‘’KOSOVA’’ or ‘’KOSOVO’’
J.P. Maher Ph. D. Professor Emeritus of Linguistics Northeastern Ilinois University Chicago
To the Editors of City.Net
‘’Kosovo’’ is a Serbian place name, more fully ‘’kosovo polje’’, meaning ‘field (or plain) of blackbirds’. ‘’Kosovo polje’’ lies just outside the city of Prishtina.
Ornithology lesson:
Among North Americans, Australians, and South Africans, only ornithologists can identify the species in question. Kosovo’s ‘’black bird’’ is no crow, nor raven, no starling nor grackle, but ‘’turdus merula’’, European cousin of the North American rusty-bellied thrush (‘’turdus migratorius’’), which Yanks call the ‘’robin’’.
In Britain and Ireland ‘’robin’’ is the name of another species, ‘’erithacus rubecula’’. (The ‘’four and twenty blackbirds baked in a pie, of the English rhyme, were of the species’’merula’’, in Serbian called ‘’kos’’. From this term ‘’kosovo’’ is derived possessive adjective. Like America’s harbinger of spring, the black bird called ‘’kos’’ in Serbian language sings sweetly in the springtime and early summer.
For North Americans the feel of the Serbian place name ‘’Kosovo’’ can only be from a translation, Field of Robins’’.
Albanians have borrowed the word from the Serbs, whose once overwhelming majority was driven down, especially since the Congress of Berlin, by savage aggression from Albanians incited then and in WW I by Austria-Hungary and Germany, in World War II by Musolini’s puppet Albanians, and after WW II by the discriminatory ethnic cleansing of the Stalinist dictator Josip Broz.
Native Indian place names in America have no meaning in English:Eg. ‘’Michigan’’ means nothing in English. In Ojibwa ‘’Mishshikamaa’’ means ‘it is a big lake’.
Just so the place names of Ireland have transparent meaning in Gaelic but are meaningless tags in the colonialist English, eg. ‘’Dublin’’ is Gaelic ‘’dubh lin’’ ‘black pool’, and ‘’Kildare’’ is ‘’cildara’’ ‘church of the oak’.
Just so the name of the Serbian province of Kosovo are clear Serbian formations, but have no meaning in the Albanian language.
Proof of the Serbian origin of the name and the loanword status of the immigrant Albanian term is that the word ‘’Kosovo’’ has a clear etymology to anyone who knows a Slavic language, while Albanian ’’Kosova’’ is an opaque, meaningless place name in the Albanian language.
Kosovo is Serbian.
1997.
КОСОВО ИЛИ KOSOVA?
J.P. Maher, умировљени професор Лингвистике на Универзитету Илиноис, Чикаго
Косово је српски назив, потпуније, Косово поље, што значи поље, равница, пуно црних птица. Косово поље лежи непосредно уз град Приштину.
Орнитолошка лекција:
Међу Североамериканцима, Аустралијанцима, и Јужноафриканцима, само орнитолози могу да препознају врсту у питању из наслова. Црна птица косовска није врана, нити гавран, ни чавка, нити сврака, већ ``turdus merula``, европски рођак Североамеричке птичице сивкастог стомака (turdus migratorius), коју Јенкији зову `црвендаћ`.
У Британији и Ирској црвендаћ је назив за једну другу врсту, ’erithacus rubecula. (‘’ four and twenty blackbirds baked in a pie``) -24 црне птичице испечене у пити“: из ове енглеске брзалице су ’’merula’ примерци на српском језику „кос“. По овоме се види да је термин „косово“ присвојни придев именице „кос“.
Као и амерички весник пролећа, ова црна прица која се зове кос, пева лепо у пролећно и летње доба. За Североамериканце осећај за српски назив „косово“ може бити по преводу фразе „Field of Robins’’ (поље косова).
Албанци су позајмили ову реч од Срба који су некад као већина протеривани са Косова, нарочито после Берлинског конгреса, бруталном навалом Албанаца подстрекиваним Аустроугарима и Немцима у Првом светском рату, у Другом светском рату Мусолинијевим слугама Албанцима, и после Другог светског рата дискриминаторским етничким чишћењем стаљинистичког диктатора Јосипа Броза.
Изворни индијански називи места у Америци немају значење на енглеском језику:
Нпр.‘’Michigan’’ ништа не значи на енглеском, али на Ojibwa језику ‘’Mishshikamaa“ значи „Велико језеро“.
Такође називи места у Ирској имају шире значенје на галском, али су без значења на колонијалистичком енглеском језику, нпр. ’Dublin’’ је Gaelic ‘’dubh lin’’ ‘Црно језеро’, и ‘’Kildare’’ је ‘’cildara’’, ‘Храстова црква’.
С тим у вези српски назив за покрајину Косово је чист српски израз и нема значење на албанском језику.
Доказ српског порекла овог назива као и позајмљен статус овог појма од Албанаца имиграната је тај да реч „Косово“ има јасну етимологију свакоме ко мало познаје словенске језике, док албанско „Kosova’’ је нејасан беззначењски термин на албанском језику.
Косово је српско!
1997.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Friday, October 17, 2008
INTERVIEW WITH NOAM CHOMSKY
10/10/2008 06:44 PM
INTERVIEW WITH NOAM CHOMSKY
'The United States Has Essentially a One-Party System'
The linguist and public intellectual Noam Chomsky has long been a critic of American consumerism and imperialism. SPIEGEL spoke to him about the current crisis of capitalism, Barack Obama's rhetoric and the compliance of the intellectual class.
SPIEGEL: Professor Chomsky, cathedrals of capitalism have collapsed, the conservative government is spending its final weeks in office with nationalization plans. How does that make you feel?
AP
A happy purchaser of a new iPhone. "Consumption distracts people. You cannot control your own population by force, but it can be distracted by consumption."
SPIEGEL: What exactly did you anticipate?
Chomsky: In the financial industry, as in other industries, there are risks that are left out of the calculation. If you sell me a car, we have perhaps made a good bargain for ourselves. But there are effects of this transaction on others, which we do not take into account. There is more pollution, the price of gas goes up, there is more congestion. Those are the external costs of our transaction. In the case of financial institutions, they are huge.
SPIEGEL: But isn't it the task of a bank to take risks?
Chomsky: Yes, but if it is well managed, like Goldman Sachs, it will cover its own risks and absorb its own losses. But no financial institution can manage systemic risks. Risk is therefore underpriced, and there will be more risk taken than would be prudent for the economy. With government deregulation and the triumph of financial liberalization, the dangers of systemic risks, the possibility of a financial tsunami, sharply increased.
SPIEGEL: But is it correct to only put the blame on Wall Street? Doesn't Main Street, the American middle class, also live on borrowed money which may or may not be paid back?
Chomsky: The debt burden of private households is enormous. But I would not hold the individual responsible. This consumerism is based on the fact that we are a society dominated by business interests. There is massive propaganda for everyone to consume. Consumption is good for profits and consumption is good for the political establishment.
SPIEGEL: How does it benefit politicians when the populace drives a lot, eats a lot and goes shopping a lot?
Chomsky: Consumption distracts people. You cannot control your own population by force, but it can be distracted by consumption. The business press has been quite explicit about this goal.
SPIEGEL: A while ago you called America “the greatest country on earth.” How does that fit together with what you've been saying?
Chomsky: In many respects, the United States is a great country. Freedom of speech is protected more than in any other country. It is also a very free society. In America, the professor talks to the mechanic. They are in the same category.
SPIEGEL: After travelling through the United States 170 years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville reported, "the people reign over the American political world as God rules over the universe." Was he a dreamer?
Chomsky: James Madison’s position at the Constitutional Convention was that state power should be used "to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority." That is why the Senate has only a hundred members who are mostly rich and were given a great deal of power. The House of Representatives, with several hundred members, is more democratic and was given much less power. Even liberals like Walter Lippmann, one of the leading intellectuals of the 20th century, was of the opinion that in a properly functioning democracy, the intelligent minority, who should rule, have to be protected from “the trampling and the roar of the bewildered herd.” Among the conservatives, Vice President Dick Cheney just recently illustrated his understanding of democracy. He was asked why he supports a continuation of the war in Iraq when the population is strongly opposed. His answer was: “So?”
SPIEGEL: “Change” is the slogan of this year’s presidential election. Do you see any chance for an immediate, tangible change in the United States? Or, to use use Obama’s battle cry: Are you "fired up”?
Chomsky: Not in the least. The European reaction to Obama is a European delusion.
SPIEGEL: But he does say things that Europe has long been waiting for. He talks about the trans-Atlantic partnership, the priority of diplomacy and the reconciling of American society.
Chomsky: That is all rhetoric. Who cares about that? This whole election campaign deals with soaring rhetoric, hope, change, all sorts of things, but not with issues.
SPIEGEL: Do you prefer the team on the other side: the 72 year old Vietnam veteran McCain and Sarah Palin, former Alaskan beauty queen?
Chomsky: This Sarah Palin phenomenon is very curious. I think somebody watching us from Mars, they would think the country has gone insane.
SPIEGEL: Arch conservatives and religious voters seem to be thrilled.
Chomsky: One must not forget that this country was founded by religious fanatics. Since Jimmy Carter, religious fundamentalists play a major role in elections. He was the first president who made a point of exhibiting himself as a born again Christian. That sparked a little light in the minds of political campaign managers: Pretend to be a religious fanatic and you can pick up a third of the vote right away. Nobody asked whether Lyndon Johnson went to church every day. Bill Clinton is probably about as religious as I am, meaning zero, but his managers made a point of making sure that every Sunday morning he was in the Baptist church singing hymns.
SPIEGEL: Is there nothing about McCain that appeals to you?
Chomsky: In one aspect he is more honest than his opponent. He explicitly states that this election is not about issues but about personalities. The Democrats are not quite as honest even though they see it the same way.
SPIEGEL: So for you, Republicans and Democrats represent just slight variations of the same political platform?
Chomsky: Of course there are differences, but they are not fundamental. Nobody should have any illusions. The United States has essentially a one-party system and the ruling party is the business party.
SPIEGEL: You exaggerate. In almost all vital questions -- from the taxation of the rich to nuclear energy -- there are different positions. At least on the issues of war and peace, the parties differ considerably. The Republicans want to fight in Iraq until victory, even if that takes a 100 years, according to McCain. The Democrats demand a withdrawal plan.
Chomsky: Let us look at the “differences” more closely, and we recognize how limited and cynical they are. The hawks say, if we continue we can win. The doves say, it is costing us too much. But try to find an American politician who says frankly that this aggression is a crime: the issue is not whether we win or not, whether it is expensive or not. Remember the Russian invasion of Afghanistan? Did we have a debate whether the Russians can win the war or whether it is too expensive? This may have been the debate at the Kremlin, or in Pravda. But this is the kind of debate you would expect in a totalitarian society. If General Petraeus could achieve in Iraq what Putin achieved in Chechnya, he would be crowned king. The key question here is whether we apply the same standards to ourselves that we apply to others.
SPIEGEL: Who prevents intellectuals from asking and critically answering these questions? You praised the freedom of speech in the United States.
Chomsky: The intellectual world is deeply conformist. Hans Morgenthau, who was a founder of realist international relations theory, once condemned what he called “the conformist subservience to power”on the part of the intellectuals. George Orwell wrote that nationalists, who are practically the whole intellectual class of a country, not only do not disapprove of the crimes of their own state, but have the remarkable capacity not even to see them. That is correct. We talk a lot about the crimes of others. When it comes to our own crimes, we are nationalists in the Orwellian sense.
SPIEGEL: Was there not, and is there not -- in the United States and worldwide -- loud protest against the Iraq war?
Chomsky: The protest against the war in Iraq is far higher than against the war in Vietnam. When there were 4,000 American deaths in Vietnam and 150,000 troops deployed, nobody cared. When Kennedy invaded Vietnam in 1962, there was just a yawn.
SPIEGEL: To conclude, perhaps you can offer a conciliatory word about the state of the nation?
Chomsky: The American society has become more civilized, largely as a result of the activism of the 1960s. Our society, and also Europe's, became freer, more open, more democratic, and for many quite scary. This generation was condemned for that. But it had an effect.
SPIEGEL: Professor Chomsky, we thank you for this interview.
Interview conducted by Gabor Steingart
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2008
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction only allowed with the permission of SPIEGELnet GmbH
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
S. Ossetia, Abkhazia and New Political Reality
September 01, 2008 3:00 AM
By Ivan Simic - Belgrade PalestineChronicle.com
On August 25, 2008 the Federal Assembly of Russia unanimously voted to urge President Medvedev to recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. On the following day, President Medvedev agreed, and signed a decree in which Russia officially recognized the two entities.
Georgia has rejected Russia's move. Deputy Foreign Minister of Georgia, Giga Bokeria said: "This is an unconcealed annexation of these territories, which are a part of Georgia."
On August 26, 2008 Russian President Medvedev has instructed the foreign ministry to open talks with Abkhazia and South Ossetia on establishing diplomatic relations with Russia.
President Medvedev issued a statement saying: "This was not an easy choice to make, but it is the sole chance of saving people's lives" and calling on other countries to follow suit. In a televised address, he echoed the language of genocide used by Western leaders to describe Serbian attacks on Kosovo Albanians in 1999. Medvedev described Georgia in much the same way as Western leaders had once described Serbia.
Later, on August 26, a spokesman for the Palestinian group Hamas welcomed the diplomatic recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He said that there were similarities between the situations of the Abkhazian and South Ossetian people, and the Palestinian people. The spokesman said: "We, Palestinians, also struggle to attain recognition for our rights, the main of which is the right to be an independent state. We hope that the decision of Moscow becomes the beginning of recognition of peoples which combat for freedom and justice."
On August 28, Vasily Dolgolyov, the Belarusian Ambassador to Russia said that Belarus would in the next day or two recognise the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
The Russia's move was also supported by the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan issuing a joint statement vouching support for Russia's "active role" in resolving the conflict.
So far, no other recognized state has recognized them; however there have been intensive international disapprovals.
The unilateral recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by Russia was met by much disapproval from some members of the international community and other members of the United Nations, the NATO, the OSCE, and the European Council.
The United States President George W. Bush condemned the actions taken by the Russian authorities and called on them to reconsider their irresponsible decision. President Bush also said, "the two areas are within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia, and they must remain so."
The UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband accused Russian President Dmitry Medvedev of "inflaming" the crisis. He also called on Russia to stand by International Law as the basis for resolving this crisis and stated that he will assemble the "widest possible coalition against Russian aggression."
Eastern European capitals lined up in support of Georgia, with the Czech Republic in a statement calling Russia's action an attack on the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia.
The European Union leaders have condemned Russia's decision to recognise the Georgian breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, while Georgian rebels compared the move to the creation of Republic of Kosovo earlier this year.
The EU has tried to avoid parallels between Georgia separatism and the newly-created state of Kosovo in the past, saying Kosovo is "unique" despite the fact that 20 out of 27 EU states recognised its unilateral declaration of independence in February without an EU mandate.
Authorities in Abkhazia were happy to make the link, saying: "We use the same arguments as those used by the West with regard to Kosovo: All other possible means were exhausted. There was no possible way to reconcile with Georgia. This is purely a continuation of the Kosovo precedent. Of course some Western leaders will say that there is no link between Kosovo and Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but what can they say without contradicting themselves about what they said regarding Kosovo?"
The Ambassador of Russia to the NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, replied to accusations that Russia's recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is "irreversible", but called upon the NATO countries to withdraw and review their recognitions of independent Kosovo and subsequently act on the premise that this is the new political reality. He assures, moreover that any NATO attack on Russia-supported regions would mean "a declaration of war on Russia".
In relation to the current event in Georgia, in Moldavia, Moldovan rebels called for independence of the breakaway territory of Transnistria.
Currently, 15 EU states are confronted with secessionism, including Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Belgium, Cyprus, Romania, Slovakia, and the UK, among others.
Question is: who is next?
Ivan Simic lives in Belgrade, Serbia. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com
By Ivan Simic - Belgrade PalestineChronicle.com
On August 25, 2008 the Federal Assembly of Russia unanimously voted to urge President Medvedev to recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. On the following day, President Medvedev agreed, and signed a decree in which Russia officially recognized the two entities.
Georgia has rejected Russia's move. Deputy Foreign Minister of Georgia, Giga Bokeria said: "This is an unconcealed annexation of these territories, which are a part of Georgia."
On August 26, 2008 Russian President Medvedev has instructed the foreign ministry to open talks with Abkhazia and South Ossetia on establishing diplomatic relations with Russia.
President Medvedev issued a statement saying: "This was not an easy choice to make, but it is the sole chance of saving people's lives" and calling on other countries to follow suit. In a televised address, he echoed the language of genocide used by Western leaders to describe Serbian attacks on Kosovo Albanians in 1999. Medvedev described Georgia in much the same way as Western leaders had once described Serbia.
Later, on August 26, a spokesman for the Palestinian group Hamas welcomed the diplomatic recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He said that there were similarities between the situations of the Abkhazian and South Ossetian people, and the Palestinian people. The spokesman said: "We, Palestinians, also struggle to attain recognition for our rights, the main of which is the right to be an independent state. We hope that the decision of Moscow becomes the beginning of recognition of peoples which combat for freedom and justice."
On August 28, Vasily Dolgolyov, the Belarusian Ambassador to Russia said that Belarus would in the next day or two recognise the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
The Russia's move was also supported by the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, with China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan issuing a joint statement vouching support for Russia's "active role" in resolving the conflict.
So far, no other recognized state has recognized them; however there have been intensive international disapprovals.
The unilateral recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by Russia was met by much disapproval from some members of the international community and other members of the United Nations, the NATO, the OSCE, and the European Council.
The United States President George W. Bush condemned the actions taken by the Russian authorities and called on them to reconsider their irresponsible decision. President Bush also said, "the two areas are within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia, and they must remain so."
The UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband accused Russian President Dmitry Medvedev of "inflaming" the crisis. He also called on Russia to stand by International Law as the basis for resolving this crisis and stated that he will assemble the "widest possible coalition against Russian aggression."
Eastern European capitals lined up in support of Georgia, with the Czech Republic in a statement calling Russia's action an attack on the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia.
The European Union leaders have condemned Russia's decision to recognise the Georgian breakaway republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, while Georgian rebels compared the move to the creation of Republic of Kosovo earlier this year.
The EU has tried to avoid parallels between Georgia separatism and the newly-created state of Kosovo in the past, saying Kosovo is "unique" despite the fact that 20 out of 27 EU states recognised its unilateral declaration of independence in February without an EU mandate.
Authorities in Abkhazia were happy to make the link, saying: "We use the same arguments as those used by the West with regard to Kosovo: All other possible means were exhausted. There was no possible way to reconcile with Georgia. This is purely a continuation of the Kosovo precedent. Of course some Western leaders will say that there is no link between Kosovo and Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but what can they say without contradicting themselves about what they said regarding Kosovo?"
The Ambassador of Russia to the NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, replied to accusations that Russia's recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is "irreversible", but called upon the NATO countries to withdraw and review their recognitions of independent Kosovo and subsequently act on the premise that this is the new political reality. He assures, moreover that any NATO attack on Russia-supported regions would mean "a declaration of war on Russia".
In relation to the current event in Georgia, in Moldavia, Moldovan rebels called for independence of the breakaway territory of Transnistria.
Currently, 15 EU states are confronted with secessionism, including Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Belgium, Cyprus, Romania, Slovakia, and the UK, among others.
Question is: who is next?
Ivan Simic lives in Belgrade, Serbia. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com
Kosovo independence splits EU on Geogia
September 2, 2008 SERBIANNA
Diplomatic sorces say that EU countries that have recognized Kosovo came under ferocious criticism by the EU states that have not recognized Kosovo during the summit of EU heads of state in Brussels.
EU countries that have not recognized Kosovo are Spain, Portugal, Slovakia, Romania, Greece and Cyprus.
Serbian state agency Tanjug, citing diplomatic sources, says that these countries blamed Kosovo recognition for crisis in Georgia and the Russian recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
The source says that Fance, which chairs the EU presidency, wanted to avoid any linkage between Kosovo and Georgia but the states that oppose Kosovo recognition insisted that Kosovo recognition has destabilized the security of the international order.
Romanian President Trajan Basesku said in Brussels that Romania remains consistent with its position not to recognize the unilaterally proclaimed independence of Kosovo.
Basesku confirmed that Romania had been given a document by Russia where Moscow explains why it has recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
At the summitt, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said that Kosovo could not be a precedent for South Ossetia and Abkhazia because its a unique case. Negotiations on Kosovo status have already been held with no results says Sarkozy.
Sarkozy said that Eu has to be consistent because just as Russia condemned recognition of Kosovo so must Europe condemn Russia.
However, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said that his country protects the territorial integrity of Georgia just as much as it protects the territorial integrity of Serbia over Kosovo.
Diplomatic sorces say that EU countries that have recognized Kosovo came under ferocious criticism by the EU states that have not recognized Kosovo during the summit of EU heads of state in Brussels.
EU countries that have not recognized Kosovo are Spain, Portugal, Slovakia, Romania, Greece and Cyprus.
Serbian state agency Tanjug, citing diplomatic sources, says that these countries blamed Kosovo recognition for crisis in Georgia and the Russian recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
The source says that Fance, which chairs the EU presidency, wanted to avoid any linkage between Kosovo and Georgia but the states that oppose Kosovo recognition insisted that Kosovo recognition has destabilized the security of the international order.
Romanian President Trajan Basesku said in Brussels that Romania remains consistent with its position not to recognize the unilaterally proclaimed independence of Kosovo.
Basesku confirmed that Romania had been given a document by Russia where Moscow explains why it has recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
At the summitt, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said that Kosovo could not be a precedent for South Ossetia and Abkhazia because its a unique case. Negotiations on Kosovo status have already been held with no results says Sarkozy.
Sarkozy said that Eu has to be consistent because just as Russia condemned recognition of Kosovo so must Europe condemn Russia.
However, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said that his country protects the territorial integrity of Georgia just as much as it protects the territorial integrity of Serbia over Kosovo.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Serbia: Kosovo Fuelled Georgia Conflict
21 August 2008 Belgrade--US and western support for Kosovo’s secession from Serbia has helped fuel tensions in Georgia's separatist province of South Ossetia, Belgrade’s Foreign Minister insists.
Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic was quoted by Belgrade daily Vecernje Novosti on Thursday as saying the recognition of Kosovo's independence on February 17 by the United States and its NATO allies has "destabilised" other parts of the world."We have pointed out to the international community from the very start that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo could present a dangerous precedent," Vuk Jeremic was quoted as saying. "Unfortunately, this has proven to be true much sooner than anyone expected." Jeremic was not immediately available for comment, but his spokeswoman confirmed the authenticity of the newspaper interview.Serbia lost control over Kosovo in 1999 after it launched a military campaign there against Kosovo's ethnic Albanian separatists.
Then-President Slobodan Milosevic was forced to pull out of Kosovo after Serbia was bombed by NATO for 78 days in retaliation for its brutality against civilians in Kosovo.Serbia's new, pro-Western leadership that came after Milosevic was ousted in 2000 has refrained from using force in Kosovo but has refused to give up its claim on the territory. Earlier this month, Jeremic sought support in the United Nations for Serbia's request that the Netherlands-based International Court of Justice rule on the legality of Kosovo's declaration of independence. Read more: http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/12366/If approved at the upcoming UN General Assembly session, the Serbian request would present an important diplomatic victory for Belgrade, although the court's ruling would be nonbinding.
Serbia has refused to acknowledge the secession of predominantly ethnic Albanian region. Russia has supported Serbia while the United States and its EU allies have stood by Kosovo.In Georgia, fighting broke out on August 7 when Georgia moved to take control of its separatist South Ossetia region. This triggered a massive intervention by Russia, which recaptured South Ossetia and then moved deep into other parts of Georgia.Georgia’s move may have been prompted by the likelihood that South Ossetia and Abkhazia were preparing to follow Kosovo's example and declare independence, while Russia says it is unfair of the West to back one people’s independence and deny it to another.
Read more: http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/analysis/12332/Jeremic said Serbia condemns the use of force in Georgia, and urged countries to find a "peaceful way through the United Nations, with respect to international agreements and international law.
Copyright BalkanInsight.com 2008
Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic was quoted by Belgrade daily Vecernje Novosti on Thursday as saying the recognition of Kosovo's independence on February 17 by the United States and its NATO allies has "destabilised" other parts of the world."We have pointed out to the international community from the very start that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo could present a dangerous precedent," Vuk Jeremic was quoted as saying. "Unfortunately, this has proven to be true much sooner than anyone expected." Jeremic was not immediately available for comment, but his spokeswoman confirmed the authenticity of the newspaper interview.Serbia lost control over Kosovo in 1999 after it launched a military campaign there against Kosovo's ethnic Albanian separatists.
Then-President Slobodan Milosevic was forced to pull out of Kosovo after Serbia was bombed by NATO for 78 days in retaliation for its brutality against civilians in Kosovo.Serbia's new, pro-Western leadership that came after Milosevic was ousted in 2000 has refrained from using force in Kosovo but has refused to give up its claim on the territory. Earlier this month, Jeremic sought support in the United Nations for Serbia's request that the Netherlands-based International Court of Justice rule on the legality of Kosovo's declaration of independence. Read more: http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/12366/If approved at the upcoming UN General Assembly session, the Serbian request would present an important diplomatic victory for Belgrade, although the court's ruling would be nonbinding.
Serbia has refused to acknowledge the secession of predominantly ethnic Albanian region. Russia has supported Serbia while the United States and its EU allies have stood by Kosovo.In Georgia, fighting broke out on August 7 when Georgia moved to take control of its separatist South Ossetia region. This triggered a massive intervention by Russia, which recaptured South Ossetia and then moved deep into other parts of Georgia.Georgia’s move may have been prompted by the likelihood that South Ossetia and Abkhazia were preparing to follow Kosovo's example and declare independence, while Russia says it is unfair of the West to back one people’s independence and deny it to another.
Read more: http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/analysis/12332/Jeremic said Serbia condemns the use of force in Georgia, and urged countries to find a "peaceful way through the United Nations, with respect to international agreements and international law.
Copyright BalkanInsight.com 2008
Saturday, July 5, 2008
What comes around, goes around
04 July 2008 Pristina
Kosovo’s Prime Minister said on Thursday that attempts by Kosovo Serbs to set up parallel institutions are "in vain" and "illegal."
“The creation of parallel structures and other non-institutional bodies is destined to be a failed, useless, illegitimate, unacceptable and illusionist policy,’’ Hashim Thaci said.
“We urge Belgrade to play a positive role for peace and stability in the region and refrain from any attempts to provoke negative actions in Kosovo,’’ he added.
Last weekend, Kosovo Serbs inaugurated their own parliament in the ethnically-divided town of Mitrovica with a declaration that Kosovo is a part of Serbia, defying criticism from the United Nations and ethnic Albanian leaders that the assembly is illegal.
The assembly is created based on the results of local elections held by Serbia in Kosovo, which Pristina and the UN also said were illegal. The assembly has no executive authority but reflects a deepening ethnic partition of Kosovo since its Albanian majority declared independence from Serbia in February, backed by the West but opposed by Belgrade and its ally Russia.
The United States condemned the creation of the assembly while Russia said it was a logical revolt against the declaration of independence.
Earlier this week, Kosovo’s President Fatmir Sejdiu condemned the formation of the assembly saying that local Serbs are being manipulated by Belgrade. For more, read:
http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/11419
Speaking on Thursday, Thaci also reacted against local governance in the Serb-dominated municipality of Strpce in southern Kosovo, where a new mayor took his post based on the results of the May 11 polls.
“I emphasise again, everything related to this issue is illegal, irresponsible and non-functional,’’ said Thaci.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
The War Street Journal Invents Kosovo
July 3, 2008
Being Walter Duranty
The War Street Journal Invents Kosovo
Lies about Kosovo are nothing new. For almost two decades now, there's hardly been any truth in reports that have reached the Western public concerning this southern province of Serbia now posing as an independent state. The 1988 constitutional reforms designed to rein in Albanian separatism were presented as "stripping Kosovo of autonomy." The 1989 speech by Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic at a commemoration of a historic battle against Ottoman invaders was routinely claimed to have been a call for hatred, nationalism, or violence – but never actually quoted. And with good reason – because it was nothing of the sort.
Lies ramped up in 1998, as the terrorist gang calling itself the "Kosovo Liberation Army" (KLA) emerged, targeting police officers, postal workers and fellow Albanians who would not "contribute" to the cause. Media in the West claimed the KLA were "freedom fighters" from Serbian "repression." In reality, they were fighting for an independent Kosovo ruled by Albanians, and eventually an "ethnic Albania" encompassing Albania proper, and parts of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Greece.
Events from 1998-99 ought to be familiar to the readers of this column: the Rambouillet "peace plan," the Racak "massacre," and finally the "humanitarian bombing" of Serbia that went on for 78 days. Lies piled up sky-high: hundreds of thousands of Albanians supposedly shot, or raped, or burned in ovens, or thrown down mine shafts… Each and every one was later revealed as complete and utter fabrication, only to be shrugged off by their authors, who would go on to make new claims shortly thereafter.
The "peace" that came in June 1999 was nothing of the sort; hundreds of thousands of Kosovo's Serbs, Roma, Turks, and other communities fled for their lives as the triumphant KLA took over under NATO's aegis. Thousands of homes put to the torch, ancient churches and monasteries dynamited, entire families massacred, everyone else's property looted – these grisly facts of "liberation" were dismissed in the West as "revenge attacks." Revenge for what?
Paradise Imagined
The Wall Street Journal's opinion pages can be considered the norm when it came to the Western media coverage of Kosovo. Serbs were always and ever evil, wrong and deserving of everything that happened to them. Albanians were virtuous victims who deserved "freedom" and statehood, laws and logic be damned. Never mind that it was WSJ's Daniel Pearl who criticized the propaganda about "genocide" in Kosovo and debunked the Trepca Mine myth. The cognitive dissonance between the news and opinion in the "War Street Journal" has been a fact for quite some time.
It is not surprising, therefore, that WSJ's travel writer Stan Sesser chose to follow the editorial page's tack, rather than the Pearl's. Sesser's June 27 article, titled "Europe's Unlikely Charmer," is about as facetious as Kosovo stories get, and par for the course at WSJ.
Only someone who knows nothing about the region could ever describe Kosovo as a "paradise," affordable or not. Yet that is how Sesser begins his story.
Sure, the streets may be filthy and the towns squalid, but everything is just hunky-dory in the "newest nation on Earth." He leaves out the fact that Kosovo's recent declaration of independence is hotly disputed by Serbia and another 150-odd nations, choosing instead to say that Kosovo "is currently recognized by more than 40 countries, including the U.S. and most European Union members." Well, hey, if Washington and Brussels say something is OK, that's surely so!
Sesser says he never once felt threatened – once he was identified as an American, anyway. Had he been identified as a Serb, or a Slav of any kind, Sesser would have been fortunate to escape the fate of Valentin Krumov. This Bulgarian UN employee was shot in broad daylight on a Pristina street for giving the time to an Albanian bystander in "what sounded like Serbian."
Failing Both Language and History
According to Sesser, the war "took 12,000 lives" and "destroyed Kosovo's economy." He doesn't say where he got the number from; most of his colleagues have been using the equally imaginary 10,000. Yet even counting the KLA casualties, the documented numbers so far are below 5,000.
Then there's an issue of language. Sesser was assigned an Albanian guide for his visit to the monasteries (which he mislabels "Greek Orthodox"). But he calls the Patriarchy "Peja" – which is a corrupted form of Albanian "Peje," itself a corruption of the Serbian name for the ancient city, Pec (Peć, meaning “stove” or “oven”). But the confusion becomes complete when he tries to make a bad wordplay on the name of the province's capital.
In Serbian, the administrative capital of Kosovo is Pristina (Priština). The Albanian name for the city is Prishtine. Both have a very emphatic "sh" sound. Yet Sesser makes a terrible pun about how the city is anything but "pristine."
Nor is Sesser's history any better than his linguistics. Apparently, Pristina was named after an "ancient king of the Ilyrians [sic], the ancestors of Kosovo's ethnic Albanians." However in Adrian Room's Placenames of the World (McFarland, 2003), Pristina is derived from "prisht," the Serbian word for boil (see page. 292). There was no Illyrian "king Pustule."
Albanians may believe that they are descended from the Illyrians, who inhabited the Balkans in pre-Roman times, but that doesn't mean this is actually true, or supported by evidence. The "Illyrian theory" was first postulated by Austrian court historians in the late 1800s, and it has been challenged since.
So That is What 'Coexistence' Means…
At one point, Sesser admires the medieval city of Prizren. He quotes one Naim Shahini, who "spent a day volunteering his labor to help renovate an old Prizren mosque" as saying that for 500 years, "Greek [sic] Orthodox and Catholics lived with Muslims without any problem."
Those five centuries, mind you, were the era of the Ottoman Empire, in which Christians (and Jews) were allowed to live, but as dhimmi – the disenfranchised infidels, who had to defer to Muslims in every respect, pay taxes and give up their children to become Janissaries. In Muslims' eyes (be they Albanian or Bosnian), it was those pesky infidels demanding freedom from the sultan that created "problems."
Sesser does not mention the fact that Albanian mobs sacked and torched the Bishop's residence and the Church of St. George in Prizren during the March 2004 pogrom. Some "coexistence," that.
This isn't just an omission, either. Sesser chooses to illustrate Kosovo reality by lamenting the fact that Albanians living in the northern, Serb part of Mitrovica need NATO escort to go to school or work. How ironic, given that needing an armed escort to go anywhere is precisely one salient characteristic of Serb life in occupied Kosovo. And note how there are Albanians living in north Mitrovica. The number of Serbs in the south part is precisely zero.
But tourists should not worry, says Sesser, because NATO is there:
"To forestall ethnic conflicts, 17,000 NATO troops, supplemented by thousands of police under U.N. auspices, are everywhere, paying special attention to the historic mosques, churches and monasteries that are among the country's treasures."
What else to call this but extremely facetious? Those troops (back when there were 40,000 of them, even) and police have done nothing to prevent a mass ethnic cleansing of Serbs in 1999, or any of the thousands of attacks on Serb lives and property since, including the 2004 pogrom. Over 150 churches and monasteries have been destroyed in the presence of these troops. Never happened, at least according to Sesser. Not in his affordable paradise of coexistence…
No Excuse
Perhaps it is being unfair to Stan Sesser to single him out for scrutiny, when hundreds of his colleagues have misrepresented Kosovo for years. He could be simply an ignorant travel writer, not knowing much about history, politics or language, focusing on hotels and their amenities and simply repeating the information he was fed by Albanian handlers and editors in New York. But when is a lie tolerable? When are omissions of truth "OK"? When is ignorance an excuse, for a reporter?
The right answer should always be "never," else all journalists end up resembling Walter Duranty. Unfortunately, that's now how things work when it comes to Kosovo.
Nebojsa Malic
antiwar.com
Being Walter Duranty
The War Street Journal Invents Kosovo
Lies about Kosovo are nothing new. For almost two decades now, there's hardly been any truth in reports that have reached the Western public concerning this southern province of Serbia now posing as an independent state. The 1988 constitutional reforms designed to rein in Albanian separatism were presented as "stripping Kosovo of autonomy." The 1989 speech by Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic at a commemoration of a historic battle against Ottoman invaders was routinely claimed to have been a call for hatred, nationalism, or violence – but never actually quoted. And with good reason – because it was nothing of the sort.
Lies ramped up in 1998, as the terrorist gang calling itself the "Kosovo Liberation Army" (KLA) emerged, targeting police officers, postal workers and fellow Albanians who would not "contribute" to the cause. Media in the West claimed the KLA were "freedom fighters" from Serbian "repression." In reality, they were fighting for an independent Kosovo ruled by Albanians, and eventually an "ethnic Albania" encompassing Albania proper, and parts of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Greece.
Events from 1998-99 ought to be familiar to the readers of this column: the Rambouillet "peace plan," the Racak "massacre," and finally the "humanitarian bombing" of Serbia that went on for 78 days. Lies piled up sky-high: hundreds of thousands of Albanians supposedly shot, or raped, or burned in ovens, or thrown down mine shafts… Each and every one was later revealed as complete and utter fabrication, only to be shrugged off by their authors, who would go on to make new claims shortly thereafter.
The "peace" that came in June 1999 was nothing of the sort; hundreds of thousands of Kosovo's Serbs, Roma, Turks, and other communities fled for their lives as the triumphant KLA took over under NATO's aegis. Thousands of homes put to the torch, ancient churches and monasteries dynamited, entire families massacred, everyone else's property looted – these grisly facts of "liberation" were dismissed in the West as "revenge attacks." Revenge for what?
Paradise Imagined
The Wall Street Journal's opinion pages can be considered the norm when it came to the Western media coverage of Kosovo. Serbs were always and ever evil, wrong and deserving of everything that happened to them. Albanians were virtuous victims who deserved "freedom" and statehood, laws and logic be damned. Never mind that it was WSJ's Daniel Pearl who criticized the propaganda about "genocide" in Kosovo and debunked the Trepca Mine myth. The cognitive dissonance between the news and opinion in the "War Street Journal" has been a fact for quite some time.
It is not surprising, therefore, that WSJ's travel writer Stan Sesser chose to follow the editorial page's tack, rather than the Pearl's. Sesser's June 27 article, titled "Europe's Unlikely Charmer," is about as facetious as Kosovo stories get, and par for the course at WSJ.
Only someone who knows nothing about the region could ever describe Kosovo as a "paradise," affordable or not. Yet that is how Sesser begins his story.
Sure, the streets may be filthy and the towns squalid, but everything is just hunky-dory in the "newest nation on Earth." He leaves out the fact that Kosovo's recent declaration of independence is hotly disputed by Serbia and another 150-odd nations, choosing instead to say that Kosovo "is currently recognized by more than 40 countries, including the U.S. and most European Union members." Well, hey, if Washington and Brussels say something is OK, that's surely so!
Sesser says he never once felt threatened – once he was identified as an American, anyway. Had he been identified as a Serb, or a Slav of any kind, Sesser would have been fortunate to escape the fate of Valentin Krumov. This Bulgarian UN employee was shot in broad daylight on a Pristina street for giving the time to an Albanian bystander in "what sounded like Serbian."
Failing Both Language and History
According to Sesser, the war "took 12,000 lives" and "destroyed Kosovo's economy." He doesn't say where he got the number from; most of his colleagues have been using the equally imaginary 10,000. Yet even counting the KLA casualties, the documented numbers so far are below 5,000.
Then there's an issue of language. Sesser was assigned an Albanian guide for his visit to the monasteries (which he mislabels "Greek Orthodox"). But he calls the Patriarchy "Peja" – which is a corrupted form of Albanian "Peje," itself a corruption of the Serbian name for the ancient city, Pec (Peć, meaning “stove” or “oven”). But the confusion becomes complete when he tries to make a bad wordplay on the name of the province's capital.
In Serbian, the administrative capital of Kosovo is Pristina (Priština). The Albanian name for the city is Prishtine. Both have a very emphatic "sh" sound. Yet Sesser makes a terrible pun about how the city is anything but "pristine."
Nor is Sesser's history any better than his linguistics. Apparently, Pristina was named after an "ancient king of the Ilyrians [sic], the ancestors of Kosovo's ethnic Albanians." However in Adrian Room's Placenames of the World (McFarland, 2003), Pristina is derived from "prisht," the Serbian word for boil (see page. 292). There was no Illyrian "king Pustule."
Albanians may believe that they are descended from the Illyrians, who inhabited the Balkans in pre-Roman times, but that doesn't mean this is actually true, or supported by evidence. The "Illyrian theory" was first postulated by Austrian court historians in the late 1800s, and it has been challenged since.
So That is What 'Coexistence' Means…
At one point, Sesser admires the medieval city of Prizren. He quotes one Naim Shahini, who "spent a day volunteering his labor to help renovate an old Prizren mosque" as saying that for 500 years, "Greek [sic] Orthodox and Catholics lived with Muslims without any problem."
Those five centuries, mind you, were the era of the Ottoman Empire, in which Christians (and Jews) were allowed to live, but as dhimmi – the disenfranchised infidels, who had to defer to Muslims in every respect, pay taxes and give up their children to become Janissaries. In Muslims' eyes (be they Albanian or Bosnian), it was those pesky infidels demanding freedom from the sultan that created "problems."
Sesser does not mention the fact that Albanian mobs sacked and torched the Bishop's residence and the Church of St. George in Prizren during the March 2004 pogrom. Some "coexistence," that.
This isn't just an omission, either. Sesser chooses to illustrate Kosovo reality by lamenting the fact that Albanians living in the northern, Serb part of Mitrovica need NATO escort to go to school or work. How ironic, given that needing an armed escort to go anywhere is precisely one salient characteristic of Serb life in occupied Kosovo. And note how there are Albanians living in north Mitrovica. The number of Serbs in the south part is precisely zero.
But tourists should not worry, says Sesser, because NATO is there:
"To forestall ethnic conflicts, 17,000 NATO troops, supplemented by thousands of police under U.N. auspices, are everywhere, paying special attention to the historic mosques, churches and monasteries that are among the country's treasures."
What else to call this but extremely facetious? Those troops (back when there were 40,000 of them, even) and police have done nothing to prevent a mass ethnic cleansing of Serbs in 1999, or any of the thousands of attacks on Serb lives and property since, including the 2004 pogrom. Over 150 churches and monasteries have been destroyed in the presence of these troops. Never happened, at least according to Sesser. Not in his affordable paradise of coexistence…
No Excuse
Perhaps it is being unfair to Stan Sesser to single him out for scrutiny, when hundreds of his colleagues have misrepresented Kosovo for years. He could be simply an ignorant travel writer, not knowing much about history, politics or language, focusing on hotels and their amenities and simply repeating the information he was fed by Albanian handlers and editors in New York. But when is a lie tolerable? When are omissions of truth "OK"? When is ignorance an excuse, for a reporter?
The right answer should always be "never," else all journalists end up resembling Walter Duranty. Unfortunately, that's now how things work when it comes to Kosovo.
Nebojsa Malic
antiwar.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
