The Forgotten War - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Pacifier · 02-18-2004, 07:06 AM

Quote:

The Forgotten War
Remember Kosovo?

With our modern-day communications systems of radio, television, and the internet, we tend to forget many important things, even when it comes to crucial issues such as war and peace. Most had already started to forget about Afghanistan, and would have done so, if it were not for the recent spate of attacks which saw one Canadian, one British, and seven American soldiers killed in one week, leading to talk of a spring offensive against a "Taliban rebellion". The Taliban? Weren't they already defeated long ago, with a new Afghanistan rising from the ashes?

Sadly, the same holds true much closer to home, and our blindness is all the more unforgiving considering that wars within Europe, which cost over tens of thousands of lives, have promptly been forgotten. There was a time when almost everyone in the western world knew where Kosovo was, and journalists were falling over each other to cover what was happening. Even on the internet, hip and over-hyped intellectuals like Richard Barbrook would tag the end of each e-mail message with "Victory to the KLA!"

But for those intent on pursuing a programme of perpetual war for perpetual peace, it would do no good to dwell on the past. Thus, Kosovo is to this day trumpeted as a victory for the concept of humanitarian warfare. Everyone is happy, and the mission was accomplished; been there, done that, time to move on to the next target.

Yet Kosovo is anything but the happy and prosperous place that it was supposed to be. Nor has peace been brought to region. Crime, terror, ethnic cleansing, and smuggling is rampant -- this time under the aegis of the UN and not Belgrade.

Four years after it was "liberated" by a NATO bombing campaign, Kosovo has deteriorated into a hotbed of organized crime, anti-ethnic violence, and even al-Qaeda sympathizers. Though nominally still under UN control, this southern province of Serbia is today dominated by a triumvirate of Albanian paramilitaries, mafia gangs, and terrorists. They control a host of smuggling operations and are implementing what many observers call their own brutal ethnic cleansing of minority groups, namely Serbs, Roma and Jews. This, despite an 18,000-strong NATO-led peacekeeping force and an international police force of more than 4,000.

Typically, the response by the international community to this is to look the other way, for it's far easier to do this than explain why NATO should go against the ones they "liberated" just a few years ago. Furthermore, it would distract the west from other "nation-building" projects that are currently underway around the world.

So as to not have an uncomfortable news item suddenly hit the headlines of the western media, a fortified concrete barrier around the UN compound on the outskirts of the provincial capital Pristina was constructed recently -- just in case. The barrier is supposed to protect the UN against terrorist strikes by "Muslim extremists" who have set up bases of operation in what has become a largely outlaw province.

Meanwhile, minority Serbs, who were supposed to have been guaranteed protection by the international community after the 78-day NATO bombing campaign ended in the spring of 1999, have abandoned the province en masse. The last straw for many was the recent round of attacks by ethnic Albanian paramilitaries bent on gaining independence through violence. Last summer saw one of the more grisly massacres, in where two Serb children were killed and four others wounded by ethnic Albanian militants while swimming in the Bistrica River, near Pec.

Attacks on Serbs in Kosovo, a province of two million people, have risen sharply over the past year. Serbs, who now make up 5% of the population of Kosovo, down from 10% before the NATO campaign, are the main targets of the paramilitary groups. According to statistics collected by the UN criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia at The Hague, 1,192 Serbs have been killed, 1,303 kidnapped and 1,305 wounded in Kosovo in 2003 alone. In June, 1999, just after the NATO bombing, 547 Serbs were killed and 932 were kidnapped.

The bombing campaign was partly launched by NATO countries to end what was viewed as a systematic ethnic cleansing program of Albanians by Serb security forces in the region. In its immediate aftermath, many Serbs left Kosovo to settle in other parts of Serbia and Montenegro.

While NATO was at war against Milosevic, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), an insurgent group that emerged in the late 1980s to fight Serb security forces, were seen as allies. Soon after, they were regarded as guerrillas that were an obstacle to peace. Now they are viewed by many as outright terrorists.

While the KLA was supposed to be officially disbanded, it has carried on as a mafia organisation involved in the smuggling of both drugs and people. Some former members of the KLA joined the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC), a civilian defence organization which is supposed to help local residents.

But far from helping local residents, the KPC has continued to do the work of the KLA -- to clear the province of all non-Albanian ethnic groups, with the ultimate goal of a union with Albania and the establishment of a Greater Albania, which also includes parts of Macedonia, Montenegro, and even Greece.

The situation with the KPC has become so bad that even the UN has had to step in. Harri Holkeri, the province's UN leader, suspended two generals and 10 other officers in late 2003, all members of an ethnic Albanian offshoot of the KLA. A UN inquiry into the KPC found that its mostly ethnic Albanian military officials have been involved in violent confrontations with Serbs, including a bomb attack last April on a Kosovo railway.

As the western world preoccupies itself with the Middle East, the situation in Kosovo is deteriorating rapidly. There is no question that the whole process of rebuilding Kosovo as a democratic, multi-ethnic society has failed, this primarily due to both the inability of the UN mission and NATO forces to protect Serbs and other non-Albanians from large-scale ethnic cleansing.

Some are even more harsh in their assessment. James Bissett, a former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia, remarked recently that NATO forces made a real mess of Kosovo. "The bombing of Yugoslavia was a dreadful failure on humanitarian grounds," he said. "It failed to stop ethnic cleansing, which has continued after the so-called peace treaty."

Much of the ethnic cleansing presently underway in Kosovo is the work of Muslim ethnic Albanian paramilitary groups who have come to be known as the "Balkan Taliban". In addition to murder and kidnapping, they have vandalized Serb cemeteries and destroyed many of the region's Orthodox Christian monasteries and churches. Serbs complain that it's a strategy of cutting Kosovo Serbs off from their historical and religious traditions.

In addition to the their ethnic cleansing activities, these groups have turned Kosovo into one of Europe's biggest hubs for drug trafficking and terrorism. The province has become an important center for heroin, cigarette, gasoline and people smuggling. More than 80% of Western Europe's heroin comes through Kosovo, where several leading drug laboratories have also been set up.

During the decade that led to the breakup of Yugoslavia, drugs and other commodities were usually smuggled through Bulgaria and Turkey to Western Europe. Now, more than 5,000 tonnes of heroin pass directly through Kosovo every month. In a recent article in Serbia's Vreme magazine, Kosovo was referred to as the "republic of heroin."

In addition to this, the Albanian mafia also controls trafficking in cigarettes, weapons, gasoline and women. Dozens of young women from impoverished towns and villages in the region are forced into prostitution rings centered in Kosovo, security officials say. Many of these women are then taken to work in Western European countries.

Compounding the problem of Kosovo is that there is little consensus on what to do next. Many Serbs and moderate ethnic Albanian politicians first would like a decision from the international community on Kosovo's legal status; that is, will it remain a province of Serbia or become an independent entity. Most ethnic Albanians are calling for independence, but their more extremist elements would like to fold the province into a Greater Albania that would see ethnic Albanians take over the mostly Albanian regions of neighbouring states as well.

Yet the Serb government in Belgrade wants Kosovo to continue as part of Serbia. And the UN is at a loss of what to do, preferring instead to sit on the fence and send mixed signals to all sides hoping that somehow the situation will solve itself.

Although the NATO war with Yugoslavia took place five years ago, talks on Kosovo's future began only recently. Serb and ethnic Albanian leaders met in Vienna in October 2003 to discuss transportation and the return of Serb refugees to Kosovo.

Most Serbs realise that the chances for Kosovo remaining in Serbia are slim. There is a powerful Albanian lobby in the United States that is determined to make Kosovo independent. Moreover, many Serb leaders know that to attract much-needed aid and investment, they will need to give way on Kosovo.

In the meantime, the situation is expected to only get worse, with renewed threats of violence against both the UN and Serbs in the province. Unless the international community takes a good, hard look at Kosovo and comes down from its fence-sitting position, Kosovo may yet explode into the headlines, thereby debunking NATO's self-proclaimed success in the region. Moreover, it would start to raise some very uncomfortable questions concerning about the concept of humanitarian warfare and nation building. After all, if the west can't handle Kosovo, then how are they are going to bring peace and stability to places like Afghanistan or Iraq?

(http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/co/16765/1.html)

I think this is an example of "nation building" and "humanitarian war" gone wrong. In Kosovo we supported a dangerous allie (the KLA), an error we repeated in afghanistan by supporting the "northern alliance"
We also undestimated the power of the ethnical conflicts there, much as we now underestimated the power of the conflicts in iraq, I'm afraid the situation in Iraq will become much worse than in Kosovo, leading into a full scale civil war.

onetime2 · 02-18-2004, 08:10 AM

It really only goes to show that nation building is not a quick and easy thing. The world has little patience or willingness to take on risk nowadays.

Japan, Germany, and South Korea are examples where we (the US and others) had to step in and commit to a long term presence and serious involvement. I guess the reason we tolerated the risk was fear of the alternative (further aggression from Germany, Japan, and North Korea). I would put Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan into that category as well (not just from a pure aggresion fear but more of a fear of the situation to foment terrorism/hatred of the US.

Quick military exercises to quell aggression do little to solve the problem.

Sparhawk · 02-18-2004, 11:04 AM

Ok, 'point of order', but I thought it was stupid that the author called the deaths of 2 children, and the wounding of 4 others a massacre. A grisly, brutal murder, no doubt, but it gives the word massacre less meaning when you apply it to just 6 people.

onetime2 · 02-18-2004, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparhawk
Ok, 'point of order', but I thought it was stupid that the author called the deaths of 2 children, and the wounding of 4 others a massacre. A grisly, brutal murder, no doubt, but it gives the word massacre less meaning when you apply it to just 6 people.

I didn't read it quite that way. I read it along the lines of wanton/indiscriminate killing/slaughter of people. Not necessarily the killing of a large number of people. If the author meant it the other way then I agree with you.

Zeld2.0 · 02-18-2004, 11:27 PM

Well anyways what I have to point out (if any reason its a subject I happen to be studying on recently) that the world is far different from the days of Korea, Germany and Japan - I think people need to remember the Cold War was growing during that time and indeed it was a big factor.

Thats where I think the argument that Iraq can be Germany has problems - because there isn't the threat of another superpower to transfer its people to your ideology and thats where the conflict comes in.

Lebell · 02-18-2004, 11:35 PM

I will simply point out that Kosovo was and is a UN operation, meaning that the UN is not the panacea that some claim it to be.

Nothing in this world is black and white.

But as with Iraq, I believe that Kosovo is better off than it was and will continue to improve.

Pacifier · 02-19-2004, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Well anyways what I have to point out (if any reason its a subject I happen to be studying on recently) that the world is far different from the days of Korea, Germany and Japan - I think people need to remember the Cold War was growing during that time and indeed it was a big factor.

Not only that, also germany and japan are far different societies than afghanistan and iraq. using germany and japan as a example for the new nation building missions is false

onetime2 · 02-19-2004, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zeld2.0
Well anyways what I have to point out (if any reason its a subject I happen to be studying on recently) that the world is far different from the days of Korea, Germany and Japan - I think people need to remember the Cold War was growing during that time and indeed it was a big factor.

Thats where I think the argument that Iraq can be Germany has problems - because there isn't the threat of another superpower to transfer its people to your ideology and thats where the conflict comes in.

The world does not change quite so easily. People are motivated by the same things. Changing a society takes a long time whether there is a cold war or not. The commitment to rebuilding the societies is what made these instances a success.

Pacifier,
As far as Iraq and Afghanistan being so different than the others listed above, please give specific examples of why you think it won't work. Let's see, strong religious, cultural, and societal beliefes, yep they were there in Japan, Germany, and South Korea.

Pacifier · 02-19-2004, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
As far as Iraq and Afghanistan being so different than the others listed above, please give specific examples of why you think it won't work. Let's see, strong religious, cultural, and societal beliefes, yep they were there in Japan, Germany, and South Korea.

as for germnay we then were already closer to the western societies than afghanistan and iraq are now. we also had no internal conflicts like there are afghanistan or iraq. Plus Germany was increbible "war tried" and tired of a dictatorship.
we already had some sort of experience with "democracy" (Weimar Republic). Our religion was the same as yours.

japan was pretty different from america when it comes to ideology.
the japan ideology included a fight "till the end" but when the end was there in was also part of the ideology to fully accept a defeat.
they also had no internal conflicts.

In Afghanistan and Iraq you have a religion which is very different from the west. The ideology is very different, also in both nations there are heavy internal conflicts which are, for us, hard to understand and therefore to difficult solve (in Iraq for instance I'm afraid we will see a civil war that will divide the land, perhaps even with a kurd nation in the north witch will also affect Turkey. It seems that the US were pretty unaware of those problems when they moved in). This makes nationbuilding extremely difficult and dangerous. Both strongly opposes the westen nations and civilisation in general. Nationbuilding in those nation may still be possible, but I think the west had no real plan and not real knowledge about the situation and what will happen after the "liberation" so they now seem somewhat lost. What they did seemed to be a bit chaotic and more like "try and error"

onetime2 · 02-19-2004, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pacifier
as for germnay we then were already closer to the western societies than afghanistan and iraq are now. we also had no internal conflicts like there are afghanistan or iraq. Plus Germany was increbible "war tried" and tired of a dictatorship.
we already had some sort of experience with "democracy" (Weimar Republic). Our religion was the same as yours.

japan was pretty different from america when it comes to ideology.
the japan ideology included a fight "till the end" but when the end was there in was also part of the ideology to fully accept a defeat.
they also had no internal conflicts.

In Afghanistan and Iraq you have a religion which is very different from the west. The ideology is very different, also in both nations there are heavy internal conflicts which are, for us, hard to understand and therefore to difficult solve (in Iraq for instance I'm afraid we will see a civil war that will divide the land, perhaps even with a kurd nation in the north witch will also affect Turkey. It seems that the US were pretty unaware of those problems when they moved in). This makes nationbuilding extremely difficult and dangerous. Both strongly opposes the westen nations and civilisation in general. Nationbuilding in those nation may still be possible, but I think the west had no real plan and not real knowledge about the situation and what will happen after the "liberation" so they now seem somewhat lost. What they did seemed to be a bit chaotic and more like "try and error"

Iraq is among the most "westernized" nation in the middle east. Every country has internal conflicts and all countries, when going through a rebuilding process, have internal threats to stability. Every faction within the country tries to garner the best position and it can easily turn to violence. The transition from war to peace in Germany and elsewhere was far from easy, just as the changes in Afghanistan and Iraq will be far from easy.

Pacifier · 02-19-2004, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
Iraq is among the most "westernized" nation in the middle east.

Thats true, but that still doesn'tm ake it a western nation. there was also time when the Iran was very "westernized". And the same religious tendecies that took over Iran can be seen now in Iraq.

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
Every country has internal conflicts and all countries, when going through a rebuilding process, have internal threats to stability.

sure, but when the become violent it becomes harde to take over control again.

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
The transition from war to peace in Germany and elsewhere was far from easy, just as the changes in Afghanistan and Iraq will be far from easy.

True, but the attempts in the recent past are making me a bit pessimistic. To see back to Kosovo: the situation there is not what I would call peaceful and stable or "democratic", but noone cares anymore about that it seems, there are new nations to be "liberated" and when the US decide that they are finished with "nationbuilding" they will leave and the media attantion will also be gone. and then anything could ahppen in iraq and noone would care. ..

onetime2 · 02-19-2004, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pacifier
True, but the attempts in the recent past are making me a bit pessimistic. To see back to Kosovo: the situation there is not what I would call peaceful and stable or "democratic", but noone cares anymore about that it seems, there are new nations to be "liberated" and when the US decide that they are finished with "nationbuilding" they will leave and the media attantion will also be gone. and then anything could ahppen in iraq and noone would care. ..

I have been pessimistic for a long time with regard to nation building, but firmly believe it is the best thing for humanity. Nation building failures far outnumber successes. The only successes are those where the rebuilders were truly committed to making it work (whatever the reasons for the commitment).

I have some hope that there is sufficient commitment in Iraq as I believe creating a strong democratic(ish) government in the middle east can get the region moving in a more stable direction. I fear that the current political infighting within the US around Iraq can only soften the resolve of the American people to see it through. This would be a HUGE mistake since, as you pointed out, the international reputation of the US is to intervene in things and then leave once our needs are met. We need to stay involved with Iraq and build it into the greatest country it can be.

Afghanistan is a different story. The goal in Afghanistan has not really been to rebuild the nation. It was to dislodge the Taliban and Al Qaeda. While I would hope that we can bring some stability and hope for a better future there, I think it may be too difficult. There are just too few resources to work with there.

Kosovo is a travesty in my opinion. It illustrates how easily the world can turn its back on people despite all the speeches by leaders of the "first world" countries about human rights, economic freedoms, and compassion for others.

Zeld2.0 · 02-19-2004, 07:02 PM

Im hopeful the nation building goes out good too I think too much of the post-Cold War experiences around the world have shown the flipside of nation building.

Part of the problem is that democracy is not always what people want. I love democracy and so I hate saying it but not everyone is made for democracy - take Russia for example. 400 years of authoritarian rule is not erased easily.

In some areas of the world a strong leader/bordering dictator or more is required - the former Yugoslavia is just such an example for when Tito was gone the tensions exploded.

Religion is one of those things that people know but often don't factor in - many people in the U.S. and even on this board are fiercely defensive of their religion. Saying God is a joke or whatever offends many people - the same is true about Islam.

Islam with its own sects and believes are also very split in ideology though the religion is essentially the same while in Christianity we can see it as well with its various groups and ideologies.

Iran is an example of where the minority rulers get kicked out by the majority who want the government in their style. Afghanistan before was the fundamentalist government as well.

The problem IMO is that its not easy to just change people's views overnight - not to mention that the anticolonial feeling is DEEP within the Arab nations. This tradition has gone back many years.

These are the differences between Germany and Japan though a far major player than those reasons above was the Cold War - for Germany the alternative of freedom under democracy was oppression under communism - a pretty big no brainer.

Japanese culture was built on obedience and when the Emperor said its time to surrender and change, they took it - oh and the Japanese version of democractic tradition was the Meiji period as essentailly democracy was somewhat there before the military took over.

Anyways its mainly those major points that sorta set apart the argument that Iraq and Afghanistan are like Germany and japan - imo its these points that really set it up and Iraq and Afghanistan are uncharted waters.

Pacifier · 03-18-2004, 08:03 AM

Does it start again?

Quote:

NATO is sending peacekeeping units from Bosnia to Kosovo, which is experiencing the worst spate of violence since the end of the ethnic war there five years ago.

A NATO spokeswoman in Brussels said an American and an Italian unit were on their way to Kosovo. Britain also said it would send an extra 750 troops.

A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Defence said a spearhead battalion from the Royal Gloucestershire, Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiment would leave within four days.

The latest clashes were triggered by the drowning of three Albanian children Tuesday night near Mitrovica, according to a spokeswoman for the U.N. mission in Kosovo.

At least 22 people were killed and more than 200 wounded in the subsequent unrest.

full article at CNN

onetime2 · 03-18-2004, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pacifier
Does it start again?

full article at CNN

Hopefully not. Perhaps this early "intervention" will stop it before it gets going again.

02-18-2004, 08:10 AM	#2 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	It really only goes to show that nation building is not a quick and easy thing. The world has little patience or willingness to take on risk nowadays. Japan, Germany, and South Korea are examples where we (the US and others) had to step in and commit to a long term presence and serious involvement. I guess the reason we tolerated the risk was fear of the alternative (further aggression from Germany, Japan, and North Korea). I would put Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan into that category as well (not just from a pure aggresion fear but more of a fear of the situation to foment terrorism/hatred of the US. Quick military exercises to quell aggression do little to solve the problem. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

02-18-2004, 11:04 AM	#3 (permalink)
Sparhawk Dubya Location: VA	Ok, 'point of order', but I thought it was stupid that the author called the deaths of 2 children, and the wounding of 4 others a massacre. A grisly, brutal murder, no doubt, but it gives the word massacre less meaning when you apply it to just 6 people. __________________ "In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

02-18-2004, 11:35 PM	#6 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	I will simply point out that Kosovo was and is a UN operation, meaning that the UN is not the panacea that some claim it to be. Nothing in this world is black and white. But as with Iraq, I believe that Kosovo is better off than it was and will continue to improve. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

02-18-2004, 11:27 PM	#5 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Well anyways what I have to point out (if any reason its a subject I happen to be studying on recently) that the world is far different from the days of Korea, Germany and Japan - I think people need to remember the Cold War was growing during that time and indeed it was a big factor. Thats where I think the argument that Iraq can be Germany has problems - because there isn't the threat of another superpower to transfer its people to your ideology and thats where the conflict comes in.

02-19-2004, 07:02 PM	#13 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Im hopeful the nation building goes out good too I think too much of the post-Cold War experiences around the world have shown the flipside of nation building. Part of the problem is that democracy is not always what people want. I love democracy and so I hate saying it but not everyone is made for democracy - take Russia for example. 400 years of authoritarian rule is not erased easily. In some areas of the world a strong leader/bordering dictator or more is required - the former Yugoslavia is just such an example for when Tito was gone the tensions exploded. Religion is one of those things that people know but often don't factor in - many people in the U.S. and even on this board are fiercely defensive of their religion. Saying God is a joke or whatever offends many people - the same is true about Islam. Islam with its own sects and believes are also very split in ideology though the religion is essentially the same while in Christianity we can see it as well with its various groups and ideologies. Iran is an example of where the minority rulers get kicked out by the majority who want the government in their style. Afghanistan before was the fundamentalist government as well. The problem IMO is that its not easy to just change people's views overnight - not to mention that the anticolonial feeling is DEEP within the Arab nations. This tradition has gone back many years. These are the differences between Germany and Japan though a far major player than those reasons above was the Cold War - for Germany the alternative of freedom under democracy was oppression under communism - a pretty big no brainer. Japanese culture was built on obedience and when the Emperor said its time to surrender and change, they took it - oh and the Japanese version of democractic tradition was the Meiji period as essentailly democracy was somewhat there before the military took over. Anyways its mainly those major points that sorta set apart the argument that Iraq and Afghanistan are like Germany and japan - imo its these points that really set it up and Iraq and Afghanistan are uncharted waters.