_____
CANADA, SUPPORT International Law and Justice
CANADA, SUPPORT Sovereignty by United Nations Charter and
the Helsinki Final Accords
CANADA, Say NO to Illegal Separation of Kosovo and Metohija
from Democratic Republic of Serbia!
CANADA, Say NO to Hate and Intolerance That Made Albanians
Separate Kosovo and Metohija from Serbia!
CANADA, Say NO to Kosova!
_____
<http://www.kosovoisserbia.org/> <http://www.kosovoisserbia.org/>
<http://www.kosovoisserbia.org/>
SEND PROTEST TO:
E-mail addresses of :
Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister
Hon. Maxime Bernier, Minister of Foreign Affairs
Hon. Stephane Dion, Liberal Party of Canada
Hon. Jack Layton, NDP
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(copy all addresses and paste it to email - To:)
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Why Canada should not recognize Kosovo
James Bissett, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence should not be recognized by
Canada. It has not been authorized by the United Nations and is therefore in
violation of international law, the United Nations Charter and the Helsinki
Final Accords. In addition, UN resolution 1244, which ended the bombing of
Serbia, reaffirms Serbia's sovereignty over Kosovo.
The basic principles of territorial integrity and state sovereignty have
governed the relations between states since the treaty of Westphalia in
1648. While they have been violated many times in the intervening years,
usually by acts of aggression by dictators, they remain the essential
components of international law.
After the cataclysmic events of two world wars and the dropping of the
atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki the framers of the United Nations
incorporated the principles of territorial integrity and state sovereignty
into the United Nations Charter. The Charter was seen as the primary
safeguard of peace and security in a nuclear age. The Helsinki Final Act of
1975 reinforced these principles by adding to them the principle of the
inviolability of borders.
These are fundamental principles and they have universal application. They
cannot be set aside because of special cases or because they present an
obstacle to the policy objectives of a powerful nation. Their message is
simple and clear --borders cannot be changed without the consent of the
state involved.
In the spring of 1999 the U.S.-led NATO countries intervened militarily in
Kosovo and, in violation of the UN Charter, bombed Serbia. The bombing was
justified on allegations that genocide and ethnic cleansing were taking
place in Kosovo. We now know these allegations were completely unfounded.
In the three years of armed conflict in Kosovo leading up to the bombing by
NATO the UN estimates there were a total of 4,600 people killed during the
fighting and this figure includes both Serbs and Albanians. In fact, so far
there have been only a little over 2,000 bodies discovered. This in itself
is a tragic figure, but it is not genocide.
As for ethnic cleansing it is now generally acknowledged that the mass
expulsion of the Albanians took place after the bombing started. While there
were thousands of Albanians displaced within Kosovo as a result of two years
of armed conflict there was not a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing
taking place.
Although the western media continue to justify the independence of Kosovo on
the grounds of ethnic cleansing and atrocities committed by Slobodan
Milosevic's security forces the facts do not support these allegations. They
do stand, however, as testimony to the success of NATO's propaganda machine.
The intervention in Kosovo had nothing to do with humanitarian reasons but
was deliberately designed to justify the continued existence of NATO and to
fundamentally change its role from a purely defensive organization acting in
accordance with the UN Charter into one that could intervene wherever or
whenever it decided to do so, and with or without UN approval.
There have been numerous reports that western security agencies trained,
equipped and armed members of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and sent them
back into Kosovo to assassinate Serbian mayors, police officials and
Albanians who did not support their cause. It was a highly successful
operation and it fuelled the armed rebellion by the KLA.
In August 1998 -- seven months before the NATO bombing -- the U.S. Senate
Republican Policy Committee reported that, "planning for a U.S.-led NATO
intervention in Kosovo is largely in place. ... The only missing element
seems to be an event with suitably vivid media coverage that could make the
intervention politically saleable. ... That the administration is waiting
for a 'trigger' is increasingly obvious." That trigger was soon to be
pulled. It was the highly suspicious "Racak" massacre that, as Madeleine
Albright said, was the galvanizing incident that led to the bombing.
The bombing of Serbia by NATO without UN approval was a historical turning
point. The precedent had been set. The UN Charter could be subverted if the
military intervention could be cloaked and justified in terms of
humanitarianism.
The intervention in Iraq was to follow but this time not all of the NATO
countries went along with the American initiative. Many of those who
supported the bombing of Serbia condemned the invasion of Iraq. There seemed
some hope that a lesson had been learned- that violation of the UN Charter
leads to a slippery slope and a return to the days when the resolution of
international disputes would only be by the use of force.
The recognition of Kosovo outside of the UN framework will set a dangerous
precedent. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said that Canada should make
foreign policy decisions that are not only independent but are noticed by
other powers around the world. Here is an opportunity for Canada to
illustrate both of these objectives and stand firm for the UN Charter -- by
saying no to the recognition of Kosovo.
James Bissett served as Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia.
? The Ottawa Citizen 2008
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=32b1a951-15cf
-4193-bff5-af0cb5d3fa90
<http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=32b1a951-15c
f-4193-bff5-af0cb5d3fa90&p=1> &p=1
_____
Europe's new jihadist statelet?
THE WASHIGTON TIMES EDITORIAL
February 19, 2008
After Sunday's Kosovar independence declaration comes President Bush's stamp
of approval for a Republic of Kosovo and the nod of the four major European
Union powers: France, Germany, Britain and Italy. In all likelihood, the
result will be Europe's 46th legally sovereign government, with a population
that is 90 percent Muslim. What is far less clear is whether a weak,
perpetually dependent Kosovar statelet ? and make no mistake, this will be a
toothless, weak and impoverished state ? is in the United States' best
interest.
The answer is no. Lawlessness and terrorism are likely to fester inside
Kosovo ? which is rife with organized criminal gangs and plagued by
corruption. Slavic resentments emanating from neighboring Serbia and Russian
revanchism are a certainty. Much as the Bush administration and European
governments favor independence, it creates new problems where old ones lay
dormant,
There is really only one potentially positive result from an independent
Kosovo: some measure of self-determination for a long-oppressed people. But
at this time it is questionable whether independence is the right way to
achieve this. Given the territory's recent history, it is difficult to
imagine independence occurring without serious jeopardy to U.S. and European
interests, at least in the short term.
With terrorism and international criminal activity being the United States'
two greatest concerns in this region, Kosovo's independence surely cannot
redound favorably to either. Remnants of the old drug-smuggling,
arms-trafficking terrorist organization calling itself the Kosovo Liberation
Army (KLA) are still active. Indeed, many of this al-Qaeda-linked
organization's alumni are alive and well in positions of influence. The KLA
was among the first international terrorist groups linked to al Qaeda in the
late 1990s. Western intelligence agencies observed its members training at
al Qaeda terror camps a decade ago and more. Look for its veterans and their
sympathizers in government to achieve a new prominence in a Kosovo freed
from Serbia.
Loose European talk of incorporating the entire Balkans one day into the
European Union should frighten EU citizens in this context. Then they will
consider the economics of inclusion. Kosovo's 2004 per capita income is
under $3,000. Unemployment is thought to hover near 40 percent. Foreign
assistance comprises approximately one-third of GDP. In short, Kosovo cannot
possibly sustain itself economically or militarily in the present. Indeed,
it may never be able to do so.
Outside Kosovo's borders, complications are materializing, beginning with
more serious Russian and Serbian resistance than previously anticipated.
Yesterday, Serbia formally protested the European Union's mission to Kosovo,
a 2,000-strong force of police and rule-of-law experts who officially began
operations the day before Kosovo's independence declaration. But Russian
obstructionism at the U.N. Security Council is a very possible second act to
Serbia's opposition. Unhelpful declarations of sympathy and support, or
perhaps even diplomatic recognition, for breakaway movements in ex-Soviet
satellite states such as Georgia's Abkhazia region, where rebels control of
an unrecognized command state, now become more easy for Moscow to justify.
As former senior U.S. diplomats John Bolton, Lawrence Eagleburger and Peter
Rodman, critics of independence for Kosovo right now, wrote three weeks ago
in The Washington Times: "[T]he United States should not prompt an
unnecessary crisis in U.S.-Russia relations."
Of course, the long-term reason to wonder about Kosovar independence is the
U.S. troop commitment there. Independence actually means perpetual
dependence on NATO and other foreign forces, which will likely continue for
decades. As of the fall, about 1,500 U.S. service members were deployed
there. Presently, the 2,000-strong E.U. contingent shows a commitment to
Kosovo's security well into the future. But at a moment when reciprocity of
security commitments among NATO partners in Afghanistan is nowhere to be
seen, and U.S. forces are overstretched in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere,
no one should bet on Europe's will to persevere a decade hence. And yet,
independence creates the conditions for the United States to be called upon
to stave off chaos in the event that some future roster of European leaders
go "Afghan" on Kosovo.
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080219/EDITORIAL%20/322739956/1013
_____
