Balkans

The results of the Global Peace Index for 2009 suggest that the world has become slightly less peaceful in the past year, which appears to reflect the intensification of violent conflict in some countries and the effects of both the rapidly rising food and fuel prices early in 2008 and the dramatic global economic downturn in the final quarter of the year. Total 144 countries was analysed in 2009.

The Global Peace Index (GPI) is implemented by organization called Vision of Humanity, which groups together a number of interrelated initiatives focused on global peace.  As its mission Visions of Humanity Org.brings a strategic approach to raising the world’s attention and awareness around the importance of peacefulness to humanity’s survival in the 21st century.

Indicators

Twenty-three indicators of the existence or absence of peace were chosen by the panel of experts, which are divided into three broad categories: measures of ongoing domestic and international conflict, measures of safety and security in society and measures of militarization. Measures of ongoing conflicts include e.g. number of external and internal conflicts, estimated number of deaths from organized conflict (external/internal), level of organized conflict (internal) and relations with neighbouring countries.

Some reservations:

• Vision of humanity, its expert panel and GPI are representing mainly western methodology, approach and values
• GPI is based to data available of different indicators and as such a compromise

With these reservations I however find GPI both interesting and useful and anyway I haven’t seen  any better global survey.

To the table below I have collected the GPI rankings for the Balkans and Black Sea region countries analysed in 2009.  In addition I have included to table also top-3 and worst-3 countries, the BRIC countries and USA. Rankings for the mentioned countries analysed in 2007 are also included for comparison. Countries most at peace are ranked first. A lower score indicates a more peaceful country. My source - Vision of Humanity Org: GPI results - , full list of 144 countries, methodoly and other explanations can be found from here!

• Slovenia is rising also in this research to global top-level - from place 15 to place 9 close to traditionally peaceful Nordic countries and outstriping most of sc "Western democracies" and the rest of world
• Croatia has improved its index from 67 to 49, amasing 18 places
• It seems that the civilicised border dispute between Slovenia and Croatia doesn't have any effect in GPI ranking
• The rise of Bosnia-Herzegovina is one of the highest in GPI and is partly explained via UNCHR statistics about improved situation of displaced persons.  The other sources - as recent U.S. Intelligence report - are not so optimistic and also I have earlier been worrying e.g. about rising radical Islam in BiH
• Moldova and Ukraine have a bit too high ranking (75 and 82) from my point of view if compared to e.g. Georgia (134).  While conflict in Transdnistria still stays in frozen stage the events during last election are sign about latent tensions.  Ethnic tensions and coming Presidential elections are already making situation in Ukraine unstabil.

Peaceful societies?                   

Peaceful societies are

• Well functioning governments
  Good relations with regional neighbors
• Low levels of corruption
• High enrolment rates in primary education
• Freedom of the press
• Respect for human rights

The Drivers of Peace and Violence

• Functioning of government
• Freedom of the press
• Extent of regional integration
• Primary school enrolment ratio
• Life expectancy
• Women in parliament

Drivers of Violence   

• Importance of religion in national life 
• GPD per capita
• Hostility to foreigners /private property
• Electoral process

Peace and global challenge

More my views one may find from my BalkanBlog!

A common utterance “money talks” is sometimes used also related to elections.One could suppose that if voting matters the parties or candidates are investing more to win elections.Normal marketing is sometimes not guaranteeing enough votes so in many societies more crude means are used such as election fraud/rigging, non-transparent and illegal political campaign and party financing.A simple vote buying maybe tells most about importance of elections. I wonder if there exists in any EU member state a barometer showing current price level of votes in EP elections, not only the official campaign costs but the unofficial price per vote.

Buying a polling station or enough of them could be one possibility which from my opinion is complicated to implement in EP elections. I was quite surprised while reading from BNP pages that some party really thinks this to be possible.A quote:

All British National Party members and supporters have been urged to be on the lookout for polling station fraud committed by corrupt officials who may seek to cast ghost votes in the election on June 4th, party leader Nick Griffin has announced. “We have received information that certain corrupt officials at some polling stations have devised a plan whereby they intend to vote on other people’s behalf towards the end of polling day,” Mr Griffin said. “Apparently the plan is to wait until late on polling day, and then to start crossing off names of people on the electoral register who have not yet voted and then voting on their behalf,” Mr Griffin said.

If buying votes via election organisation is difficult there is always possibility to buy them directly from electorate.In Finland there is a tradition to transport free people in rural areas from their home to polling station and maybe give them a cup of coffee and expect that they may vote “right way”;otherwise these voters would maybe stay home. Of course one can select the persons to which give free transport but it does not guarantee the “right” vote. During this EP elections I have impression that free transport services are lower level than before indicating the unimportance of coming election.

More effective way is to bay vote with money. In Finland I have not heard this to been done but in Balkans situation is a bit different or what to think about following quote from Bulgaria April 2, 2009:

Bulgarian MPs have passed a new set of punishments for anyone found to be involved in 'vote buying' after the second reading of a new bill Thursday. Bulgarian MPs have passed a new set of punishments for anyone found to be involved in 'vote buying' after the second reading of a new bill Thursday. Anyone found to be involved in vote rigging or buying will now receive a jail term of 1-3 years and a fine of between BGN 1 000 and BGN 10 000. This new law includes anyone found threatening or conning voters during local or national elections. For more serious offences judges will be able to give a jail term of up to 6 years and a fine of up to BGN 20 000. The bill was passed soon after Bulgaria's Chief Prosecutor, Boris Velchev, called on all political parties to slam vote buying practices. "Vote buying is nothing new but it has recently entered court-rooms," Velchev stated. He expressed concerns that this practice may cast a shadow over the upcoming general and EP elections in the summer.

Modern technology helps to monitor that buyer gets what (s)he is paying for.E.g. the voter takes a picture with mobile phone about voting slip, shows it to payer and gets money. In Balkans I have heard the sum vary between 5 to 50 euro per vote;I wonder what’s the value during these EP elections.

Vote buying is one kind of political corruption – misuse of political power for private gain for preserving or strengthening power, for personal enrichment or both.A candidate can use also indirect means get power for benefits like cronyism, clientelism, nepotism, patronage, insider trading, speed money, embezzlement or abuse of public property.These indirect ways are hard to proof.

For me it would be interesting to get feedback about different variations of vote buying during this EP elections – variations which are outside normal marketing, legal, sometimes even transparent campaigns.Even in overall this EP elections seems to have low market value there maybe are candidates who want to collect their million from Brussels and are using unusual means to get it.Learning these bad practices could help to improve countermeasures for next next EP quality in future.

More my views one may find from my BalkanBlog!

Latest developments during last weeks related the EU’s policy of diversifying Europes’s energy supplies give a clear indication that EU’s pipedream – Nabucco – is vanishing while the rival Russia’s South Stream gets a boost both on the ground and updated aims. European Commission has tried enhance Nabucco already some nine year with modest or even backward success. Now is maybe the right time to reconsider EU’s energy plans in new context.

Russia will propose including the South Stream gas pipeline to pump natural gas from Russia to the Balkans and onto Europe in a list of EU priority projects, a Gazprom deputy CEO said Tuesday. "We are drafting an application for inclusion of the South Stream project into the list of EU priority projects, and we see no grounds why this application should be rejected," Alexander Medvedev told journalists during a break at an international energy conference in Berlin.

Earlier Nabucco got its priority status in EU as the aim was to diversify supplies away from Russia.  Now Gazprom is to make a presentation to the European Parliament to promote South Stream later in 2009. The EU Energy Commission says Gazprom would have to prove South Stream represents “added value” for Europe to become a priority, earlier the EU has already accepted Gazprom's Nord Stream as a priority project.

Boost to South Stream

On May 15 South Stream project got a boost two step closer to reality. As I mentioned in my previous article in addition to Italy’s ENI, Gazprom signed memoranda of understanding with Greek natural gas transmission company DESFA, Serbia's Srbijagas and Bulgarian Energy Holding.  What I didn’t knew then was that at a meeting in Sochi, attended by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Russia's Gazprom and Italy's ENI agreed to double the planned pipeline's capacity to 63 billion cubic meters from previous plan 31 bcm/y.  So at same day the establishment of joint ventures for the construction of South Stream pipeline was finally provided with a formal basis and the project doubled estimated gas flow. This Gazprom's move strengthens their competitive advantage over Nabucco and at the same time affirm its dominance in the field.

The pipeline would cross the Black Sea at 2.000m depth and from there to the city of Barna, in Bulgaria and from there its north part will reach Austria after crossing Serbia while its south part will extend to Greece and Italy.

Signed contracts are boosting also regional economy. The Greek section of South Stream will cost between 700 to 1000 Mln Euros, the section in Serbia is estimated cost some  700 Mln Euro, costs in Bulgaria  depend if gas is going existing or totally new pipeline. Further investments related to final route(s) of pipes are possible also in Croatia and Slovenia.  After the gas flows the transit fees can be remarkable in transit countries.

Desperate search for gas by Nabucco

The economic viability of the Nabucco project has long been questinable. EU has only committed a small fraction of the €7.9 billion ($10.6 billion) needed to build the pipeline. The basic question is where the gas for Nabucco (ultimately targeted at 31 billion cubic meters per annum) will come from. If there is no good answer coming soon the today’s and tomorrow’s potential investors are looking better alternatives.

But despite the recent progress on Nabucco, it all still looks to many analysts like a case of too little, too late. "I believe Nabucco still looks very problematic," says Jonathan Stern, director of gas research at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. "It might work, or it might not, but I don't think it's going to work quickly." He argues that the pipeline probably won't be viable until around 2020—much later than the 2014 starting date currently being advanced.

Nabucco’s supply base has been vanishing with latest developments.  Original idea was to get gas from Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan.  Gazprom's newfound willingness to offer cash on the barrelhead for Turkmen and Kazakh gas led to Kazakhstan's permission to construct a new pipeline that will feed gas from Central Asia into Russia's export network.  The United States Senate offers verbal support, but Washington is no closer to brokering the tradeoffs that would be necessary for Nabucco to get off the ground.  Same time Gazprom is ready to buy all the gas from the second stage of an offshore Azeri development and Azerbaijan stll lacks a direct gas link to Europe and has been unable to agree with Turkey on terms for the transit of larger planned volumes.

Ongoing sanctions against Iran made an extension line from Turkmenistan to Turkey a non-starter.  They also meant that no Western government could countenance even an informal arrangement where Iranian gas might compensate Turkey so that more gas flowing through Nabucco would reach other European markets.

Nabucco tinkering with Middle East dreams while South Stream works on the ground in Europe

A couple of days after Sochi meeting four UAE and European companies told an oil and gas contracts between them and the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) to supply gas from Iraq’s Kurdistan region to kick-start the Nabucco pipeline project to supply Europe.

The Iraqi government on Monday 18th 2009 rejected an $8 billion Kurdish plan calling new contracts illegal.  The KRG, which has clashed with Baghdad over draft oil legislation, has countered that the deals are legal and comply with Iraq’s constitution. In Iraq gas normally has been a side-product in oilfields so increasing gas production has been related increasing oil production.  Whatever the legal output will be a strong estimation is that gas starts flow for export after 2020.

Schroeder’s view

Speaking at a business meeting in Russia’s Kaliningrad on Monday, Schroeder, who chairs the Nord Stream shareholders' committee, said that Russia cannot be blamed for recent gas shortages at the EU.

“When we get Russian gas, the problem is not the supplier, but the fact that 80 percent of the pipeline is located in the Ukraine. We should look for independence not from Russia, but from such transit schemes,” he was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying. “Both Nord Stream and South Stream allow to avoid unstable transit countries,” Schroeder added.

My view

As Nabucco’s supply base has vanished and its economical reliability is going same way while South Stream is gaining distance on the ground it is time to revise European Commission’s pipedreams. Does EU want be dependent on Russia’s gas (South and Nord Stream), Ukraine’s transit (today’s lines), Turkey’s blackmail combined middle-East as supplier (Nabucco)?

Power play has many aspects – I have touched only gas.  Searching and increasing use of renewable energy sources, increasing nuclear energy, decreasing consumption etc are all as part of a whole.  However from my point of view need of gas will be the at least the same if not bigger than today in EU and Europe for next two-three decades.

I would like to see EU to change priority status from Nabucco to South Stream.  Nabucco could still be kept alive in case to wait stabilisation in middle-East.  Besides whole the time there is improvements in liquefaction plants and tankers to increase the share Liquefied natural gas/LNG compared to gas supplied via pipes.  Selecting South Stream now could secure its smooth implementation before 2015; help EU focus other aspects of its energy sources and policy and improve EU-Russia relationship with its geopolitical consequences.

Sources and more about topic:

EU’s big Choice – Nabucco or South Stream

Gazprom-DESFA Agreement on South Stream Signed

Russia to propose EU include South Stream in priority projects

South and Nord streams to secure EU’s gas stability – Schroeder

Gas Pipelines: South Stream Gets a Boost

Russia and Italy sign gas supply deal

I was just watching a film“UN death camps in Kosovo April 2009” about protest which was hold by Roma children living in UN camps in North Mitrovica, Kosovo.  The protesters however were still living, so far 81 has already dead after ten years suffering in United Nations Camps for Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), living in place which is described the most toxic site in Eastern Europe.  Their story gives another perspective related to “humanitarian intervention” implemented by Nato and to international administration implemented afterwards and backed with billions of Euros EU financing.  And this is happening in Europe and in this millennium.

The children hold a protest vigil on International Roma Day.  In the protest, their banners proclaimed "God Save Us from UNHCR" and"Welcome to Kouchner's Hell", reminding Bernard Kouchner – then Special Representative of the UN Secretary General (SRSG), now FM of France - about his promise autumn 1999 to move families immediately from toxic camp.

In brief

“The place where the camps are, the UN had a plan to build a fence around it and say, 'danger.' But they didn't do that. Instead they put the Roma there." (U.N. toxic Shame)

While Nato troops arrived to Kosovo – for “humanitarian intervention” – on June 1999 their Kosovo Albanian allies started their revenge not only against Serbs but also against the Roma which the Albanians accused of collaborating with Serbs.  The largest Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians (RAE) community was in south Mitrovica.  They were forced to move over Ibar river to Serb dominated north Mitrovica.

Under international administration those displaced families were placed in camps located heavily polluted mining and smelter complex.  The international administration know that camps were in dangerously toxic environment, the experts and non-governmental organizations demanded immediate evacuation for Roma families, however after nearly ten years – in post-war Kosovo, 200 km from the European Union’s borders – these families still are trapped in camps slowly dying from lead poisoning.

To get live picture about case I can recommend an excellent documentary film “Trapped – The forgotten story of Mitrovica Roma” by Katalin Barsony/Duna Television/Hungary which can be watched from here!

The Saga

A summary of main events related to Mitrovica Roma case is in insert below.  As source I have used a Chronology prepared by KMEG (The Kosovo Medical Emergency Group) –group of advocates with goal to achieve immediate evacuation and medical treatment for families abandoned in toxic camps in north Kosovo.  (The Chronology and other KMEG material can be found from here)

1999: June 16 After NATO troops arrived in Kosovo, black uniformed KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) soldiers begin visiting homes in the Romani (Gypsy) settlement (mahalla) of Fabrička in south Mitrovicë/Mitrovica, largest Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian (RAE) community in Kosovo, with about 1,000 families comprising about 8,000 people. The RAE families are told that Kosovo is only for Albanians and the RAE must leave if they want to save their families. Over the next three months, many RAE families lock up their homes and move across the Ibar River into north Mitrovicë/Mitrovica. But accommodation is unavailable as thousands of Serbs also flee from Albanian nationalists.

1999: August Paul Polansky, an adviser to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees  (UNHCR) on Romani issues, visits the Fabrička neighbourhood to assess the situation. He finds Albanians looting many of the abandoned homes. He asks French NATO troops in the area to intervene. Their Commanding Officer (CO) replies that they are not a police force, and that their mandate is only to protect Albanians from the local Serbs.

1999: September Baroness Nicholson meets Bernard Kouchner, Special Representative of the UN Secretary General (SRSG) at camps when he stated the families would be moved immediately.

1999: End of September UNHCR is renting a plot of land from abandoned lead mining site where the IDPs can be housed in tents until UNHCR can find a permanent solution for these 800 vulnerable inhabitants. According UNHCR this is a temporary solution for only 45 days. Also head of UNMIK (SRSG) Dr. Bernard Kouchner (founder of Medecins San Frontieres, and currently the Foreign Minister of France) personally assures that the camp will be closed within 45 days and the inhabitantsresettled elsewhere.

1999: December UNHCR contracts with ACT (Action by Churches Working Together) to build a camp in north Mitrovicë/Mitrovica called Česmin Lug/Çesmin Llug. These barracks are built next to the railroad tracks that border the tailing stands of the Trepča lead mines. These barracks are built with old lead-painted boards.

2000: Summer/Fall SRSG Dr. Bernard Kouchner orders his UN medical team to make an investigation of the lead pollution in the entire Mitrovicë/Mitrovica area. French army doctors have reported several cases of lead poisoning in their soldiers who are quartered in an old Serbian army base 100 meters from the IDP camp at Česmin Lug/Çesmin Llug.

2000: November Dr. Andreyew submits his written report to Dr. Kouchner, head of UNMIK and a report to the World Health Organization (WHO), recommending evacuation of the RAE camps and fencing off the land so that the public cannot accidentally enter. His investigation shows that the entire population of Mitrovicë/Mitrovica is suffering from unhealthy levels of lead poisoning. However, the highest levels (three to four times higher than the average in Mitrovicë/Mitrovica) were found in the children in the IDP camps of Çesmin Llug/Česmin Lug and Zhitkovc/Žitkovac. Dr. Andreyew’s report, which UNMIK refused to release to the public, was never acted upon, with one exception: several international UNMIK police officers were tested, since they jogged daily on a path by the slag heaps near the Česmin Lug/Çesmin Llug camp. Their lead levels were so high that UNMIK immediately repatriated them since lead poisoning cannot be treated at the source of poisoning without causing dangerous complications.

2002 UNHCR shelves all of its plans to resettle the camp Roma abroad. UNHCR contracts ACT (Action by Churches Working Together) office in Prishtinë/Priština to build barracks on the same toxic land in Zhitkovc/Žitkovac, replacing the tents.

2004: March/April After the investigation prompted by the death of Djenita Mehmeti, and the compiling of the information from the blood lead level (BLL) results, WHO Pristinë/Priština sends a letter to UNMIK calling for an immediate evacuation of the UN camps. UNMIK refuses, claiming that they have no place to take 500 Gypsies. UNMIK pleads lack of resources to tackle the problem. 

2004: November pregnancies and more than 50 have miscarriages. ICRC sends a letter to UNMIK demanding immediate evacuation of the camps. UNMIK refuses.

2005 A staff member of WHO, upset by UNMIK’s and WHO’s apparent cover-up of the tragedy, asks Paul Polansky to let the world know what is happening. Polansky publishes an opinion piece in the International Herald Tribune about the plight in these UN camps. Though several other journalists pick up the story, UNMIK authorities still refuse to evacuate the camps.  He also asks European Roma Rights Center   (ERRC) to file a lawsuit in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Strasbourg against UNMIK. The Human Rights Court in Strasbourg rejects the lawsuit saying that only a country, not an organization, can be sued.

2006 Finally admitting that the camps are located on highly toxic waste, UNMIK decides to bow to international pressure and take some steps to try to convince the public they are dealing with the lead pollution.

2008 An international advocacy group, known as the Kosovo Medical Emergency Group(KMEG), is formed to publicize the plight of the IDPs in the UN camps. The group– whose purpose is to push for an immediate medical evacuation - begins a press campaign and makes public the report from 2000, as well as all blood tests from 2004 to 2008 which WHO and UNMIK have refused to share with even the families in the camps. treat the more than 500 IDPs.

On 12 May, 2008, UNMIK officially turns over the three camps (Osterode camp, Česmin Lug/Çesmin Llug and Leposaviq/Leposavić) to the Kosovo government. As the year ends, it is noted that 78 RAE had died in the camps since Nov 1999, their lives foreshortened by the severe damage caused to their health by toxic conditions in the camps.

On January 22nd 2009 European Parliament highlights Roma camp case in its "EU resolution Kosovo" as follows: (EP) Is gravely concerned at the acute ill health of Roma families in the Osterode and Cesmin Lug refugee camps; believes that these are directly linked to the improper siting of those camps which find themselves on the highly toxic tailing stands of the Trepça lead mines; welcomes the Commission's initial engagement with the Kosovo government and urges the Commission to continue to work with a view to relocating urgently the families concerned;

2009 April 81 deaths so far, the Kosovo government who took over responsibility on 2008, have not yet even visited the camps.

My view   

When I visited in those northern Mitrovica camps during 2000-2002 the risks about lead poisoning was well known.  Also we who lived in normal conditions in region were got some instructions to exercise some caution.  Already then there were plans to cure circumstances but nothing happened.  I hardly have imagination how it is possible to still have same problems.

This should not had been happen – not during and after “humanitarian intervention”, not during post-conflict capacity building and after billions of EU taxpayers money put to development projects, not in Europe 200 km from EU border, not in international protectorate with “European perspective”.

EU’s most ambitious rule of law mission – Eulex – has been operating in Kosovo already nearly one year.  I must ask if human rights have any priority in mission or is the aim only to train local police to write traffic tickets correctly.  EU Commissioner Rehn said in his letter 17.02.2009 to MEP Gay Mitchell, that funding is not primary problem but complicated political side.  When EU has funds and other resources ready to implement actions plus huge rule of law mission on the ground I really wonder why actions are not taken immediatelly.

The Way ahead

From my point of view at least following steps should be taken to correct situation and to prevent it happen again:

1)     According international law (UN Security Council resolution 1244) Kosovo still is international protectorate.  As officially highest authority is UNMIK so it could make immediate decision t evacuate camps and transfer Roma families from them to get medical treatment elsewhere.  The other international actors – Eulex, Kfor, ICO (International Community Office)/EU Special representative and EU delegation could help to implement this immediate action.

2)     For long term solution international – and donor – community should plan together with local representatives resettlement/housing program for Roma families.

4)     To increase responsibility in future missions the persons/organisations who have enabled situation described earlier should be put in international court charged about human rights violations, crimes against humanity, involuntary manslaughter and covering up the case (stupidity, laziness and incapability are probably not crimes but could be non-qualifying skills in future recruitments).

Roma families in Kosovo are people left in deathly camps years after a conflict. These are not only displaced, but their displacement happened while western nations, whose duty it was to protect them, stood by. Inactive at the scene, international administration subsequently placed them in a dangerously toxic environment, and for years thereafter effectively ignored their plight covering same time own mistakes.  EU’s speciality has been “soft power”, taking responsibility, initiative and leadership now could at least limit the damages in Roma camps in Kosovo and hopefully elsewhere afterwards.

More about UN Camps e.g.

• An article“Gypsies relocated by UN remain in toxic land” by Pulizer Center on Crisis reporting

• Two-part film “UN Camps in Kosovo” from 2005 gives more perspective to case: Part I and Part II
  

• KMEG portal with links to more films and articles

• More my articles over Kosovo in my BalkanBlog

I almost got stroke while reading yesterday a headline “Worse than the Taliban – new law rolls back rights for Afghan women” in the Guardian.Not due the act itself but because it reflects the substance and outcome of EU’s civil crisis management mission. First I thought it was April fools’ joke but it wasn’t and unfortunately the case is not so unique example among EU’s capacity building efforts in different missions.

On 31.3.2009 foreign ministers of 73 states had Afghanistan conference in Hague, Netherlands, to continue support for security and development projects in country.

The new law

So how are human rights and civil society developing in Afghanistan with EU’s help.Summarizing what really happens there the abstract below gives picture of one aspect (Source and full story in the Guardian):

Hamid Karzai has been accused of trying to win votes in Afghanistan’s presidential election by backing a law the UN says legalises rape within marriage and bans wives from stepping outside their homes without their husbands' permission.The Afghan president signed the law earlier this month.

The final document has not been published, but the law is believed to contain articles that rule women cannot leave the house without their husbands' permission, that they can only seek work, education or visit the doctor with their husbands' permission, and that they cannot refuse their husband sex. A briefing document prepared by the UNDP Fund for Women also warns that the law grants custody of children to fathers and grandfathers only.Senator Humaira Namati, a member of the upper house of the Afghan parliament, said the law was "worse than during the Taliban". "Anyone who spoke out was accused of being against Islam," she said.

Some female politicians have taken a more pragmatic stance, saying their fight in parliament's lower house succeeded in improving the law, including raising the original proposed marriage age of girls from nine to 16 and removing completely provisions for temporary marriages.

EU’s development efforts

EU is doing capacity building activities in Afghanistan through supporting ISAF –operation (military peacekeeping), implementing its own EUPOL Afghanistan mission (building civilian police in accordance with international standards) and giving EU Aid for humanitarian purposes and development projects.

To contribute effectively to the stabilization of Afghanistan as well as responding to the immense development needs and challenges of the Afghan people is a major external priority for the European Union (EU). Since 2002 the European Commission (EC) has contributed more than 1.4 billion EUR to Afghanistan. EC aid has been used for humanitarian purposes as well as to support priority reconstruction and development efforts. (Source EC/EuropeAid)

The aims and targets of EU assistance are defined in Country Strategy Paper/Afghanistan (CSP/AFG). Human rights, gender and the environment are highlighted as key issues that affect a wide range of policy areas. These policy areas will be mainstreamed in all focal and non-focal areas.In public administration, increased female representation in all tiers of the public administration will be an important consideration … programmes will aim to promote the effective participation of women in local decision-making where this is possible…the CSP also aims to focus on human rights at a range of levels in its sector programmes.

Financing backward progress

EU seems to throw billions of its taxpayers money to development in Afghanistan which is going opposite direction than originally intended.Unfortunately this is not exemption.In Bosnia-Herzegovina ethnic groups are building their own statehood components against EU’s efforts to strengthen centralized state.Despite high-flown statements about developing “European” standards in Kosovo the province is still a tribe leaded protectorate with poor administrative record, unsustainable economy and captured by crime organized crime groups.

To close the gap between aims and practice the following actions could according my experience be useful:

• improvement of situation analysis,
• developing field experience feedback during missions,
• applying “project cycle management” practice in operation/mission planning procedure,
• Logical Framework Approach should be applied through the process,
• Special need is also use there Participatory Planning methods so that all stakeholders can commit to actions.

Implementing the list above could produce positive news – real not only in oriented progress reports to Brussels - in future from Afghanistan as well from other mission regions.  The minimum demand anyway should be that EU actions are not worsening the situations on the ground.

George Ivanov from the main ruling VMRO DPMNE party maintains a lead according to early results from (FYRO) Macedonia’s (later Macedonia) Presidential election although he is likely to face a run-off vote in two weeks time;then his challenger will be Ljubomir Frckoski from the Social Democrats.Macedonia could have a “Snow White Election”, the EU ambassador to the country, Erwan Fouere said optimistically during his monitoring to the ballot posts.Besides fair play in elections the statement can also describe the fact that the snow prevented some 12,000 people in certain mountainous villages to vote as the balloting did not start in 103 out of the nearly 3000 ballot stations. (Source BalkanInsight)

Background 2008

The election was being closely monitored in the West which has previously warned the country that it could face years of delay in its bid to join the European Union if there is a repeat of last year’s election-related violence.

Last year’s general elections were marred with violence and fraud in the ethnic Albanian populated areas of the country.Violence erupted between rival ethnic Albanian parties during the vote leaving one person dead and several wounded.This sparked negative reports from election monitors and criticism from the west, including the EU.

Campaign 2009

For their part, the seven presidential candidates have focused their campaigns on the country’s strategic goals, EU and NATO membership, and on the need to solve the burning so-called name row with Greece that jeopardizes these goals. The economy and ethnic relations between the Macedonian majority and the Albanian minority were also high on the agenda.

Macedonia’s Helsinki Committee had earlier skeptical view about this year elections.The Committee cites the latest OSCE report on the election campaign that notes that pressure put on administration workers to vote for the ruling VMRO DPMNE party, badly organised local election bodies, and unbalanced media coverage do not bode well for a good assessment of the elections.(Source BalkanInsight)

Results

After several weeks of campaigning during which the main candidates have largely failed to inspire voters.A bit over 50 % of eligible voters bothered to go vote.

Out of 98 percent of the counted votes, the results are following:

• George Ivanov (Conservative VMRO DPMNE) is the frontrunner with about 340,000 votes or 35 percent,
• Ljubomir Frckoski from the main opposition the Social Democrats has won 198,000 votes or just over 20 percent,
• The independent candidate Ljube Boskoski, acquitted at The Hague tribunal of war crimes during the 2001 Macedonia conflict last year and Imer Selmani from the New Democracy party both tallied around 145,000 votes or about 15 percent each,
• Agron Buxhaku from the ruling Democratic Union for Integration, DUI got 73,000 votes or just under 7.5 percent,
• Nano Ruzin from the Liberal Democrats won around 39,000 votes or about 4 percent, and
• Mirushe Hoxha from the Democratic Party of Albanians, DPA got about 30,000 votes or around 3 percent.

Earlier the State Election Commission announced Sunday’s presidential and mayoral elections went without major incident and met democratic norms. (Source BalkanInsight)

Wishful thinking

Before elections there was an assumption that if the country pulls off a smooth election it can hope for a swift removal of EU visas put up against travelling Macedonian citizens and a date for the start of its EU accession talks this autumn.

Macedonia has been a EU candidate state since 2005 and last year the EC said Skopje is still not ready for the start of accession talks largely because the violence and fraud allegations that marred the 2008 general election.

So when elections now went quite well is Macedonia closer EU?  Unfortunately not – not because of country itself but due the stagnation of EU for the sake of Lisbon Treaty.Before Irish yes the Treaty is not coming to force and EU can not “de facto” absorb new members.

When situation is frozen Croatia and Macedonia must wait, Turkey probably has already realized that it will not in near future come an EU member, Montenegro’s candidate application is put in archives and others are calculating their options.From the other hand this kind of time-out can be seen also positive since it gives time to think possible new cooperation methods as alternative for full membership. 

More my articles about Balkans one may find from my BalkanBlog.

balkan
ari rusila
BalkanBlog
Bookmark this on Delicious

When EU normally is disseminating EU doctrine to outside world there some times could be nice idea to apply some practice of others in Brussels. This came to my mind while reading news from Bosnia. Protesting over the inability of their politicians to elect a city mayor more than five months after the last elections, local residents in Mostar – Bosnia-Herzegovina - brought a donkey to demonstrations last week, proposing the animal be the city’s new Mayor.

Local residents and media have demanded assistance from Bosnia’s top envoy and his Office of the High representative, the OHR. “Once again, the political parties seek to blame everyone but themselves for the current situation. However, the OHR notes that the parties, who were elected to serve the needs of the citizens of Mostar, have only pursued political negotiations based on their own selfish desires for power, position and material gain.” (More in BalkanInsight)

Deciding about future visions and actions of EU is one key function in EP so one must ask if the decisions made by donkeys are better or worse than human beings. Some years ago in New York a monkey was put to play darts at a target being composed of NY stock list. When stock portfolio was filled by stock with hits of monkey’s darts and compared to portfolios of sc professional brokers the monkey got in many cases better profit. Be it monkey or donkey could this be possible also in EP?

Environmental assessment with donkey parliament would be positive. Members of EP would not need to visit in home country to give some false illusion that the opinions of voters have some role in decision-making. The output of parliament members could be useful for organic farming.

Present parliament delegations and members are also making visits in developing countries on purpose to estimate need or output of EU’s external Aid programmes. With donkey parliament one could send parliament members temporary to make some fieldwork in these countries and with many cases the result on the ground could be better and more important for beneficiaries than with today’s implementation.

Comparing pros and cons between donkey parliament and present system can give contradictory results depending connotations of each individual. Probably the voters have anyway put the selection in right scale and will show the importance of EP with turnout percentage on voting day.

More my views one may find from my BalkanBlog!

This post was first published in TH!NK ABOUT IT site 2nd March 2009.

Market economy and free trade are the prevailing trend in today’s developed countries. One drastic phenomenon of its darker side is known as “medical apartheid” or the “New Cannibalism”. One of those cases in Europe got more light last week, when new evidence from the “Human Organ Trafficking” -case came public in Serbia. (More about case in my article “War crime selected – organ harvesting from Serbs by KLA").

The story about harvesting organs from captured Serbs by Kosovo Albanian guerrillas 1998-99 was kept undercover by western mainstream media until last April 2008 before former UN war crimes prosecutor Carla del Ponte opened her mouth. Reportages of German Der Spiegel magazine and British The Guardian followed, justice departments from Albania and Serbia started high level cooperation for case.  Also Council of Europe decided to re-examine the case, which maybe has also link to illegal organ transplant clinic raided in Pristina, Kosovo, early November 2008.(More e.g. Der Spiegel)

KLA slaughterhouse

It is believed KLA kidnapped the victims, and then secretly transported them to camps in northern Albania, where their vital organs were removed to be sold in the black market. Carla Del Ponte gave greater credence of a macabre operation, in which as many as 300 Serbs were abducted and transported to Albania to have their organs removed. In a memoir, she wrote: “Victims deprived of only their kidney were sewn up and confined again inside the shack until they were killed for their vital organs.”

The Serbian War Crimes Prosecution has so far identified 10 members of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) suspected of killing kidnapped Serb civilians. Those suspects identified, prosecution spokesman Bruno Vekarić said in Belgrade on 25^th Wednesday , are linked with the case of decapitated soldiers, "which has been publicized by the news media". (Source B92, Beta, Tanjug)

The prosecution (of Serbia) will send an official report to authorized institutions in Albania in order to inform them of the investigation’s new evidence. The prosecution now intends to present this new evidence to the Council of Europe rapporteur Dick Marty, who is due there March and also to chief prosecutor of Eulex mission in Kosovo to catch suspected persons. This may be more difficult as both Kosovo’s present and former Prime Ministries (commanders of KLA and best friends and allies of West) presumably have been involved in case.

EU

European Union started to show more interest into illegal organ trade on 2006 when few MEPs raised a question in European Parliament about Chinese Communist Party's Organ Harvesting 2006. There was a good base for suspicion about the Chinese regime’s “organ harvesting,” the name for the fatal removal and sale of organs from death row prisoners and from Falun Gong practitioners held for their beliefs.(More e.g. here )

EP was also consideringOlympic boycott due the case already Summer 2006.Edward McMillan-Scott, vice president of the EP had straight talks in China and he believed that nearly 400 hospitals in China shared the lucrative trade in transplant organs, with websites advertising new kidneys for $60,000.(Source)

Last year EP was calling on satellite company Eutelsat to resume broadcast of an independent Chinese-language television network into China. MEPs pointed out three areas of pressing concern for human rights in China, including the persecution of the Falun Gong spiritual group, the suppression of rights in Tibet and third the Chinese regime’s “organ harvesting,”.

Global trade

There are about 95,000 people waiting for kidney transplants in the United States and about 65,000 in Europe, said Michael Bos of the Netherlands Health Council. Annual transplant rates run about 25,000 in the United States and 16,000 in Europe. "Something like 10,000 kidneys are transplanted every year from living donors who are paid sometimes small amounts," Bos said, calling the situation "a kind of medical apartheid." "This goes from the poor to the rich, from underdeveloped to rich countries, from black and coloured people to whites and often from women to men."

U.S. and European laws ban the sale of human organs and most tissue for transplant is taken fresh from the cadavers of the newly deceased. A smaller amount also comes from live donors, mostly people giving to save the life of a relative or friend.But these supplies cannot expand to meet the demand, which is booming as medical advances make transplantation more reliable and illnesses cause more cases of kidney failure.  (Source: article in Javno newsportal Apr 2^nd2007)

The U.N. World Health Oranization estimates one-fifth of the 70,000 kidneys transplanted around the world each year come from the black market.

Transplant tourism

The Geneva-based WHO believes that "transplant tourism" is rising, as rich patients bypassed bans on buying organs at home by travelling abroad to receive kidneys from poor donors. Beside kidneys also trafficking of half-livers, eyes, skin and blood is flourishing. (More e.g. UPIJan 12^th 2009)

Below: Kidney prices in different countries:

The organ trafficking is negotiated by an elaborate network of criminals.For about $150,000, an organ broker connects a buyer and seller to a "broker-friendly" U.S. hospital, where surgeons are either complicit in the scheme or willing to turn a blind eye.The organ seller typically gets a few thousand dollars, plus a chance to see a U.S. city.

Reputable U.S. medical centers transplant kidneys and other human organs they get illegally through the black market, a university anthropologist asserts. Surgeons take black-market kidneys from people in the world's most impoverished slums and put them into wealthy dialysis patients from the United States, Europe and and Israel, Nancy Scheper-Hughes of the University of California at Berkeley told Newsweek. (Source Newsweek 10^th Jan 2009)

The transplant tourism goes also opposite direction e.g. to China.One example about this global business and tourism is a case, when a New Yorker paid $60,000 to receive a kidney in a South African hospital from a Brazilian who was paid $6,000 for it; an Israeli businessman set up the deal.

The bottom line

With organ trafficking one can see inequality at its cruellest form.The main discriminative feature is between wealthy upper-class and the rest of the population.The other distinctive line goes between developed rich countries and the rest of the world.

Transplantation is a growing problem in rich states because waiting lists are growing far faster than the supply of organs.Adding the trend of changing population-structure in developed countries one can easily estimate that the need of new transplants is growing creating bigger market for illegal organ trade.

Is there anything to stop this trend?Short term I don’t believe so.Future can however change situation when research brings new solutions e.g. through gene, stem cell or material innovations.Even then the problem is who can pay these new treatments.

More my articles one may find from Archives:Blog!

This post was first published in TH!NK ABOUT IT site 21st February 2009.

An Italian non-governmental organisation – the Rome-based “Un ponte per …” - is investigating consequences of NATO's 1999 bombings of Serbia and the effects of the use of depleted uranium (DU) on the civilian population. The NATO allegedly used shells with depleted uranium which are still today causing an increase in the number of cancer patients. NATO has admitted the use of DU in the bombing campaign and Italian media has reported that 45 Italian soldiers who served in the international forces in Kosovo (KFOR) died after the bombing and 515 became ill with cancer.  In Serbia and its separatist province Kosovo the number of civilian victims is still unexplored but most likely the figures are manifold compared to those of soldiers.

This topic was discussed years ago when e.g. I was working in Kosovo, however any proof and warnings then did not came to my hands.  Later more information was available and on 24^th Nov. 2008 I wrote an article “Depleted Uranium from NATO bombs killing people in Balkans” referring information I got from Croatian news portal Javno.

And DU is…?

To get picture above larger go to link .

The recent military use of DU

Over the 78 days of NATO bombing, a total of 31,000 shells with depleted uranium, weapons banned by international treaties, were dropped in at least 112 locations in Serbia and especially Kosovo region.  Earlier in Bosnia-Herzegovina around 10,000 rounds were fired in operations around Sarajevo in the latter stages of allied operations in Bosnia.  More than 100,000 DU shells were fired during the Gulf war 1991.

A map of places where DU has been used either in combat or by accident below:

Un Ponte per…

Un Ponte per… (UPP) is a volunteer association established in 1991 just after the end of the bombings on Iraq. Its aim was to promote humanitarian aid to the Iraqi population.  When the war in the Balkans escalated, the association created new campaign and started various projects aimed at sending medicines and health supplies to the Yugoslav Federation and helping refugees from Kosovo.  UPP’s institutional partners include ECHO, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNESCO,UNOPS,UNHOCI ,UNRWA, Italian Municipalities and Regions and Provinces, and more info about their activities can be found from their web-site .

New investigation in Serbia/Kosovo

Now the 'Un ponte per...' NGO investigator Alessandro di Meo told Adnkronos International (AKI) that the international community was turning a deaf ear to the problem, because the use of depleted uranium is prohibited by international conventions. “But ten years after the bombing, the world has the right to know what really happened and what the consequences are,” he said. Samantha Menngarelli – also investigator of “Un ponte per…” - said the truth about military casualties was slowly sinking in in Italy after a surprising increase in deaths and cancers amongst soldiers who served in KFOR. “But the civilian victims have been completely ignored and we want to shed light on this problem,“ she said. (Source: Andkronos International )

The ‘Un ponte per…’ investigators will tour several Serbian cities that were hardest hit during the bombings before submitting a report to the Rome-based NGO.

Same time a Serbian NGO, ironically called 'Merciful angel' the name of NATO's 1999 airstrikes, recently reported that cancer ailments have jumped about 200 percent in some parts of Kosovo and areas of Serbia that were most heavily bombed.  Earlier Javno news portal reported that in Kosovo’s Kosovska Mitrovica in 2005 there were 38 percent more cancer patients than in 2004. In those two years, a total of 3,500 cancer cases in Kosovo Albanians were diagnosed.  Elsewhere since 2001, medical personnel at the Basra hospital (Iraq) claimed that they observed a sharp increase in the incidence of child leukemia and genetic malformation among babies born in the decade following the Gulf War.  (More e.g. in Croatian news portal “Javno” 17.11.2008)

Contradictory topic

The British and US governments have long denied that DU ammunition is harmful.  The British Gulf Veterans and Families Association have for years called for systematic testing. It claims that "hundreds" of Gulf warriors have died of cancers and other illnesses contracted during active service.  Also WHO is quite cautious about health risks of DU (More in WHO factsheets ).

There is huge contradiction between official position of DU users and findings on the ground. The situation is a bit similar like position of tobacco industry compared the one of smokers – many have been died but direct evidence of causality is missing.

There is a developing scientific debate and concern expressed regarding the impact of the use of DU projectiles and it is possible that, in future, there will be a consensus view in international legal circles that use of such projectiles violate general principles of the law applicable to use of weapons in armed conflict. No such consensus exists at present.  In United Nations in December 2008, 141 states supported a resolution requesting that three UN agencies: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), WHO and IAEA update their research on the impact of uranium munitions by late 2010.

From the other side there is also growing movement to ban DU military use. International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW) – is now comprising over 102 member organisations in 27 countries. From their web-site one can check latest developments.

If the causality between DU military use and morbidity will came clear one could speak war crime and demand some responsibility from those who have decided to them.  This could also be one connecting factor in Balkans because DU maybe is killing people - civilians and soldiers - there regardless of their ethnicity, religion and country as well foreigners in mission.

More my articles one may find from my Archives:Blog!

This post was first published in TH!NK ABOUT IT site 17th February 2009.

It is nearly five years since the outburst of ethnic Albanian violence in Kosovo on March 17, 2004, when 19 people killed and 954 wounded and when 35 Orthodox holy sites were ruined in two days. This pogrom got its prize a year ago on February 17^th when Kosovo Albanians unilaterally – but orchestrated by western powers - declared independence of this province.  The events showed way to all separatist movements on the globe that violence is accepted method to attain political goal.  They also uncovered the EU's nonexistent skills with crisis management and designing anything else than already dead road maps for conflict resolution.

Those two dates are well remembered in all ethnic groups in Serbia and its separatist province, although from different perspectives. Also international community, especially EU should remember them as they have lost their perspective in West Balkans long time ago.

March 17^th 2004  

Almost 4,000 Serbs were expelled from their homes, six town and nine villages were ethnically cleansed, 935 houses belonging to Serbs and 10 public institutions (schools, health centres, post offices…) were ruined or torched in addition to 35 Orthodox churches (total 150 since bombings 1999) . March 17^th violence was sequel to the ethnic Albanian terror and war in Kosovo as a result more than 200.000 refugees or better say internally displaced persons (IDPs) from province.

March 17^th showed the total failure of international community in Kosovo. Fabricated, biased or optimistic reports were singing the praises of conflict management and progress, intelligence – lacking touch with local community - didn’t know anything about planned terror. The response of peacekeepers and police was also delayed. The commanders were unreachable, drunk or had hangover due the St. Patrick’s Day celebrations after buckets of Irish whiskey and Guinness.

March 17^th finalized IDP problem

After 72 days illegal bombing campaign 1999 international community started wide housing program for refugees and IDPs and with Albanians it was a success while Kosovo accommodated nearly half million more Albanians than before bombing (don’t ask from where those extras came).  Serbs instead were afraid to move back – like it was situation also with refugees from Croatia – so today Serbia is suffering one of the biggest (326,853 refugees and IDPs) refugee/IDP problems in the whole Europe (More in my article “Refugees and IDPs in Western Balkans” )

According to statistics from the UNHCR there are about 206,000 IDPs from Kosovo living in Serbia. This fact has mostly ignored in western mainstream media. Their attitude is understandable since this media from the very beginning had fixed their one-sided picture about good and bad guys so Serbs somehow deserved their fate. The outcome is that Serb Refugees and IDPs from Kosovo are one of the forgotten and forsaken victim groups in the former Yugoslavia.

After pogrom 2004 new housing program was planned but it is questionable if more people from non-Albanian ethnic groups moved in or out because lack of security. March 17^th guaranteed that Serbs are not considering to come back to their earlier homes and those who still live in enclave ghettos are planning to move anytime.

Dream of “European” standards and forgetting them

After reverse ethnic cleansing during Summer 1999 UN started to administer its protectorate. Autumn 2002 UN started to plan and later launched a “standards before status” –policy, 8 milestones to achieve before starting status talks. The first independent review about these “European” standards came public October 2005 in Karl Eide’s report to UN .  Latest then it was clear that Kosovo will not reach European standards in foreseeable future. However growing frustration among Kosovo Albanians made international community to fear that March 17^th pogrom could repeat again so status talks started regardless of standards.

On the behalf of UN Martti Ahtisaari - unofficial lackey of U.S.State Department and Nato - held ten rounds of pseudo talks with Pristina and Belgrade during 2006.  Ahtisaari published his biased report which soon found itself in garbage bin and UN started new negotiation round. This time facilitators were better balanced in sc. Troika including representatives of U.S., Russia and EU. This time real alternatives for future status were on table such as Åland and Hong Kong models, partition, confederation, new autonomy model.  Albanian side did not see necessary to negotiate anything because U.S. had already promised independence for them so also this round lead to stalemate. (More about negotiation events here)

February 17^th 2008

In December 2007 NATO and EU started to implement coordinated declaration of Kosovo’s independence. Its elements were e.g. following:

• the US and the EU would take leading roles in “coordinating and managing” Kosovo’s process towards independence
• a “creative interpretation” of UN SC Resolution 1244would allow for NATO to stay in Kosovo “no matter its status” and for the EU to send its ESDP mission without Security Council authorization
• Pristina would be asked to “coordinate”their moves and not proclaim unilateral independence without prior signals from Washington and Brussels
• Serbia would be sent a “sweetener”in the form of a promise of accelerated candidate status in exchange for “constructive disagreement”.

The EU would build a “unified” positionby creating a framework which would allow for Kosovo’s independence, but decisions on recognition would be subject to national decisions, procedures and frameworks, meaning that EU members would not be obliged to recognize it.

This scenario was implemented and February 17^th 2008 Kosovo declared its independence regardless international law and UN.  The first recognitions came from Afghanistan,  U.S. and other its lackeys followed.

Everything didn’t go like planned in Washington and its Brussels allies.  Bribing of Serbs wasn’t successful;  Russia with other rising BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) countries had their say in UN, recognitions stopped.

When Albanian majority declared Independence Feb. 2008 the idea was to transfer international administration from UN to EU.  However the only internationally accepted UN Security Council resolution 1244 - which says that Kosovo is part of Serbia - stayed valid. So that about independence which in mistake has accepted through some 50 countries.

The UN General Assembly was backing Serbia’s draft to request an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) about the legality of the unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo.  October 8th UNGA, by a recorded vote of 77 in favour to 6 against (Albania, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 74 abstentions, adopted a resolution drafted by Serbia and now the case is in Haague.

Today the actual situation on the ground is big mess without any clear exit strategy.  EU is administrating in Kosovo under UN umbrella.  Albanian dominated southern part is continuing its life under EU supervision while Serb dominated northern part will formally continue to be an UN protectorate de facto integrated to Serbia.  However a wider framework is international law and UNSC resolution 1244 ar valid before new resolution will replace the existing one.

International situation escalated immediately by Kosovo’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence – some 5.000 ethnic groups had waited this signal that with violence one can achieve political goals despite international law.  Kosovo was already good excuse for separatist movements during last Summer and Autumn in Caucasia and South America.

From frozen conflict to frozen independence

After agreement with Serbia EU’s rule of law mission (EULEX) finally started end of 2008 after half an year delay.  This filling of power vacuum came in right moment before Kosovo would slide to next “failed or captured state”.  Probably also local population in Kosovo has noticed during short independence experiment that for state more is needed than only flag and anthem.

In an interesting interview of John Bolton in Interfax  , former US Undersecretary of State and Ambassador to the United Nations made e.g. following remarks:

• US recognition of severed Kosovo province was a serious mistake, leading to an escalation of tensions, instead of calming down the situation in the Balkans.
• “support to the independence of Kosovo is an atavism that might have made sense 15 years ago, but makes no sense today.”
• “consensus boils down to the fact that nobody knows where Kosovo is”

Normally I have doubts with thoughts of U.S. neocons but this time Mr. Bolton hit the nail on the head - I can only agree.

Conclusions

It’s easy to blame the today's situation in Kosovo on U.S foreign policy.  After implementing its failed attempt to please Muslim countries, after increasing the profits of its military-industry-complex and after creating one of its biggest military complex in Europe U.S. is covering its track record and leaving the whole mess to its lapdogs in EU. As a result of EU’s short-sighted post-conflict management policy they must again throw away few billions of EU taxpayer money to keep flag in international protectorate and safe haven of drug cartels – in artificial unsustainable creature with no realistic visions nor exit strategy.

March 17^th 2004 in Kosovo is an example for international community general and for EU missions especial about fatal failure of crisis management when they are short of right situation analysis, when practice is contrary to their ideals and when interests of local stakeholders and internationals differ. The outcome of EU’s nearly nine years efforts for capacity building to create economically sustainable multiethnic society with democratic values could be joke – unfortunately this never-ending story continued February 17^th 2008 and is still continuing to unforeseeable future and it is not fiction.

More over Kosovo case in my +30 articles here!