From aki at alb-net.com Thu Feb 7 07:04:27 2002 From: aki at alb-net.com (AKI News) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:04:27 -0800 Subject: [AKI-News] Where is the Democracy? Message-ID: Advocates for Kosova's Independence (AKI) January 31, 2002 ================================= ** AKI Newsletter, Issue 7 ** ================================= When wrestling with the current complexities in creating a stable Kosova, it's easy for those involved on all sides to feel burnt-out, easy to ask oneself, "why bother?" Many geopolitical forces have come to bear on this one tiny place. There are so many layers of poorly-defined competing interests. It's especially confusing now due to the loss of U.S. leadership and interest in the Balkans. The original goal of creating a clear, openly democratic, and fair strategy to determine a final status, a process that represents the best interest of the current population being governed, seems overwhelming. Historically, since 1912, if not before, it had been customary to blame the Albanians for the resulting poverty, disorder, and confusion in the UN protectorate. Nowadays, world leaders ignore the fact that a high percentage of Kosova's civil population went to the polls and without ethnic violence, calmly elected a moderate government (or so they thought). Thus, the current trend of US politicians and others to shout "extremism!" as a reason to deny or delay the Albanians' a process of self-determination is not based in reality, but fiction, reflecting a cultural bias against the so-called "lawless Albanians" that has persisted throughout history. In fact, the election in Kosova was conducted far more fairly than the recent presidential election in the U.S. And we do not need to look far to find other such double standards. Crime? Kosova's myriad gas stations are engaged in money-laundering? What about America's Enron crisis, a scandal in which the very highest level of our government is involved? Will internationals deny our right to self-expression because of Enron or the Bush electoral process? Of course not. Rugova is a weak president with self-serving interests? Okay. True. But what about that invisible, now-you-see-him-now-you-don't vice president, Dick Cheney? What to conclude from this? That democracy must be earned by civil virtue measured and predetermined by various outsiders' feelings and frustrations? NO. Such a self-righteous posture is not based by any kind of socially just principles nor by any measurable goals. Instead, we can conclude that self-righteousness is both universal and universally self-serving, and as present in Kosova - as in other societies. The principle we must uphold and protect is that democracy in the 21st century is a universal right, not an international option, inviolable by any organization or institution, including the United Nations, whose primary mission it is to uphold this right for those who are not yet included, those who have been colonized. Fortunately for Americans, democracy for us is not held tantalizingly just out of reach, jerked out of sight by a cadre of internationals at every shortcoming our society experiences. We do not lose our Constitution or our basic liberties because of a scandal like Enron or a confused and confusing presidential election. We Americans do not face a future in which we have no choice but to be linked to a nation that recently tried to kill, and did brutally kill without a single apology or remorse, thousands of our citizens. Imagine our distress if our political future were tied to the Al Quaida! Imagine how this would polarize our population! Milosevic nationalists play a strong and enduring role in Serbia. Nevertheless, of course, the current level of regional violence is absolutely unacceptable. The calls for an end to murder, crime, and violence in Kosova by international leaders are both necessary and correct and should be echoed by civic leadership at all levels. In fact, if Kosova's political leaders do not begin to speak out responsibly on issues of violence and ethnic hatred, perhaps there should be real, concrete consequences imposed on them for promulgating this kind of civic indifference and irresponsibility. However, the idea of withdrawing the universally guaranteed right of self-determination and representative government from a civil population in the 21st century is not only cruel, morally backward, and discriminatory, it is, according to international human rights laws and charters, possibly ILLEGAL. The citizens of Kosova deserve an open, representative process towards a final status by which to achieve their political goals. International leaders and local political leaders have yet to see that basic fact. Thus, there remains no starting point to solve the problems of Kosova. The bungling start to the Kosova Parliament is a symptom of this very grave shortcoming. Sincerely, AKI Team ======================== * A R T I C L E S * ======================== KOSOVALIVE.COM weekly summary Constitutional Framework Criticized in Follow-Up Kosova Report January 22, 2002 PRISHTINA (KosovaLive) - The Independent International Commission on Kosova have released a 43-page follow-up report detailing the necessary conditions for conditional independence in the region. Their original report was published in October 2000, and two years later, the commission has reevaluated its original conclusions in favour of an independent Kosova. The Independent International Commission on Kosova was established as an initiative of the Prime Minister of Sweden, Goran Persson, to provide an objective analysis of the events during and after the war in Kosova, and to research the lessons to be learned. The Commission is independent of any government or institution, national or international. The report identifies the need for improvements such as the reduction of nationalistic aspirations towards Kosova, yet also maintains that the region is still considered a symbol of the Serb national identity. "Not enough pressure was put on the new [Serb] regime, specifically in relation to Kosova? to get rid of this nationalism," continued Tham. "So we are somewhat critical towards the international community in that respect." The Commission praised the accomplishments of UNMIK and KFOR in their endeavors to rebuild, and improve the standards of human rights, but they stopped short to put forward their own parallel of the United Nations as a "protectorate" of Kosova, exercising an "imperial power" in a "colonial relationship." The report stated, "If you are here to create a democracy, it is somewhat paradoxical if this democracy is so restricted that the people of Kosova cannot rule themselves but the main decisions are taken by this imperial power." The uncertainty of a future status for Kosova has been a source of conflict for Kosovars since the UN established Resolution 1244 and the "illusion of self-rule" represented in the constitutional framework. The idea of partition has been observed as gaining popularity in arenas such as Belgrade, though the international community has objected that ethnic borders are not consistent with principles that negate ethnic cleansing. The future of Montenegro plays a large role in the future status of Kosova, though the dissolution of Yugoslavia is not an entirely sellable proposition. What remains to be seen is the ability to compromise within the political environment of Kosova. As forthright as the Commission was with respect to self-determination within the region, they also recognize that this cannot be fully realized without the cooperation of its neighbors. "The solution for Kosova will not work in isolation, particularly with Serbia and Macedonia - not within the framework of a revised Yugoslavia, but within the framework of conditional independence," read the report. ----------------------------------------------------- Brayshaw: Meeting with Belgrade Not Harmful to Kosova PRISHTINA (KosovaLive) - The latest meeting between international representatives of the United Nations and Belgrade Government authorities under the auspices of the FRY Working Group was the main topic on the agenda of the Interim Administrative Council (IAC) at Tuesday's meeting. Charles Brayshaw, the acting head of U.N. mission in Kosova, wanted to reassure the Kosovars that his meeting with the Belgrade authorities was not harmful for Kosova. "Kosovra must not be concerned about UNMIK's relations with officials in Belgrade as with all the other neighbors we have many issues to discuss with Belgrade. I want to reassure you that UNMIK takes seriously the responsibilities granted to it buy the U.N. Resolution 1244. We will continue to take that responsibility until the central institutions are established and will be careful not to harm the interest of the people of Kosova," said Brayshaw. Meanwhile, the member of the Alliance for the Future of Kosova (AAK), Bujar Dugolli called on UNMIK to halt the contact with Belgrade "Because they harm the interests of the people of Kosova and damage the credibility of UNMIK toward our people." It is expected that an agreement will be signed shortly, which would enable the cooperation between Serbian authorities and UNMIK Police in fighting criminal activities such as drugs and weapon trafficking, money laundering, and prostitution. "These activities do not recognize borders. We believe that there is information in Serbia as there could be in Kosovo to help tackle the phenomena," Brayshaw contended. He added they also discussed the issue of the Albanian prisoners in Serbia. "We discussed this issue and the head of the UNMIK First Pillar, Jean Cady, discussed procedures in detail regarding the prisoners." Brayshaw said there was understanding that the Albanian prisoners should be returned to Kosova within an accelerated timetable, but he failed to provide any further details of the exact timeframe. -- ### Questions/Comments, email AKI-NEWS at aki at alb-net.com AKI Website: www.alb-net.com/aki/ From amead at maine.rr.com Mon Feb 18 14:03:28 2002 From: amead at maine.rr.com (Alice Mead) Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 14:03:28 -0500 Subject: [AKI-News] AKI NEWSLETTER- 2/20/02 Message-ID: AKI (ADVOCATES FOR KOSOVA'S INDEPENDENCE) February 20, 2002 FURTHER ISSUES REGARDING THE ROLE OF EU AND THE STATUS OF FRY AND THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION FOR MONTENEGRO >"Finally we must express our alarm at the undoubted fact that EU >pressure for a federal solution is playing into the hands of political >factions in both Belgrade and Podgorica that are the least progressive >in terms of modern European values, rather than the reverse." *************************************************** >Peter Palmer, International Crisi Group's Montenegro analyst, said: >"The priority for the EU should be to help Montenegro and Serbia to >find a stable solution which both sides can live with. By seeking to >impose a solution by >applying extreme pressure to just one side, the EU is actually >polarizing the parties and making a tense situation worse." > >Nicholas Whyte, Research Fellow and Communications Manager at CEPS >said: "The EU must not force unwilling partners into a new federation. >Too often in history, the great powers of the day have tried this >approach and then had to deal with the consequences. European values >surely require the EU not to take a stand on the final status of >Yugoslavia but to facilitate peaceful resolution of the problem. There >is still time for this to work." > >Subject: Open Letter on Montenegro for media release >Brussels, 14 February, 2002: A group of prominent European politicians >and activists today sent an open letter to the Secretary General of >the Council of the European Union, Dr Javier Solana Madariaga, >expressing extreme concern about the EU's approach to >Montenegrin-Serbian relations. Among the signatories are members of >the European parliament, former foreign ministers and the Chairman of >the Irish parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee. > >The drafting of the letter was coordinated by the Centre for European >Policy Studies (CEPS) and the International Crisis Group (ICG). A copy >of the letter accompanies this media release. > >For interviews: >Nicholas Whyte, CEPS, Brussels >+32 (0) 2 229 3911 (CEPS) >+32 (0) 2 229 3942 (direct) >+32 (0) 495 544 467 (mobile) >***************************************************************** > >An Open Letter to Dr Javier Solana Madariaga, >Secretary General of the Council of the European Union and >High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy > >14 February 2002 > >Dear Dr Solana; > >We have been following with strong interest your efforts to try to >resolve the present impasse over the future of Montenegro-Serbian >relations. We are extremely concerned that the EU is trying to >bull-dozer Podgorica in a direction that would be economically and >politically unwise. > >On the economic side, Podgorica has already moved faster towards the >open European market (tariff average 3%) than Belgrade (tariff average >10%), and should not now be required to move backwards. > >Podgorica has already introduced not only the DM as its currency two >years ago, but now successfully - and without external help - moves >onto the euro for its budget and replaces DM by euro notes and coins. >It should not be forced back onto the Yugoslav dinar, a currency with >a very bad track record. > >Economic openness and the euro as currency make sense for a small >coastal Adriatic economy, which can build a prosperous future with >tourism as its main export industry. There is no reason why a small >economy of this type cannot be viable - in population Montenegro is >about the same as Cyprus and much bigger than Malta. > >Re-integration of the region together with its integration with the >EU, are objectives that we all support. But the EU should not push for >a federation between unwilling partners. As you will remember surely, >history is littered with failures of this type, mostly imposed by the >European great powers of the day. > >A different scenario is entirely possible, and suggested in fact by >the Montenegrin statement of 5 February 2002. If a constitutional >agreement cannot be found today, it would be better to welcome the >perspective of progressive convergence of Serbia and Montenegro over >the time horizon ahead for preparing for EU accession (i.e. at least >ten years). In the meantime, there would be several options including: >(1) a loose confederation, allowing for different economic policies >for the time being, and (2) independence. Either one would have to be >legitimised by a referendum. We strongly believe that the people of >Montenegro should be allowed to exercise their democratic right to >decide on the future of their republic. > >In all cases the outcome could be supported by an agreement between >the parties to resume re-integration talks after some years as EU >accession becomes a closer prospect. The EU should abstain from >expressing any further preference over which should be the solution, >but simply facilitate an amicable resolution without more delay, and >agree to be supportive in all cases. > >In all cases Belgrade should get on with the job of rationalising its >own government structures, eliminating the overlap of Yugoslav and >Serbian governments. > >Finally we must express our alarm at the undoubted fact that EU >pressure for a federal solution is playing into the hands of political >factions in both Belgrade and Podgorica that are the least progressive >in terms of modern European values, rather than the reverse. > >Yours sincerely, > >Ersin Arioglu, Chairman, >Yapi Merkezi, Turkey; International Crisis Group board member >Emma Bonino, Member of the European Parliament; >former European Commissioner; International Crisis Group board member >Richard Caplan, Research Fellow, Centre for International Studies, >University of Oxford >Michael Emerson, Senior Research Fellow, CEPS >Gareth Evans, President, International Crisis Group; former Foreign >Minister, Australia >Daniel Gros, Director, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels >Tim Judah, Journalist, London, England >Desmond O'Malley TD, Chairman, Joint Foreign Affairs Committee, >Irish Parliament >Peter Palmer, International Crisis Group Montenegro Analyst >Heidi R?hle,Member of the European Parliament, B?ndnis 90/Die >Gr?nen P?r Stenb?ck, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Finland; >International Crisis Group board member >Ed van Thijn, former Minister of Interior, The Netherlands; former >Mayor of Amsterdam; > International Crisis Group board member Nicholas >Whyte, Research Fellow, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels > >========================================================== >Boris Pajkovic E-mail:Boris.Pajkovic at ncl.ac.uk >Newcastle University Tel.:++(0)191/222-8510/222-6359 >Geography-Daysh Building Fax:++(0)191/222-5421 >Newcastle upon Tyne >NE1 7RU England/UK >========================================================== > >-- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 6936 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.alb-net.com/pipermail/aki-news/attachments/20020218/d1dccbe1/attachment.bin