something contrary to Jihadist interests, but in line with ours.
... Is that really what the deal is? That's what it seems like. There are details, sure, but this seems to be the mental framework into which the details are fitted.
I have a hard time thinking that many people are that stupid and/or crazy. Before I go cubarian and start ranting about the fourfold day and being educated stupid, anyone have any idea what is actually going on in the heads of people in Washinton who do policy?
Am I missing something? Am I close?
at February 19, 2008 12:33 PM
The recognition of Kosovo is being championed by Bush and Rice, probably in the hope that, as with their push for Palestine, the US will be the darling of the Umma, Iraq and Afghanistan will settle down, and the entire Mideast will arrive t a new Golden Age under American auspices. Sure.
It's just not possible to "fight terror" and curry favor with Islam. Fuggedaboutit.
at February 19, 2008 12:41 PM
In the calculus of State Department there is something worse than being Muslim,that is being Orthodox Christian and the reason for this is that Orthodox Christianity is the religion of Russia.
It does not matter if the government of a given Orthodox nation is pro- Western or not.They are always suspect.
At this time there are four cases of ethnic conflicts between Orthodox Christians and Muslims :
Cyprus,Bosnia,Yugoslav Macedonia and Kosovo.
1) Cyprus is the mirror of Kosovo with 80% majority of Greek Cypriots and 20% minority of Turkish Cypriots.In this problem US supports the Annan Plan which is for "political parity" between the two communities,that is parity between 80% and 20% of the population with equal ministers and deputies in the central government,the right to veto of the minority for all issues,complete autonomy of every federal state,the ban on the majority of Greek Cypriot refugees to return in their houses(the right to return does not exist in this case) and the right of Turkey to reinvade if something goes wrong.
2)Bosnia : Bosnia has a relative Muslim majority.There US wants to annul the Dayton Agreements seeking a strong central government,that is to abolish the autonomy of the Serbs in Republika Srbska for the sake of the Muslim controlled central government.
3) Yugoslav Macedonia : The US supports the Ahrid Agreements signed after an armed rebellion of the Albanians which provide for the decentralization of the country and favor Albanian minority.
4) Kosovo : The US supports an independent Albanian-majority country.
So,in these cases that Christians are on the majority (Cyrpus,Macedonia) US supports decentralization,federation,minority rights and in these cases that Muslims are on the majority (Bosnia,Kosovo) US supports majority rule,so in all four cases it sides with the Muslim side.
US also demanded from Greece to discourage the Greek minority in Albania from asking even local autonomy (the fact that most people do not know that a Greek minority exists in Albania is because no one is talking and is rapidly vanishing through immigration in Greece) and accept hundrends of thousands of Albanian immigrants in Greece so that there is a change of the situation and where there was a Greek minority in Albania there will be an Albanian minority in Greece,and of course it presses constantly for the admission of Turkey in EU.
Historical records do not matter.The fact that Greece was a US ally in World War I,World War II,the Cold War and the Korean War and Albania was not an ally in any of these wars and had the statue of Stalin until 1991 in downtown Tirana does not count at all.Serbia was also US ally in two world wars and a neutral with the Tito regime during the Cold War but that did not save them from bombing.
There are no mistakes here but a concrete policy of supporting the Muslims in the Balkans with the sake of reestablishing some form of the former Ottoman Empire.The unknown factor in these plans is the Russian nuclear arsenal.
at February 19, 2008 1:12 PM
The recognition of Kosovo is being championed by Bush and Rice, probably in the hope that, as with their push for Palestine, the US will be the darling of the Umma, Iraq and Afghanistan will settle down, and the entire Mideast will arrive t a new Golden Age under American auspices.
by jewdog
Just more proof that our leaders are insane.
They have been hoping for this since Carter.
- Camp David accords
- Iranian revolution (US turned its back on Shah)
- peacekeepers in Lebanon (we know how that turned out)
- liberation of Kuwait
- Oslo accords
- eight visits to WH by Arafat
- more Camp David negotiations
- supporting Bosnia
- supporting tsunami victims
- supporting earthquake victims
- recognizing Kosovo
An incomplete list. What did any of this get us? We remain the devil, even in Kosovo.
at February 19, 2008 1:25 PM
Jew Dog wrote:
The recognition of Kosovo is being championed by Bush and Rice, probably in the hope that, as with their push for Palestine, the US will be the darling of the Umma . . .
................................
Yes, I've been hearing this ever since the US intervention in the '90s--that the "Muslim world" will finally see that we do too care about Muslims. Well, I don't think that either the EU or the US should hold their breath waiting for gratitude.
The region is becoming more, not less radicalized. With the EU's open border policy, jihadis will be able to move freely from Albania and Kosovo anywhere in Europe without passing so much as a single checkpoint. And don't forget that both one of the 9/11 bombers and OBL himself hold Bosnian passports.
Posted by: gravenimage at February 19, 2008 1:56 PM
"Just more proof that our leaders are insane."
--PMK
Or self-serving traitors as concerns the American people.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 19, 2008 2:12 PM
@Athenian:
"2)Bosnia : Bosnia has a relative Muslim majority"
Not really. Bosnia has absolute Christian majority - Orthodox and Catholics. Muslims are slightly above 40% of the population. There is no reason why Bosnia should be "muslim land" other than Saudi money.
Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at February 19, 2008 2:17 PM
" . . . anyone have any idea what is actually going on in the heads of people in Washington who do policy?"
--hope_and_justice
You might try http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2008/02/puzzled-by-whats-going-on-in-washington.html for starters.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 19, 2008 2:21 PM
U.S. foreign policy in the Balkans is schizophrenic and makes little rational sense.
Although the U.S. and the EU are largely Christian nations, their foreign policies in the Balkans, especially Kosovo and Cyprus, have dealt a heavy blow to Eastern Christians.
Can you say betrayal? Can you say injustice?
Most definitely.
I am extremely disappointed and embarassed by my country's (U.S.) foreign policy towards Kosovo and Cyprus.
Many mistakes are still being made by the U.S. and NATO.
The Clinton and Bush administrations have done a tremendous amount of damage in the Balkans.
There are unforseen consequences.
I fully support Russia's foreign policy towards Kosovo and hope they do more to intervene and assist the Serbs.
There is a need for an intensified movement to get rid of the U.N. and NATO troops that invaded a sovereign country, Serbia-Kosovo.
Unless there is a formal Serbian and Russian rejection of the illegal actions of the U.N. and NATO in Kosovo, there will more Islam, not less growing throughout Europe.
at February 19, 2008 2:23 PM
"While normally in total agreement with this blog, the above line really bothers me. Being bitter about how your ancestors are treated is nonsensical. Never is it 'understandable'."
Perhaps it is understandable if something is learned from history -- i.e. what would it be like to have a muslim caliphate in Europe.
Check out the Ottoman Empire to find out -- and I fail to get worked up over how my ancestors were treated over one-hundred years ago. Maybe I should, but I am not so inclined.
I saw a post on one of the JW threads and I can't recall who posted it, but it was pointed out that Kosovo could be used as a precedent to establish a Palistinian state with Jerusalem as a capital.
George is hell bent on saying that such a state was created finally during his watch; could it be that the fool applauded this situation because he believes that it will help him with his secondary ambition to create a legacy?
The situation is a disaster and I wish I could deport blair, clinton, bush, albright, solans and the whole cast of characters to a muslim kosovo forever.
A lot of people are going to do a lot of dying in the not too distant future becasue of this crowd who believe that they, are the rightful rulers of the world, having the divine right of kings to impose and depose nations according to their whims.
Posted by: witness at February 19, 2008 2:23 PM
hope_and_justice,
Forgive me for saying so, but when I see people ask the kinds of questions you ask, I have to wonder where you have been the past few decades. Our insane, irrational analyses and policies vis-à-vis the dangers of Islam are not merely the problem of our political "elites"; they reflect a major sea change throughout the entire modern West in sociopolitico-cultural consciousness, going back at least 50 years if not more.
This sea change in sociopolitico-cultural consciousness is very complex and involves many good things that are part of Western Progress. However, along with the good has flowed some bad -- including among other things two prejudicial axioms of politically correct multi-culturalism:
1) Third World cultures must never be substantively criticized (let alone condemned) for any dysfunctions they manifest or for any evils they seem to perpetrate;
because
2) The ultimate font of all sociopolitical dysfunctions and evils in the world is, of course, the West.
For our Western guilt and shame of axiom #2, we must take on the white man's burden of being eternal parents to Third World peoples, helping them be "free" and "democratic" while blaming ourselves wherever, and whenever, and howsoever, those peoples happen to fail.
Along comes Islam, the Poster Child of Third World cultures, and it fits perfectly into the slot of axiom #1. Muslims can get away with murder, literally, and still it is somehow our fault and not theirs. Islam can enshrine repudiations and attacks upon all our liberal values, but the #1 axiom trumps those values -- at least when those values are flouted or attacked by precious Third World peoples (but not, of course, when white Christian and Jewish Westerners flout or attack those values -- then it's open season on criticism and condemnation and mockery).
Our political leaders are not going against the popular grain; they are, as is usually the case with politicians in democratic polities, playing it safe by going with the popular sentiment. And that popular sentiment throughout the West is not the JW wisdom.
at February 19, 2008 3:18 PM
Time for us to leave. Instead of a nasty Civil war of the like the UN abhors. Now we have a true Nation State. Able to be dealt with properly by its Neighbors.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at February 19, 2008 4:46 PM
Don't expect Dhimmi Bush and Dhimmi Rice to understand the complexities of any of this.
at February 19, 2008 4:51 PM
Hugh: brilliant as usual.
Posted by: undaunted at February 19, 2008 6:20 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/politics/24TERR.html
As you can see, the CIA got a priceless tip about a future 9/11 hijacker more than 2 years before 9/11, in March of 1999, just days before NATO's war of criminal aggression against Serbia was launched. The CIA and the Clinton-Albright clique threw the warning into a waste basket. Why? They had a bigger fish to fry: they failed to prevent the murders of thousands of Americans by Arab terrorists because they bwere too busy helping Albanian terrorists murder thousands of Serb civilians. 9/11 was punishment for the evil the Clinton clique did unto the Serb people, simple as that.
Now, the Bush clique is asking for another punishment, and the American herd just sleep through it, ignorant as ever, although it is their hides that are at stake. Nothing ever happens to the higher-ups. It is the regular American people who pay with their lives for the evil their criminal government does in their name.
Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.
Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at February 19, 2008 7:09 PM
As you can see, the CIA got a priceless tip about a future 9/11 hijacker more than 2 years before 9/11, in March of 1999, just days before NATO's war of criminal aggression against Serbia was launched. The CIA and the Clinton-Albright clique threw the warning into a waste basket. Why? They had a bigger fish to fry: they failed to prevent the murders of thousands of Americans by Arab terrorists because they bwere too busy helping Albanian terrorists murder thousands of Serb civilians. 9/11 was punishment for the evil the Clinton clique did unto the Serb people, simple as that.
This seems additional confirmation that Kosovo was given over to islamic interests as orchestrated by the saudi's; in their delusions, the clinton-albright-blair clique may jolly well have thrown the warnings away believing at the time, that the coming mass murder was avoided with the Kosovo deal.
The fools were wrong of course.
Perhaps, there is nuclear blackmail afoot too that is not part of the public discourse; it may explain the current insanity.
Unfortunately, if this is the case the sacrafice of Kosovo only means that mass murder has been stalled for a time -- it probably has not ended.
Posted by: witness at February 19, 2008 9:05 PM
Godefroi:"I think the whole-hearted and immediate support out of our White House is a strategic ploy to help supply some legitimacy to a future Palestinian state - can't the Arabs in Gaza and/or Judea & Samaria now use this as an established precedent for unilaterally declaring their own independence and nationhood? Isn't that what Bush, et al, are pushing for?"
Good point. Israel is really worried about this exact same thing. That's why they are yet to recognise Kosovo. In the 99 NATO bombing campaign, Israel refused to withdraw it's Ambassador from Belgrade much to the chagrin from Washington.
Israel, unlike the West, knows it's allies. Serbia being one of the biggest.
The Kosovo state is going to be a template for a Palestinian state.
How long before we see a unilateral declaration of independence from them?
How long?
First Serbia then Israel.
Posted by: ewha1 at February 19, 2008 11:38 PM
It's been said that "Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely". American policy towards ME and islam, under Clinton earlier and now under Bush is truly a case of Absolute Power Stupefying Absolutely, as the risk of a poor decision is perceived to be minimal. One can be ignorant, arbitrary, casual, careless, reckless and afford plenty of mistakes, before these start registering, usually as irritants and blips or in some cases, as full scale conflagrations.
In an earlier bi-polar world, was America smarter, better-informed and more careful and wherever it wasn't, as in Vietnam, the lessons of such negligence were driven home pronto? Probably not, but the scale of its influence in world affairs was never this much. There was always the Soviet Union and China factor and American international affairs were guided by this filter. And concurrently, European foreign policy, rightly or wrongly, was guided by this factor.
And as someone in an earlier post has perceptively observed, the mindset in Washington is still beset with countering Russia and China, which are in fact, the West's best potential allies in the war against Jihad, given their own internal jihadis.
One is however unable to discern any method in the West's madness in Serbia. What exactly are they trying to accomplish by dismembering one of their own strategically located bulwarks against jihadic islam? Russia and China (and Spain) are doing the right thing,politically and morally, by opposing Kosovo's independence. This insane, shortsighted and unsolicited support from the West, is going to come back to haunt it. Even if one were to look for real politik as the reason, what has the West got in return? Zilch.
Posted by: Dunk at February 20, 2008 6:04 AM
Davemate posted: My country, the UK, is now a dictatorship.
Not a dictatorship under a dictator in London but Britain has been made subservient to a group of appratchiks in Brussels. But yes, the general effect is the same.
The effects of recognising Kosovo will leave us in the position of supporting this "state" that has no legal validity in international law, unless Russia withdraws its veto. I see no reason why Russia or China will do this, as they both are quite happy to see the US and the UK supporting an illegitimate and rebellious enity in direct contradiction to international law. We will be hung by this in all forums. The US and the UK will have have no leg to stand on when they state that they support the rule of law, and stand on the principle.
Such a state of affairs was going to happen when we elected to Blair to the PM. If ever there was man more likely to flout principle and rule of law, it is Blair.
Note the way he was involved in
1. cash for "honours".
2. Appeasement of Muslims in the UK and rewarding them with peerages.
3. Appointing the Archbishop of Canterbury while being a closset Catholic.
4. How convenient to become a Catholic just when seeking the EU presidency.
Just these, points to man who has no scruples or principle, when it comes to his own aggrandisement.
Blair was instrumental in turning Clinton's mind on Kosovo to intervention. Considering the state that Bill Clinton was in at the time, Clinton seized the Kosovo issue as a way to distract attention, knowing that he could rely on a smooth talker such as Blair to convince the American public to support an intervention in Kosovo.
Now Blair is after the EU presidency. Though it is unlikely he will get it, I support his bid, for if he does become president of the EU, hopefully he will severely damage the EU, just as he did Britain.
Posted by: DP111 at February 20, 2008 8:08 AM
What is wrong with our "experts"?
There you are.
We have no experts. We are run by wankers and flakes. Time to make changes..
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 20, 2008 8:55 AM
Blair and Clinton (or Bush, for that matter) did not destroy Yugoslavia - Yugoslavia destroyed itself, a proof that multiculturalism is a failure.
Indeed multiculturalism is a failure - I agree. Yet it was Germany's recognition of Croatia(its old WW2 ally), that lit the torch. It is conceivable that Yugoslavia could have sorted out the problem without a war, or the war could have been limited.
It is our intervention in a civil war that internationalsied it, and has led to this impasse that Russia and China, or any other state, now have the legal right to undo the creation of Kosovo.
It is also worth noting that ethnic cleansing of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, was a direct consequence of NATO's unprovoked and illegal attack on Serbia, and not the other way round. And the ethnic cleansing of Serbs in Kosovo, and the destruction and damage to churches, were done under the aegis of KFOR. That makes the US and the UK responsible for the latter ethnic cleansing, as they were and are, the occupying powers.
Posted by: DP111 at February 20, 2008 9:17 AM
cruzado posted: How about the Indian nations within the USA? They too have that same right, and so do the Latin Americans in California, New Mexico, Texas and Florida.
Because the US administration states that Kosovo is "unique", and establishes no precedent.
The reason Kosovo is "unique" is because the US and the UK know full well that their initial agression was illegal. They are simply trying to cover up and make an illegal act a legal one. However Russia and China are not likely to let the US gets away with it, not unless they get something substantial in return. I wonder what? Israel, Iran with nukes?
The very fact that the US and the UK see the need to state the "unique" nature of the Kosovo situation, is the recognition that they realise the illegal nature of recognising Kosovo as an independent state. It hardly needs mentioning that just because the US says that Kosovo is "unique", does not mean that everyone will fall in line and agree that it is.
Posted by: DP111 at February 20, 2008 9:34 AM
Cantor,
"I have to wonder where you have been the past few decades"
In the educational system, mostly. Before that, not alive yet.
"Our insane, irrational analyses and policies vis-à-vis the dangers of Islam are not merely the problem of our political "elites"; they reflect a major sea change throughout the entire modern West in sociopolitico-cultural consciousness, going back at least 50 years if not more."
I agree, I agree with this diachrony, and I think you have to dig into issues with the school system, and with philosophy and ideology, to understand what the change is and how it spread.
And I'm familiar with post-colonialism and white guilt and the ideological foundations for them (Orientalism, Foucault, Derrida, Hegel, etc.), and the way in which they are taught to the public at large, in childhood, in a way that gets around critical thinking of the foundations. (At the same time I also think it is perfectly possible to dismiss it as a lot of bollocks, and I think doing so happens, quietly, more often than you suggest. The popularity of, say, South Park should attest to that.)
But what I'm wondering is, well, I'm assuming that first and foremost about half of the country is still mostly conservative. Conservative families that teach many of their kids that the multiculti pap in the schools is just that, and the kids agree. Some of these people must be smart, just statistically. Some probably become conservative wonky people that get into Washington in times of Repub.
What are they doing?
Some smart people from liberal backgrounds also, they get wonky jobs in Washinton dealing with facts, and aren't stupid, how do they maintain the glaring disconnects they were raised with as children? Fear? Like, I couldn't do that. Many people I know couldn't do that; they change their minds with exposure to evidence, as they see more and more of a picture they change their understanding. That's normal to an extent, or at least within the range of normal, no matter how much BS brainwashing people get in school.
Maybe it is just that people like this systematically get disgustied with social science and humanities, in their current state, early on and go into business and science???
I'm looking at the elites because they're the ones dealing with the evidence that could theoretically undo the pap, the idiotic thinking, at least for some of them. Most other people are doing things like moving lumber or data entry or whatever most of the day, things that don't challenge their ideas on this topic.
I know the history behind the postcolonial ideological trends, but I want to know what is going on in people's heads that make this so strong despite the facts, despite that it flies in the face of evidence.
Maybe that way one can start formulating some sort of way of getting through mental chinks.
Or maybe people, once grown are simply much more mentally inflexible, and in such larger numbers, than I tend to think?
That's my basic problem, the individual psychological aspect, how it fits in. I'm down with the historical diachronic aspect. And it does fit in, I think. I'm not one of these Foucault worshipping sorts, or these Derrida "all is texts" sorts. I think that individual psychology plays an extremely important role, and is more potent and more fixed by nature and reason and evidence that people give it credit for -- am I wrong? If so, am I wrong just in degree?
Maybe in degree. I still think that once normal people, maybe the ones who dismissed humanities and social science and bollocks and got real jobs, hear more and more about cartoon riots and teddy bear naming death sentences, that evidence will change their minds far more than it and similar has changed the minds of people doing policy...
I'm trying to say I think if normal people had the evidence the elites do, they'd react differently than the elites. So what gives, why the diff, or am I wrong about the diff?
at February 20, 2008 12:05 PM
hope_and_justice,
There has occurred a sea change in consciousness throughout the West -- so profound and sweeping that even most conservatives really believe in the PC party line about Islam being a "religion of peace" that needs to be "respected", and that the "vast majority of Muslims are 'moms and pops' like the rest of us", and that to think otherwise in any substantive way is to begin to be "bigoted".
When conservatives start thinking this way -- and most of them do --, we have a far deeper sociological problem than a mere cabal of dastardly "Gramscians".
at February 20, 2008 9:22 PM
hope_and_justice, cantor, Dumbo, and Ruslan Tokhchukov,
The polarization in the U.S. must reach a resolution. what will it be? Who will gain control? Who will lose control?
We can speculate. See THE REVOLUTION . . .
at February 25, 2008 6:07 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)