Kosovo

The newspaper says that there are hints that this ... unrest ? was planned by politicians. Local newspapers are said to have found "interesting connections" of some of the people who were active there, and that they even had town maps with the embassys marked !

Alrik Fassbauer said:

The newspaper says that there are hints that this ... unrest ? was planned by politicians. Local newspapers are said to have found "interesting connections" of some of the people who were active there, and that they even had town maps with the embassys marked !

Click to expand...

And this would surprise you because...?

I would have been terribly suprised if there was no political involvement. Let's not forget that Tomislav Nikolić's Serbian Radical Party only narrowly lost 2008 Presidential campaign. Still, since I have expected that Serbs would show their displeasure anyway, political involvement would provide fuel but not the spark IMO.

On Sunday, I was heading out for a Texas Independence Day celebration in midtown NYC. Walked smack into a pro-Serbian protest at some Orthodox Church! It was actually kind of funny watching people protest about something occurring half a world away that will likely have no direct impact on their lives.

Walp, here comes the Russian counter-move: [ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7283192.stm ].

(For those unwilling to pollute their browsers with the pinko commie propaganda of BBC, Abkhazia just declared independence. It's a mostly Russian enclave in Georgia, which is currently very pally with the USA and not pally at all with Russia.)

Edit: yes, I noticed that the Russians said that this has nothing to do with Kosovo, at all, perish the thought, cross my heart and hope to die.

It's going to continue to get ugly over there!

Could it be the Russian position on Abkhazia and South Osetia has something to do with Georgia's position on NATO?(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6190858.stm)

And the U.S. is training troops in Georgia...I'm confused--the U.S. is supporting Kosovan independence, but not Abkhazian? Is it solely because of Georgia's pro-Western stance, or is it more spitting in the eye of the Russian Bear? Is it because of oil presence in Kosovo, and a low level, mountainous agricultural economy in Abkhazia? Whatever--I can't say I like it much.

I have to say the UN position seems the most rational. From wikipedia

Any settlement must be freely negotiated and based on autonomy for Abkhazia legitimized by referendum under international observation once the multi-ethnic population has returned.

Click to expand...

As international chess games go, this one is hard for me to follow.

magerette said:

Could it be the Russian position on Abkhazia and South Osetia has something to do with Georgia's position on NATO?

Click to expand...

It does. But there is also a marked effort by resurgent Russia to reabsorb (or, at least bring back into Russian sphere of influence) breakaway republics, so Georgia (like ex Warsaw Pact's countries in Europe) needs some strong backing to protect its independence.

magerette said:

And the U.S. is training troops in Georgia...I'm confused--the U.S. is supporting Kosovan independence, but not Abkhazian?

Click to expand...

LOL weird isn't it? Condoleezza Rice is desperate to convince the world that Kosovo is a "special case" but the only countries which buy this are those who WANT to buy it. In short, she is preaching to the converted

magerette said:

Is it solely because of Georgia's pro-Western stance, or is it more spitting in the eye of the Russian Bear?

Click to expand...

Both again but I don't think that US wants to deliberately "spitt in the eye of the Russian Bear". Just that, like with plans for US' "Anti-missile Shield" in Poland and Czech Republic, Bush administration seems to be blissfully ignorant of traditional Russian insecurities and paranoias.

This is something that comes up over and over again:a misguided belief that, because of it's special status, US can get away with policies which would be (or were) condemned if implemented by others.

Bad case of "Chosen Nation" syndrome?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/tofte6.html

What he said.

(No offense intended, that's just the only smiley that points up on this board.)

zahratustra wrote:

..Bush administration seems to be blissfully ignorant of traditional Russian insecurities and paranoias.

Click to expand...

That's not all they're blissfully ignorant of--they seem to be just as uninformed on the traditional insecurities of Americans.

Thanks for the explanations, and just as I get that layer of information digested, we get this little bit of news:
Serbia's Ruling Coalition Collapses

The new elections will determine whether Serbia will continue on its path toward the EU and other Western organizations, or return to the international isolation of late strongman Slobodan Milosevic's warmongering era in the 1990s, which is epitomized by Kostunica's hard-line policies.

Click to expand...

How does it look to those on the spot-- is a new election the best thing to do at this point, or is this some kind of political machination? My head is starting to hurt...

magerette said:

Could it be the Russian position on Abkhazia and South Osetia has something to do with Georgia's position on NATO?(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6190858.stm)

Click to expand...

It does, but the situation is quite confused. These places are full of Russian peacekeepers and essentially survive as Russian protectorates, but at the same time Russia doesnt seem too eager to push for official recognition of them (and it is uncertain that Russia will do so even after the Kosovo declaration of independence), partially since they as limbo (rather than officially independent) states are useful pawns against Georgia, partially because federal Russia has potential breakaway regions of it's own. Transdnistria in Moldova presents a similar case but with less ethnic cleansing than Abkhasia (or Kosovo for that matter).

And of course I'm in agreement with what zahratustra and PJ said

magerette said:

How does it look to those on the spot-- is a new election the best thing to do at this point, or is this some kind of political machination? My head is starting to hurt...

Click to expand...

Serbia has parliamentarism (e g the government need to have at least passive support from a majority in the parliament), so from what I can tell the election is pretty much unavoidable. Maybe VPeric has a hunch on which side will come out on top?

I get the feeling there are two faultlines in Serbian politics, nationalism/"europeanism" and "democracy"/"traditionalist" (not sure what to call the second axis, both sides do accept the democratic process) with the now broken government fragmenting over nationalism and PM Kostunicas "democratic nationalists" possibly aligning with the "traditionalist nationalists" after the election, replacing a "democrat" government with a nationalist one..

magerette said:

How does it look to those on the spot-- is a new election the best thing to do at this point, or is this some kind of political machination? My head is starting to hurt...

Click to expand...

It's going to be close, but hopefuly, the "good guys" will win. As it stands now, their best bets to maximize potential votes would be to form two coalitions - DS/G17+ on one side, and LDP/minority parties on the other side - if coalitions aren't made, there will be some "falloff" votes for parties that don't pass the census (5%, 2% for minorities); on the other hand, if they form a huge coalition, they will lose votes (some of LDP's supporters will not vote for Tadić's DS, and vice versa). Tadić and company still have a lot of work, though.

In any case, the alternative means some years of isolation, and that is definitely not the path to take.

Thanks for taking the time to comment. There's no doubt the politics are complex, but it helps to get some insight from those involved. Hope the Serbian elections (and our own upcoming presidential election) will make a change for the better in the status quo.

Other Serbian news:

Bosnian Serb Wartime President Arrested

Not much coverage in this article--hard to tell from here if this is politically significant or not. Will this be a big deal in Serbia?

From a symbolic point of view, this is one of the best news this year !
I just despise him.

Nice beard, though. I wouldn't have recognized him. I wonder what kind of alternative medicine he was offering?

Whoa! Just caught the picture and the rest of the story on the news tonight--that was indeed a beard and a half. So it's my understanding the man is a war criminal, but apparently some are protesting against his arrest:

Police, Karadžić supporters clash

I'd like to disentanlge the participants here, but there are too many unfamiliar acronyms. (SRS, MUP, LDP)--perhaps these are former supporters?

I'm a little bit worried about the fallout on this one; as I said elsewhere, prosecuting war criminals is a luxury that sometimes comes at too high a price. If the price for arresting Karadzic is that Serbia goes up in flames, it's not worth paying, no matter how monstrous the man is (and if he's done a tenth of what he's accused of, he's an upstanding example of European monstrosity, which is saying something). VPeric?

I'd like to explain few things magerette asked.
SRS (Srpska Radikalna Stranka) is Serbian Radical Party, an opposition political party in the parliament and very much right wing nationalists.
MUP (Ministarstvo Unutrasnjih Poslova), Ministry of Internal Affairs, is basically a fancy name for national police
LDP (Liberalna Demoktratska Partija), Liberal Democratic Party. As name says liberal democrats.
DS (Demoktratska Partija), Democratic Party. Along with SPS (Socijalisticka Partija Srbije, Socialist Party of Serbia) form current government in parliament.

Also a note for the mentioned Obraz movement in the B92 article.
Saying its "ultra right-wing", is very much an understatement. By European standards, they can be called clero-fascist organisation.
Wikipedia Obraz

Now for actual political situation. On one side we have Pro-European socialisticky responsible government formed of DS-G17 with SPS (G17 is another democratic party, but is united with DS now). On other are right winged nationalists, SRS with DSS-NS (DSS Demoktratska Stranka Srbije, Democratic Party of Serbia. NS - Nova Srbija, New Serbia, similar to DS-G17). And on the side are smaller party of LDP with minority parties (minority political parties are formed by minority national groups in Serbia).

SRS leader is Vojislav Seselj, who is currently been trailed in HAG Tribunal.
DS leader is Boris Tadic, current president of Serbia.
SPS was leading political party in '90 with Slobodan Milosevic as its leader. Right now they are reformed pro European (at least that's what they say ).
LDP's leader Cedomir Jovanovic was member of DS, but because of disagreement with Tadic he left and formed his own party.
DSS's leader Vojislav Kostunica is former prime minister. Right now prime minister is Mirko Cvetkovic, elected by new government.

Well that's all i can think of right now. If you have questions Ill try to answer them as best as i can

Thank you, lilmagi. I can't say I'm not still confused, but at least you deciphered some of the jargon for me.

So then, of all these parties, the ones on the far right are the ones defending Karadzic, while the Pro-European socialisticky (love that word!) democrats are interested in trying him for war crimes? And I'll echo Prime Junta's concerns: is this going to make a volatile political environment even more so?

I realize this is undoubtedly an oversimplification, but in trying to understand Serbia I'm starting pretty much from scratch beyond our discussions on this board, so thanks for bearing with me.