Take Bosnia-Herzegovina. By now, the West - through the various organs

of its global financial architecture - has committed well over 5

billion USD to this godforsaken piece of land in the middle of nowhere.

This is almost 3 times the official GDP of this country. It is the

equivalent of 20 trillion US dollars invested in the USA in four years

time. All this was in order to cement the cohesiveness of this

artificial concoction of a state and to secure its future as a

political (read: economic) unit. It failed, miserably so. The Republika

Srpska is nowhere nearer to integrating with its Moslem and Croat

neighbour. The common currency did nothing to foster a common identity.

And the place represents an abysmal reversion to old colonial habits

with a governor to regulate the unruly and unyielding natives, by the

application of force if need be.

Indeed, the ethnic wars of the modern era are a direct result of said

colonial period. Borders, drawn at random and with a minimal and

arbitrary knowledge of the terrain and its inhabitants - led to a

hundred years of correctional warfare by the victims of this

patronizing ignorance. The rule of thumb is simple: people cannot live

together. Humans are misanthropes, they love to hate the different, the

other. Therefore, it is best to encourage the formation of ethnically

homogenous political units - where ethnic affiliation counts and of

ideologically homogenous political units where ideology matters and of

racially homogenous political bodies where race equals identity. A

simple rule derived from the 5000 years of trials and errors called

"human history".

The USSR disintegrated peacefully because it disintegrated into

ethnically homogenous entities (or entities with clear ethnic

identities and majorities). In the process Russia gave up oil reserves,

mineral riches, space launching sites, strategic locations and much of

its nuclear and conventional weaponry. Despite all these incredible

sacrifices, it was a peaceful process.

The Czechs separated from the Slovaks in a bloodless break-up of their

common state because the two resulting entities were ethnically

homogenous. Well, almost - hence the persecution of the Roma in both

countries.

Slovenia and Macedonia seceded from the Yugoslav Federation without as

much as a shot (except for the first few days of Slovenia's

independence when confusion ruled supreme) - because there were very

few Serbs in either. Slovenia and Macedonia are ethnically homogeneous

(Macedonia with a sizeable Albanian minority, though). Hence their

status as islands of peace and tranquillity in an impossible region.

The war with Croatia and more so in Bosnia was a direct result of

ethnic heterogeneity.

The not-so-implicit deal in the case of the USSR and the Czech Republic

was simple to grasp and very effective. "You will peacefully break up

into ethnically homogeneous units - and we will support you financially

and initiate you into our economic superstructures." It worked. It

still is working. But it was not the deal offered to the former

Yugoslav republics. To them the West's message was: "You will

peacefully break up into ethnically HETEROGENEOUS units - and we will

support you financially, subject to painful and sustained reforms."

It is time to recognize the folly and the fallacy of this last message.

Yugoslavia in particular and the Balkans in general must be

"re-designed" into ethnically homogeneous political units. If this

necessitates the re-drawing of now dangerously obsolete borders - let

it be so. It would make a lot more sense to dismantle Bosnia and unite

the Republika Srpska with Yugoslavia (Serbia) and the Croat bit with

Croatia. The Muslims can have their political unit, if they wish. Parts

of Kosovo must go to Albania. The borders have to be redrawn. The

result should be a series of ethnically homogeneous states - viable,

cohesive, peaceful and able to concentrate on economic warfare rather

than on the economics of war.

To achieve this goal, colonialism must be revived. Operation Allied

Force is a colonial war without the mercantilist emphasis of days gone

by. It is a coalition of rich countries, led by a superpower, attacking

and subduing a regional bully. As in the good old days, borders are

effectively redrawn (Kosovo's "extensive self government"), new

political entities formed, alliances with one group of natives against

another abound, military hardware coupled with economic prowess are

pitted against local aspirations which do not conform with a moralistic

"global view" of the world. The absurd is that - because colonialism is

not politically correct and is condemned by all with great vehemence -

the colonial powers of today are castrated. These eunuchs of

geopolitics do not dare to carry their military and economic clout to

its logical and beneficial conclusion. In other words: they do not dare

to DICTATE a solution and impose it rather than engage in endless

consultations with local parties and amongst themselves.

We need a new Berlin Congress. We need a new Bismarck. He said that the

whole Balkan is not worth the bones of one Pomeranian grenadier - but

this did not prevent the newly born (and recently victorious) Germany

from engaging in the redesign of South Europe. Unfortunately, the

Berlin Congress was a shoddy job, more influenced by the narrow

self-interests of the participants than by any grand vision or

integrity of intentions. To the reshapers of Europe of that time it was

more important to adversely affect the interests of Russia and Turkey

than to create a long lasting peace and the conditions for prosperity.

It was bound to fail and it did and it still does.

This is the second chance (not counting communism). This is the time to

redefine South Europe and the Balkans. This is the time to draw logical

borders, which reflect not whims and eccentricities, paranoias and

ignorance, condescension and malice - but demography and history,

national aspirations and disparate cultures and narratives. Let each

ethnic group live within safe and internationally guaranteed borders.

Let them work in harmony across borders - rather than engage in

conflicts within them. Let the Albanian lands go to Albania, the

Serbian lands to the Serbs - as the Czech lands are to the Czech and

Russian lands are to the Russian. Only then will peace prevail as it

does in Western Europe and in Scandinavia today - the scenes of

centuries of battles and bloodshed.

(Article published May 31, 1999 in "The New Presence")

Return

Millenarian Thoughts about Kosovo

"English persons, therefore, of humanitarian and reformist disposition

constantly went out to the Balkan Peninsula to see who was in fact

ill-treating whom, and, being by the very nature of their perfectionist

faith unable to accept the horrid hypothesis that everybody was

ill-treating everybody else, all came back with a pet Balkan people

established in their hearts as suffering and innocent, eternally the

massacree and never the massacrer."

("Black Lamb and Grey Falcon - A Journey through Yugoslavia" by Rebecca

West - Penguin Books 1994 edition p.20)

Rebecca West's book was first published in 1940. By that time, it was

common wisdom that the Balkans is the place where the destiny of our

world is determined or, at the very least, outlined. Had she lived

today, she would have had no reason to revise this particular judgement

of hers.

The Kosovo "air campaign" exposed and brought to culmination a series

of historical processes whose importance cannot be exaggerated.

The Russian Revolution

Forced to choose between nationalist delusions of imperial grandeur and

modern capitalism and its attendant, individualism - Russia chose the

latter. The ever-surprising Yeltsin completed the revolution he started

in 1990 by deposing of the last vestiges of stagnation personified by

Primakov. The remnants of the former nomenclature, the establishment

figures, the fossils in the ideological swamp that communism has become

- were given the penultimate slip. Russia was forced to peer into the

abyss of its own corruption, nepotism, criminality, social and

political disintegration and military impotence. It was forced to do so

by the developments in the Kosovo crisis. It was made to elect between

pan-Slavism and pan-capitalism. For a while, it seemed to have been

choosing the former - leading to an inevitable and suicidal

confrontation with the victorious civilization of the West. Then it

recoiled and chose the IMF over the KGB, material goods over

ideological fervour, the new myths of modernity over the old ones of

blood-steeped patriotism.

It is a momentous event, the consequences of which cannot yet be fully

fathomed. Extrapolating Russian history, it would be reasonable to

expect a backlash in the form of a counterrevolution. A communist

counter-revolution being unlikely - we can expect a fascist-criminal

counter-revolution. But it is as safe to assume that the revolution is

irreversible, setbacks aside. It is irreversible because for the first

time it generated vested interests not only for a select elite - but

also for everyone. Prosperity tends to trickle down and, as it does

(forming a middle class in its wake) - it knows no boundaries of class.

The real revolution has just been completed in Russia, 70 years after

Lenin's death. And all classes are about to win.

The Second Cold War

The outlines of the second cold war have emerged. It is to be fought

between a prosperous, almighty, vainglorious, narcissistic,

self-righteous, contemptuous and increasingly disintegrating USA and an

equally disintegrating China on the economic ascendant.

The second cold war (already in progress) is fought not between foes -

but between partners. The extent of economic interests common to the

two current combatants far exceeds anything achieved in the high

moments of detente between the USA and its previous rival, Russia. This

cold war is about markets and cultural dominance - not sheer,

projected, military prowess. It is a throwback to earlier days of

colonialism and mercantilism and it is laden with historical memories

and sensitivities.

The aims are different, as well. China wishes to force the USA to throw

open the gates of the global marketplace, currently zealously guarded

by the only superpower. The IMF, the World Bank, the WTO are all

believed to be extensions of the American economic clout, put to the

use of its geopolitical interests. Russia forced its way into the G8

but China has much loftier ambitions. It is not in pursuit of

membership in gentlemen's clubs - it aspires to real, raw power. It

wants to carve the world between itself and the West. In short, it

wants to dominate and to export and it wants the West to help it do so.

In return, it promises regional and internal stability and access to

its markets. To convince the West of the quality of its wares, China

demonstrates its capacity to destabilize in various corners of the

world. It transfers weapons technology, support international terrorism

and rogue states and, in general, places formidable obstacles in the

path to Pax Americana, the New World Order.

The Americans regard this as a reasonable deal but they wish to reverse

the cause and the effect. First, they want to gain unhindered access to

the potentially infinite Chinese market and to have the Chinese deliver

the regional and international stability they claim to be able to

deliver. Only then are they willing to contemplate the coveted prize of

graduating to the co-ownership of the world financial and economic

architecture.

China is fighting for legitimacy, recognition, access to markets,

capital and technology and the ability to reshape the world in its

favour. The USA is fighting to check progress of the Chinese on all

these fronts. Such fundamental differences are bound to lead to

conflict - as, indeed, they have.

In this sense, the bombing of the Chinese embassy has been an

auspicious event because it allowed both parties to break through, to

unlock and a deadlock and to make progress towards a fuller integration

of China into the WTO, for instance. It also legitimised the airing of

grievances against the style and conduct of the USA in world affairs.

In short, it was cathartic and useful.

The Demise of the Client States

The concept of the client states is so well entrenched in our

historical consciousness that its demise has been denied and repressed.

There are no longer alliances between powerful political units (such as

the USA) and smaller, dependent, satellites. The kaleidoscopically

shifting interests of the few remaining global powers dictate

geopolitical transigence and ideological transparency. These adaptive

processes lead to a myriad of alliances, forever changing to fit the

needs and interests of the moment or to cater to future contingencies.

Thus, Russia ignores Yugoslavia's pleas for help, China allows the USA,

Japan and South Korea to conduct direct negotiations with North Korea,

America bullies Israel into a settlement with the Palestinians (who

support Iraq), the UK and the USA impose a peace plan on the IRA,

Russia respects an embargo imposed on both Iraq and Yugoslavia and so

on. These are the roots of a truly global order. It is also the death

knell for rogue and "insane" states. Devoid of their patronage, these

countries are gradually tamed by the awesome twin forces of the global

market and international capital and information flows. Iran moderates,

Libya surrenders, Yugoslavia succumbs, the only exception being Iraq.

This is NOT to say that warfare is a thing of the past. On the very

contrary. In the absence of the overwhelmingly restraining impulses and

impositions of the superpowers - ethnic strife, border skirmishes, the

proliferation of weapons of mass destruction - all are likely to

increase. But these are already affairs of limited importance, confined

to parts of the world of limited importance, and fought amongst people

of ever more limited importance. War marginalizes the warriors because

it takes them out of the circulation of capital, information and goods.

Decoupled from these essential flows, warring parties wither and

shrivel.

The Convergence of Economic and Military Alliances

The Kosovo crisis started as an exercise in self re-definition. NATO

used it to successfully put its cohesiveness to test. It acted sanely

and its hypercomplex set of checks and balances and more checks scored

an impressive success. As a result, the limited aims and means of the

campaign were maintained and NATO was not dragged into either British

belligerence or Italian and Greek defeatism. It was the second time in

recent history (the first being another multilateral military campaign

in the Gulf in 1991) - that a military move did not degenerate into

full-scale insanity of carnage and bloodshed.

NATO emerged as a self-restrained, well-choreographed, well

co-ordinated body of professionals who go through motions and off the

shelf plans with lifeless automatism. While somewhat aesthetically

repulsive, this image is a great deterrent. We fear cold-blooded,

impartial machines of war more than we do any hot-blooded,

sword-wielding fanatic. NATO acted with the famous German industrial

efficiency that gave warfare a bad name. It was "surgically precise"

and civilian casualties were alchemically converted into "collateral

damage". The well-practised Jamie Shea is an exceptionally chilling

sight.

Thus, a policeman was born to police the emerging world of

international commerce, true multinationals, boundary-less flows of

data and chaotic reactions to changes in local variables. This

policeman is NATO and it wields an awesome club. As it chooses which

criminals to discipline, it transforms the nature of previously unruly

neighbourhoods. For this, at least, we should be grateful.

(Article published June 6, 1999 in "The New Presence")

Return

NATO's Next War

The real, protracted, war is about to start. NATO and the international

peacekeeping force against an unholy - and, until recently, improbable

- alliance. Milosevic (or post-Milosevic Serbia) and the KLA against

the occupying forces. It is going to be ferocious. It is going to be

bloody. And it is going to be a Somali nightmare.

Why should the KLA and Serbia collaborate against NATO (I use NATO here

as shorthand for "The International Peacekeeping Force - KFOR")?

Serbia - because it wants to regain its lost sovereignty over at least

the northern part of Kosovo. Because it virulently hates,

wholeheartedly detests, voluptuously despises NATO, the "Nazi

aggressor" of yester month. Serbia has no natural allies left, not even

Russia, which prostituted its geopolitical favours for substantial IMF

funding. Its only remaining natural ally is the KLA.

The KLA stands to lose everything as a result of the latest bout of

peacemaking. It is supposed to be "decommissioned" IRA-style, disarmed

("demilitarised" in the diplomatic argot) and effectively disbanded.

The KLA's political clout rested on its ever-growing arsenal and body

of volunteers. Yet volunteers have a strange habit of going back whence

they came once a conflict is over. And the weapons are to be

surrendered. Devoid of these two pillars of political might - Thaci may

find himself unemployed, a former self-declared Prime Minister of a

shadow government in Albanian exile. Rugova has the coffers, filled to

the brim with tens of millions of US dollars and DM raised from the

Albanian Diaspora worldwide. Money talks, KLA walks. Bad for the KLA.

Having tasted power, having met cher Albright on a regular basis,

having conversed with Tony Blair and Robertson and even Clinton via

expensive high tech gadgets - Thaci is not likely to compromise on a

second rate appointment in a Rugova led administration.

And the bad news is that he doesn't have to. Bolstered by a

short-sighted and panicky NATO, the KLA post-bellum is not what it used

to be ante-bellum. It is well equipped. It is well financed. Its ranks

have swelled. It has been transformed from an agglomeration of

desperadoes - to a military guerrilla force to be reckoned with. Even

the Serbs found that out at a dear price.

With the Serb pullout from Kosovo, Serbia is no longer the KLA'a enemy

of choice. The KLA has seen the enemy and it is NATO. The pro-Rugova

demonstrations in the camps (despite Rugova's Quisling show with

Milosevic and his refusal to explain his motives and to adopt a stern

position against the Serbs) - sounded loud and clear. Thaci picked up

the signal.

No Kosovar autonomy can do without Serbia. Kosovo is connected to

Serbia by way of infrastructure. All its trade is with Yugoslavia. It

is absolutely dependent on Serbia for its energy needs. Rugova knows

this. Thaci knows this. And Milosevic knows this. Only NATO pretends

that Kosova can survive as an independent, economically viable entity.

It cannot. It is a part of Serbia, willy-nilly and it will continue to

be so. Rugova and Thaci will be positioning themselves accordingly and

will seek the favours of the only regional force that really matters:

Serbia. Rumour has it that discussion have already commenced in Prague

between Yugoslav low-level officials and Rugova and Thaci

representatives of their competing administrations.

In conducting these discussions, Milosevic's aim is two-fold. Divide et

impera - he intends to do his best to inflame the nascent internecine

civil war about to erupt in Kosovo. By offering goodies to both camps,

Serbia pits them against one another. By being inconsistent and

unpredictable (remember Serbia's refugees policy?) - the Serbs enhance

a Kosovar personality disorder. Dazed by the arbitrariness and

capriciousness of a vicious neighbour - the Kosovars will lash at each

other in an effort to offload their frustration and aggression.

Lucky Serbia. Its infrastructure all but eradicated - it will enjoy the

best and latest replacements courtesy a multitude of international

financial institutions and NGOs. Materially revamped, nationally

revived, militarily vindicated, an invigorated power that withstood the

mightiest alliance in history - Serbia is in an excellent position to

emerge as an important, nay, indispensable, regional, pivotal player.

It can have its choice. In Rugova it will find a genteel, compliant,

respectable and submissive partner. In Thaci - a fellow bully. Serbia

can conduct business with both. As it tramples over internal dissent,

suppresses Montenegro and tightens its grip on its minorities - Serbia

will strive to split Kosovo. It will be content with the mineral-rich,

historical north. Thaci will be content with any kind of foothold, a

stepping-stone on the way to a Greater Albania. There are grounds for

doing business and business will be done, indeed.

Poor Kosova. Lucky Serbia. With such opponents, one need not have

friends. And, in the background, NATO stumbles on into its worst

nightmare, into an apocalyptic tapestry of exploding mines, KLA sniper

fire and mortar attacks, Serb revanchism, material devastation, mass

starvation and geopolitical destabilization. It is this war: gradual,

nerve wrecking, multi-annual, expensive, replete with body bags and

horror scenes - that will do NATO in. It is the end of NATO, only it

does not know it. It has contracted the humanitarian cancer and its

days are numbered.

Milosevic is smiling. He won the war. Completely. And the world has yet

to learn it.

Post Scriptum

It is ever so easy and rational to disregard the above scenario. It is

abrupt, illogical, paradoxical. The Serbs and Milosevic are surely the

KLA's worst enemies. No peace - even one mediated by a confluence of

interests - can blossom among the ruins of coexistence and trust

shredded. A KLA supported by the Serbs against NATO is as outlandish as

an Iraq supported by the USA against Israel.

But the Balkan is a region characterized by its fluid alliances and

structures. Rebecca West, in her masterpiece, "Black Lamb and Grey

Falcon" tells of an alliance no less unholy and no more improbable than

a KLA-Milosevic one (pages 840-1 in the 1994 Penguin edition):

"It happened that the Slavs who had become Janissaries, especially the

Bosnian Serbs, who had been taken from their Christian mothers and

trained to forswear Christ and live in the obedience and enforcement of

the oppressive yet sluttish Ottoman law, had learned their lesson too

well. When the Turks themselves became alarmed by the working of that

law and attempted to reform it, the Janissaries rose against the

reformation. But because they remembered they were Slavs in spite of

all the efforts that had been made to force them to forget it, they

felt that in resisting the Turks, even in defence of Turkish law, they

were resisting those who had imposed that Turkish law on them in place

of their Christian system. So when the rebellious Janissaries defeated

the loyal Army of the Sultan in the fourth battle of Kosovo in 1831,

and left countless Turkish dead on the field, they held that they had

avenged the shame laid on the Christian Slavs in the first battle of

Kosovo, although they themselves were Moslems. But their Christian

fellow-Slavs gave them no support, for they regarded them simply as

co-religionists of the Turkish oppressors and therefore as enemies. So

the revolt of the Janissaries failed; and to add the last touch of

confusion, they were finally defeated by a Turkish marshal who was

neither Turk nor Moslem-born Slav, but a renegade Roman Catholic from

Dalmatia. Here was illustrated what is often obscured by historians,

that a people can be compelled by misfortune into an existence so

confused that it is not life but sheer nonsense, the malignant nonsense

of cancerous growth."

This is reminiscent of the Gorani Moslems in 1999 Kosovo who

collaborated with the Serbs against their co-religionists, the

Albanians. They persecuted the Albanian population - looted, burned

houses and worse - more tenaciously and more ferociously than any Serb.

After the Rain : how the West lost the East · 第 10 / 22 段