Mike,

I enjoyed the history lesson. However, I think you are mistaken on why the US/NATO went to bat for the Kosovars.

While a few people in foreign policy circles may of looked at the bombing as a way to protect muslims from orthodox christians, most people, including the bulk of the American public saw the Serbians and especially Milosevic as modern day Nazis, due to policies of ethnic cleansing, etc. The American public could have cared less if the Kosovars were muslim or christian. At this time, the idea that religion could be a cause for conflict was a pretty alien ideal to most Americans. 9/11 changed that, but up until then, the idea of holy war or a war between christians and muslims seemed pretty outdated, something that ended with the crusades. Basically, America saw the conflict in Yugoslavia as one based along lines of race/ethnicity not religion.

The bombing of Serbia during the Kosovar conflict was really a continuation of the NATO intervention that started with the unrest in Bosnia. There were some pretty bad things that happened to Bosnians at the hands of Serbians during that time. As a result, the reaction in the West was to assume that Serbian leaders were racists and openly planning genocide in the heart of Europe. Something that the West swore would never happen again after the Holocaust.

Once Milosevic and those that advocated for “ethnic cleansing” were taken off the world stage, the West lost interest in that part of the world.

Mike you are well aware of how well America is able to absorb different cultures, races, ethnicities, and religions. Everyone gets along for the most part. Sure there may be some off-color jokes or comments that get passed around, but for the most part, American is still a melting pot. The idea that someone would start a war over race or religion just seems so archaic. That fact that someone would still want to kill someone in the 21st century purely for these reasons is barbaric. Americans don’t have a problem with killing troglodytes.

Jason, you are very way off in your reply.

I used to think like you. That was prior to learning just how distorted the media coverage was on the article's covered issues.

You admit to assumption in your analysis.

Stay tuned, as I'm sure there will be a followup to this.

By the way, if you have been following events there, you would know that the Serbs suffered great persecution in Kosovo in the years preceding the NATO bombing and thereafter.

Jason:

You're way off the mark.

From 1974-89, Kosovo was given an autonomous status (within the Serb Republic of Yugoslavia) by Tito. During that period, attacks on non-Albanians (mostly Serbs) increased. If you don't believe me, check what the "free" press was saying back then.

As for Serbia proper, it's very ethnically diverse and at relative peace.

Contrary to mythology, Milosevic-led Serbia didn't start four wars in former Yugoslavia.

There were many nasty things done to the Serbs in Bosnia, which others and yourself overlook. Among others, Nebojsa Malic can tell you about it. He was there. War is a nasty matter, regardless of which ethnic groups are involved.

Still not convinced? Here's an open challenge:

Let the Discovery Institute, RTTV or any other think tank or media outlet have me go at it with ANYONE.

Who are you calling "troglodytes"? The Serbs?

My money is on Mike.

Another great article from a great analyst.

We want more!

I thank Global Voices and Serbianna for picking up this RB column on the matter of Kosovo and its relationship with US-Russia relations:

http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/-/world/eastern-central-europe/russia/

http://www.serbianna.com/

Excellent article,with concise history. I wish I had known about this panel discussion earlier as I was in NYC on Nov. 3rd. Is there any place where similar future events might be advertised?

One should also include the cultural ties in any discussion of Russo-Serbian relations. We are very similar in behavior and mentality. This is due not only to a common religion, but centuries of understanding and shared history.

I just came back from Russia.

Three of my friends sent me this article. Mishka has quite a network.

Mr. Herr hasn't come back to explain himself. Typical.

Good last point Marko.

Welcome back Zhana.

Marko, here's the Columbia University Harriman Institute web site:

http://www.harrimaninstitute.org/

This is the Njegos Endowment web site:

http://www.sipa.columbia.edu/ece/serbian.html

I believe that I understand your point about a similar general mindset among Russians and Serbs. I come from a multi-ethnic/multi-religious background myself and have experienced how different groups can have different general tendencies (both good and bad).

Here's a link to a June 10, '05 discussion I had with Intelligent.ru Editor Sergei Roy on that very matter (the link includes some choice media critiques touched on at the end of my above RB article):

http://english.intelligent.ru/cgi-bin/loadtext.pl?id=3433&file=letters/letter_e0021.htm

Mike,
Excellent summary!

As for Mr. Jason Herr's comments, he forgot about the neo-Nazi Croatian Ustasha cleansing of my family as well as other Serbs like NBA star Peja Stojakovic's family in 1991, before Bosnia started up in 1992, and long before President Clinton's illegal bombing of Serbia in 1999. The bombing authorization did NOT pass in Congress and contrevened international law.

Furthermore, Osama Bin Laden became a Bosnian Muslim citizen in the 1993 and was allowed to infilitrate Europe with Al Qaeda fighters and recruited local Bosnian (Caucasian) recruits who participated in the Madrid 3/11 and London 7/7 bombings. Serbia's opposition to radical Islam goes back to June 28, 1389. For more on the present threat to the West for non-Arab Caucasians to slip past checkpoints (not just Serbs persecuted by Albanians in Kosovo), please note the following:

http://www.jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=203

What happens in Kosovo will have ramifications to Georgia, Tibet, Taiwan, and beyond.

Best,
Tomislav
NYC - a few blocks south of Ground Zero

Tomislav

Your substantive input is greatly appreciated.

The recent news on former Yugoslavia shows that Russia isn't verbally willing to sellout their historic ally.

The Nov. 16-17, QT ( http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@844.gju1mYKspfS.3@.77480649/6172 ) cited an IWPR article quoting a Russian official saying that his country will not go against the Serb position on Kosovo.

On a list which I'm on, came news of Russia considering a consulate/embassy like presence in Republika Srpska (the Serb republic portion of Bosnia).

It's great that Russia Blog, Global Voices and Serbianna are inclusive of mainstream Russocentric views on these matters. May this spirit continue.

The next step is to get Anglo-American mass media to be as forthcoming. Largely Russian government funded media operations like Russia Profile and Russia Today TV have also been lacking. There's no excuse for this.

tomislav,
i am deeply sorry if your family has been "cleansed" by "neo-nazi croatian ustasha" but you have forgot that serbs in croatia declared their own state of "krajina" much before croats even had an army. by such turning back the guilt you can blame one side or one step back the other side. it's not a solution.

problem is that serbs wanted to have a control in whole yugoslavia. nationalist movements took the opportunity and many wars started. i don't say that only the serbs are to blame but it is a fact that everything started when milosevic was at kosovo and said "nitko ne sme da vas bije". sorry, but serbs had lost kosovo the same moment when milosevic said that.

one other thing. historically, russia was a better ally to montenegro than serbia. only when serbia annexed montenegro, russia became a great ally of serbia. in fact, russia was always looking for an ally on "warm sea" and the best coice for them was montenegro for many reasons.

a russian-serbian friendship and alliance was best seen during the 1991-1995 conflict when russia sold its weapons to CROATIA. do you really think russia gives a damn about serbia? of course, except usual vain phrases.

Katyusha:

Your impression of Milosevic's 1989 Kosovo Polje address isn't accurate.

An unedited transcript of it shows that Milosevic advocated multi-ethnic harmnony and an opposition to ethnic violence. A number of propagandists have disingenuously isolated certain portions of that address in a way which misrepresents what was said.

The Russia of the last decade was very corrupt. it had its share of hucksters seeking to make a profit in whatever which way they could.

Serbs and Montenegrins remain very closely related. In the recent Montenegrin referendum, about a half million Montenegrin citizens in Serbia were denied the right to participate in that process.

You're wrong about Serbs wanting to control all of Yugoslavia. Slovenia broke away with relative peace after launching a brief terror war against the multi-ethnic JNA. Macedonians were among the JNA casualties of that Slovenian instigated war. The not so Serb friendly late Warren Zimmerman (former American ambassador to Yugoslavia) acknowledged Slovenian culpability in that conflict.

Macedonia left Yugoslavia without bloodshed.

There's sound information showing how a lax Croat government, coupled by somewhat independent Croat extemists had launched discrimination and outright terror on ethnic Serbs.

For that matter, the Bosnian Civil War ignited AFTER the Bosnian fundamentalist President Alija Izetbegovic had refused to relinquish the Bosnian presidency over to the Serb side as was constitutionally required. This happened as pro-Izetbegovic militias prepared for war. In this process, Sarajevo's Serb population began to experience what Serbs in Croatia's Communist drawn boundaries were experiencing.

Great comments.

Katjusha

You think like Jason and have a greater familiarity with the topic.

However, your views overlook some other points. Who in Russia was selling arms to Croatia? Do you really think that the Serbs are the overwhelming bad guys? The others are angels in comparison? Before the Western intervention, the Serbs were winning. The winners of wars can often inflict the most casualties.

I will check back later on this discussion.

Wow; well this was a good article and I liked the comments. I wish I could contribute however, I know I don't know a lot (the devil hides in details) of as far as history is concerned, especially the recent history. The only thing I can say is that I hope someone takes notes as things were (are) developing, because I would hate to see history being rewritten as it is often done. My wish is that one day I will be able to comprehend what and why the events did take this course in my forsaken country.

Aleks

Tito' Communist dictatorship put the past ethnic hatreds in a freezer. In the long term, this didn't correct the situation.

When his Communist freezer broke, the hatreds thawed.

Similar to George Soros in the present - Tito played up certain nationalisms (Bosnian Muslim and Albanian) as a means of offsetting the stronger ones (Croat and Serb).

no, i don't think that serbs are overwhelming bad guys. that is absolute nonsense. but it is clear that hate and conflicts started in serbia under slobodan mislovic's rule. it has spread all over yugoslavia with greater or lesser effects.

to understand my point take a look at 1988 when people is serbia were carring milosevic's picture on their car windshiels. it was a time when there was no franjo tudjman or alija izetbegovic as leaders of croat and bosnian muslim nation. so you can't blame croats and bosnians or slovenians for things which were happening in serbia. actually, serbs did accuse croatian and slovenian communist party leaders for being antiserbian while they didn't agree with the milosevic's politics in kosovo and politics in general. one of the most hatered persons in serbia at that time was stipe suvar who was a croatian communist representative to yugoslav central committee of communist party. stipe suvar had nothing in common with nationalism of whatsoever so it is clear that anyone with a view different from serbian point of view was considered as an enemy of serbs.

i personally don't consider milosevic as nationalist but i admire his clever way of making politics. he was never officially on nationalist side but under the table he did just that. and he knew how to grab the masses and control them. he is an expert on that. because of him other nations found their counterparts, like croats elected tudjman. i'm quite sure that if there was no milosevic, tudjman would never be elected or even politically known. maybe i'm wrong but we'll never know.

same thing is for serbs in croatia. if there was no milosevic's politics, serbs would never take an action against croatia. they were simply deceived by milosevic and after croats elected nationalist party, they started a rebellion. they say they were threatened by croat fascists („ugrozeni“) but all it happened was they simply lost the control at elections and power was distributed by croats and not by some communist party anymore. i city of ogulin, 5 of 8 high positions before elections were held by serbs, after the elections all positions were held by croats (croats were majority in there). my position is that democracy put serbs in „threatened position“ , not croats. after that, serbs refused to cooperate with central croatian government. all the rest is known. i wonder how would serbia react if croats (or any other ethnic minority) inside serbia refused to recognize serbian government??? unfortunately it happened in kosovo and we have a result of kosovo being practically independent. it is a result of serbian politics, not someone elses. sad but true.

all in all, the war in the 90's is a result of never finished chapters from history. my position is that serbs and croats made a big mistake when creating a joined country in 1918. back then, they should of create serbia and croatia (and slovenia as well) as two (three if counting slovenia) countries. but croats were just too big south slavic idealists and serbs were too big imperialists and wanted all serbs in one country. 1918-1920, a big mistake.

just to reply to michael,
a half million montenegrin citizens in serbia were denied the right to participate in the referendum simply because they don't live in montenegro. i support such action. it makes me mad when seeing so many people outside croatia having croatian citizenship and voting at croatian elections when they don't live in croatia, don't pay taxes in croatia or in many cases were never actually in croatia. i'm mad when their vote is equal to mine. it's not fair. therefor, i admire montenegrin decision to deny the right to vote for those who don't live in montenegro. of course we all know that montenegrin referendum was not fair as well and that many irregularity happened over there. thats an another story 

Just wanted to add liitle bit to u panserbs, I have to say one think that kosovo is lost no matter how hard you guys try to debate. It s over the end of it . Now I think what should u do is create debates in form of peace not in form of hate cause the rest of the serbs are stuck in kosovo, so to make it easy for them and for the rest of albanians is to go in kosovo and apolgize , and know the kosovo has been independent since 1999. How ever to make it easier for you to understand the problem , i was in kosovo in 2004 and I saw that every country has its own consulate , tomorow they will become embassy 's , now you can loose time and debate , jews this and british this , and american s this , alnanians this yade yade , but the simple fact is that US army is there , for another 77 years , so you do the math where the power of russia and serbia is ending. Now you are going to say china is becoming strong , but hey they wont come and help the russians.
cheers

Serbia is still a major player in that region of Europe.

Recent economic indicators show that Serbia is on the rebound. Something already evident with Russia.

With a NATO and repackaged KLA presence, Kosovo remains poor, crime ridden and ethnically intolerant.

If anything Republika Srpska and some if not all of the disputed former Soviet territories have greater cases for independence.

As of right now, Kosovo isn't permanently "lost".

The current situation is due to a misguided NATO assault and years of violence against non-Albanians.

This can be reversed.

to everyone in serbia it is clear that they can't do anything about kosovo anymore, but noone is willing to publicly admit it is lost. i believe it is not permanently lost simply because kosovo will not be granted full independence as a "normal country". it will have some sort of independence but under international jurisdiction. therefor it won't be independent but it wont be under serbian law either.

because of this "crippled independence" non of other disputed areas in the world could get full independence either. republika srpska has no possible way to become intependent simply because noone in eu would support that. if it does become independent that means the same right should be granted to other nations as well, particularly to croats in bosnia. then we're back in 1991. of course it wouldn't stop at that, hungarians could ask for independence of parts of vojvodina, and so on, and so on ...

try to think about that without "feelings" because if you don't, this story will never end as long as someone drops an a-bomb on serbia, bosnia, croatia and especially at kosovo :)

Katjusha

Hungarians make up only about 35% of Vojvodina's population.

I hope to have something out soon which will explain in detail the similarities and dissimilarities among the disputed territories within the former Communist bloc.

BTW, would you advise the Albanians to try to think "without feelings"?

Sorry, that I haven't responded to this comment thread sooner. I've been busy the last couple weeks and hadn't had a chance to check back in to see if anyone had added further comments.

I should clarify that my comment was not necessary meant to reflect my opinions on the situation in Yugoslavia, but to present the picture that the western, english-speaking media had painted of the whole mess. Yes, there may of been other english sources of info that presented events there in a different light, but you really had to look for them. The BBC, NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc. were all reporting the situation in the manner I presented in my previous comment.

Without a doubt, Serbia lost the propaganda/information war in the west during this period of time. I don't remember anyone in the west standing up and speaking for Serbia. Those who were against U.S. involvement in Yugoslavia, were not against it because they supported the Serbs (or christians), but because they didn't feel getting involved served the national interest. In other words, It wasn't the US's problem, the US didn't need to fix it.

I was serious when I said I appreciated Mike's post on this subject. I don't pretend to have even an inkling of knowledge about history in this region of the world. I would like to know more, but finding english sources of information about events in this region are pretty scarce. I have found a copy of Kusturica's film "Underworld" with english subtitles. Haven't had the chance to view it yet. Hope it might shed some more light on the situation there, from one mans's perspective, at least.

As for the troglodyte comment, that was meant to refer to anyone that would attack someone, without prior provocation, based only on that person's race or religion. It was not meant to be a slight towards Serbians or any other people in particular.

micael,

as i said, hungarians could ask for independence of PARTS of vojvodina, not WHOLE. in some areas hungarians are in high majority.

you're looking at the kosovo and vojvodina as integral parts of serbia. that is of course true, but with a small addition. both were autonomous regions prior to milosevic's changes of the constitution. of course, even with that fact, both were a part of serbia. therefor my position is they must stay a part of serbia.

on the other hand republika srpska was made in 1995 at dayton. it never had an autonomy of whatsoever during yugoslavia. republika srpska is integral part of bosnia and herzegovina and can not break away no matter of the result of kosovo case. simply because it has no legal standings in 1974 constitution of yugoslavia. because of the same constitution, rupublics could proclaim independence but autonomous regions couldn't. that is why sovenia, croatia, bosnia, macedonia and later montenegro (of course even serbia) became independent. they had legal ground. kosovo has no legal ground and is depending on international jurisdiction. that's why i say kosovo won't be granted fully independence.

your article about pro-russian regions is interesting. i'm not familiar with those cases so that is why i comment only on kosovo :)

don't get me wrong, i'm not antiserbian. actually i support serbia in kosovo case but i don't agree with serbian former and even present politics toward kosovo. instead of accepting albanians as its citizens and granting them what was taken from them (autonomy) serbia is trying to prove kosovo belongs only to serbs and nobody else. if you pay attention, i wrot serbs not serbia. the fact is that 90% of population were albanians. unfortunatelly today albanians make even higher majority. that's the result of serbian politics.

Jason,

Glad to hear you're well aware of the nature of coverage on certain topics provided on BBCNN, however

"...anyone that would attack someone, without prior provocation, based only on that person's race or religion"
I think exactly this sort of attitude got US into trouble-imagine how useful this idea is to people justifying punishing US for what it did.. well, the latest one-Iraq (I hope you not one of those numbn--s who still think Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or Al-Qaeda (now it does :-( )
Also, FYI, KLA (Kosovo liberation army) did provide OH SO MANY REASONS for serbs(the ones still alive there) to act...

I remember a really good moment from FOX news anchor, I've seen it WITH MY VERY OWN EYES in the week before bombings began (accidentally TV just was on that channel, I swear;-]) "Now, the fighters for independence from KLA...(to another anchor)Hmm, didn't we run the story about them making the terrorist organisation list few weeks ago?... Well, there we go, they are freedom fighters now..."

Katjusha:

It's the result of ethnic cleansing of non-Albanians (mostly Serbs) in Kosovo and the illegal immigration from Kosovo to Serbia.

Republika Srpska is a republic unlike Kosovo. Kosovo is internationally recognized as a part of Serbia. RS has the legal right to establish its own relations with other states.

rpublika srpska is an entity, not an republic. it just has a name REPUBLIKA.

right to establish relations with other stats is very limited. the same right have the croats in bosnia so none is even thinking of declaring independence or even joining into one state with croatia. don't misled the readesrs of this blog with false interpretation of un resulutions.

Oops!

Kosovo Premier Leaves for Moscow Carrying Albanian Passport

Pristina, 30 Nov. (Tanjug)
Kosovo Premier Agim Ceku has left for Moscow carrying an Albanian
passport, the media in Pristina reported on Thursday, adding that a
group of Kosovo journalists, who accompanied the premier, had been
returned from the airport in the Russian capital because of their
improper papers.

Russia does not accept the documents issued by UNMIK, stated Ceku's
spokesperson Ulpiana Lama. Ceku has a Croatian citizenship, and receives
Croatian retirement, and has Croatian passport, but he applied and
obtained Albanian passport.

Katjusha:

Practice what you preach.

Republika Srpska is a republic, having the right to establish relations with other states. Kosovo doesn't have that right.

Kosovo is recognized as a part of Serbia. UN Resolution 1244 governing Kosovo states a return of Serb civilian and military personnel to Kosovo.

Unlike Kosovo - minorities have returned to Republika Srpska, where there's no violence.

Now, show me where I'm wrong.

Mr. Herr's second statement is different from his first.

It is good to have forums where different views are challenged.

Kosovo continues to be a key global issue having implications in other conflict zones.

Arbitr,

Don't want to go OT on this, but there was a whole bucket load of provocation from Saddam Hussein before the first Gulf War and after. There was already a US policy of regime change in Iraq before 9/11, due to his flaunting of UN resolutions.

Yes, you are correct that Iraq didn't particularly have much to do with 9/11 or Al Qaeda. 9/11 however, gave the US the motivation to stop pussy-footing around with dictators of rogue nations, for a few years at least, until the population decided the world was safe again.

Once a nuke goes off in a US city, this will all start again. Only the next time, most Americans are probably going to decide to not bother trying to fix things in the Middle East.

Americans want to think of themselves as the good guys in the world. As a result, there is (believe it or not) a lot of restraint placed on projecting force beyond the US' borders. If a nuke goes off, Americans may decide that there is no value in trying to be the good guy, and go into a "total war" frame of mind like in WWII. We should all be worried about such an event, no matter where you stand on issues.

republika srpska is not a republic, it is one entity of a country named bosnia and herzegovina. the second entity is called federacija bosne i hercegovine. there is only one country which is made out of two entities. of you don't understand this, read the constitution of bosnia and herzegovina.

also i already said both entities have right to establish some sorts of relations with other countries, but none can declare independence and none can become independent. read the constitution of bosnia nad herzegovina.

i repeat, republika srpska is an entity and the name "republika" is the name of this entity, it does not mean this entity is a republic in the meaning of statehood. read constitution of bosnia and herzegovina.

federacija bih is an entity, the name "federacija" is the name of this entity and it does not represent federation in the meaning of statehood. read the constitution of bosnia and herzegovina

i repeat once again, if it would be like you say that republika srpska has the right to independence, than the same right should be allowed to croats. but that is simply not allowed by constitution of bosnia and herzegovina. after all that is not even possible by un resolutiion as well.

in case you haven't understand it yet..... REPUBLIKA SRPSKA IS ONE ENTITY OF A COUNTRY NAMED BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA. THE SECOND ENTITY IS CALLED FEDERACIJA BIH. BOTH ENTITIES HAVE RIGHT TO ESTABLISH RELATIONS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES BUT THOSE RIGHTS ARE LIMITED IN A WAY THAT NONE OF THE ENTITIES CAN PROCLAIM INDEPENDENCE OR JOIN INTO UNION WITH SOME OTHER COUNTRY......

do i need to write this again?

the kosovo case, i agree with your last sentence.

If it's not a republic, then why is it called such?

The stated limitations are due to a current dictatorship, where a UN appointed non-Serb/non former Yugoslav person can fire the democratically elected Republika Srpska president. This happened in 1998, when the democratically elected Nikola Posalen was fired because the ruling dictator (offhand, I don't recall whether it was Paddy Ashdown or Wolfgang Petritsch) didn't like Popsalen's platform. The current Republika Srpska president has been threatened with being fired after he suggested that Republika Srpska should vote on whether to remain in Bosnia.

In evey instance so far, the UN-appointed dictator of Republika Srpska has been politically loathed by the majority of Republika Srpska's population

Do you call this democracy and just how long do you think that the West will keep supporting such nonsense?

While I'm here, let me note that the map at the top of this article should acknowledge that Kosovo was part of the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and that it's still a part of Serbia.

Over the past few years, mosques have been built in Republika Srpska as churches in Kosovo have been systemtaically targeted for destruction.

Forgive me if that fact was already stated.

Regarding former Yugoslavia, former USSR and the West, there is this article in Russia Profile

http://www.russiaprofile.org/politics/2006/12/5/4837.wbp

I found it to be lacking in covering the pertinent intricacies.

"federacija bih" has a name "federation". what federation is it? is there any federation at all? no, it's just a name of an entity. again, constitution of bosnia and herzegovina.

limitations are mentioned in the constitution. who even thinks of breaking the constitution is being kicked from office. hey, isn't it like that in other countries as well? isn't it like that in usa? and not only serbian officials were kicked off but croatian and bosnian as well. all those who even thought of breaking the constitution. it is one of basic democratic rules. DO NOT BREAK THE LAW. constitution is the highest law in the country.

there is no dictator in bosnia and herzegovina. there are only high representative appointed by united nations. how long it will take? as long as it takes. nobody is willing to risk a new war. and my god this time not even serbs wouldn't be in advantage and have help from serbia. now everyone has a good stock of weapons and that makes it high risk.

why don't you accept that bosnia is a country. republika srpska is not recognized by any country or un. it is simply not a country unlike bosnia and herzegovina. even in serbia everyone accepts that (of course except serbian radicals).

we obviously agree with kosovo case. it is a part of serbia. and it will stay a part of serbia.

Andrew:

I share the same sentiment on your last point.

I know of a recently written article on that subject. It covers those intricacies in a scholarly slam dunk manner.

I'd love to see the lead academics attempt to debunk that article with raw facts and opinions based on facts.

For some, it's blasphemous to have a counter establishment view successfully articulated. This in part explains the "free" (for those who can afford to influence it) market selective process of who is and isn't brought on a center stage.

At the dominant venues, it's often not about getting the best presented ideas. Sometimes, it's not even about going for the besst ratings

---------------------------

Katjusha

Albanian nationalists in Kosovo have sought making that province a republic for the purpose of it having a greater case for independence. All former Yugoslav and former Soviet republics were allowed to break away because of a republic status.

The Christian majority in Bosnia (Croats and Serbs) have a greater identity with their respective nations outside of Bosnia. Kissinger among others has observed that Bosnia has always been a hodge podge kind of a zone unlike some other parts of former Yugoslavia.

This is a great discussion.

An example of a highly rated Russia Blog artcile that also happens to be of excellent quality.

Not everything considered as "top rated" is of good quality.

We want more!

Now!

You go girl!

My being able to regularly write spot on, thought provoking commentary isn't an issue.

Then what is?

Uh oh.

NG.

POLITICAL STATEMENT NR. 10 OF THE POLITICAL SPOKESMAN OF THE ALBANIAN NATIONAL UNIFICATION FRONT
Shkruar nga Albanian National Unification Front
Tuesday, 23 October 2007
DON’T OFFEND US BECAUSE YOU AND YOUR FOLLOWERS WILL BE DISGRACED…!

The Albanian National Army (ANA) didn’t attack the Serbian people in the same manner how the criminal bands of “Tsar Lazars” against Kosova and the Albanian people, not only from Kosova Protectorate, but also from the Albanian territories under Serbia (Presheva, Medvegja and Bujanoc) under Montenegro and “Macedonia”, as well as those from Belgrade, where are working and living 200 thousand Albanians.

The Albanian brave boys and heroic girls from ANA have appeared for the defense of the defenseless people that is defended neither by KFOR and UNMIK, nor by KPC and KPS. They don’t deserve the offences made by some individuals and political personalities, irrespectively they are from Prishtina or Tirana, how is the case of the KPS Spokesman, Mr. Veton Elshani, which fought at some time and was wounded by the paramilitary bandits of Serbia, but for his bad fate, he is encroaching upon not only the blood of the martyrs, but also his own blood. And he is doing this only and only to be graded by those he is serving with zeal and myopia, because he is trying to create parallelisms and comparisons between ANA and Serbian criminals and this is nothing else than myopia how acted at some time the Albanian-speaking men of Serbian police in Kosova, which compared KLA with criminal bands of Arkan, Shesheli, Milloshevi and Koshtunica.
In the name of the ANUF Central Presidency, my last advice for Mr. Elshani and all those who don’t take care what they declare, only and only to lie at the mercy of the Slavic-Greek enemies and their friends is:
DON’T INSULT AND OFFEND THE ALBANIAN BOYS AND GIRLS WHO DECIDED TO DIE FOR NATION AND FATHERLAND!...
Because, tomorrow will be very late and you will shame, not only you but also your followers, how are shaming the followers of the former Serbia’s servants, that have fled in Serbia.

The ANUF Political Spokesman
Mr. Gafurr ADILI (D.V.)
Tirana, 18th October 2007

www.jasenovac.org

that is the website which tells you about horrific things done to serbs, jews and romas in CROATIA. Why? because hitler gave them power.

My fathers grandfather was killed by the ustache aswell as much of my mothers family

Jason: you hav read to much about serbia from the bosnian and croatian view. The serb side is the only correct side. Serbs never started any wars they were just blamed on by americans and croatians.

I hope you realise that slobodan milosevic was completely innocent, tht is why he was poisoned by the americans. He only led serbs to defend serbia, not invade. That was king tito's fault that there is slovenia, bosnia, croatia etc.

Kosovo is serbia and will always be srbja. Daj Nemoj da budesh glup

katjusha please understand that you are wrong in you comments