Anda di halaman 1dari 21

Koha Digest # 90

DATE: 7 February 1996


FRONT PAGE: UNCLE LEADS US TO EUROPE

EDITORIAL

THE REPUBLIC AND SELF-DETERMINATION

by VETON SURROI

The Kosovan public functions based on injections. In the first years of the disintegration of
Yugoslavia those were optimistic injections the population was getting from political leaders
and newspapers and sometimes from international institutions and associations, meanwhile
reality gave injections of pessimism. In the last years, the roles changed a bit and now the
only ones who are giving injections of optimism are the political activists. I recalled this last
week, when the (bilateral) recognition of Belgrade's sovereignty over Kosova arose from the
local newspapers and some statements of foreigners. A friend of mine, one of the best jurists
we have, made a list of our pessimistic statements. I, on the other hand, asked my friend how
relevant was it to be optimistic or pessimistic when taking a case to defend in court. "Not at
all", he said, "Facts are relevant in court". The truth is that Kosova is not at trial, and if it
were, it would be one of the trials we are used to in this area, when the chairmen of the Party
committees (today it is the Serbian administration) dictate the verdict and sentence by phone.
Thus we would reach the answer to the question why isn't Kosova being recognized as an
independent state, when this is a just solution for 90% of the Kosovan people. It is a just
solution, but in this historical moment it is not a product of political balance in the Balkans,
Europe and the world. In this balance, justice plays almost no role, and who doesn't believe
this should just look at Bosnia. The issue of the recognition of the Republic of Kosova as an
independent state is a political movement that seeks the approval of many actors (the ones
who declare this reality want the others to recognize it) and this issue has become more or
less clear to the Kosovan leaders after Dayton. Dayton is not surprising, for these things were
clearly said since The Hague and London conferences: borders will not change. At least for
the time being. The disappointment and surprise of those who were waiting to have the
recognition of the Republic of Kosova to sort of happen somehow in some conference is
surprising. But, the reality is so and it is thrown to our faces, but there is the other side of
reality which is being easily eliminated in the comments: Kosova, needs self-determination to
fulfill the interests of its people. Even more, based on this need and its juridical development
so far and the general development of legal notions in the world, it has the right to
self-determination.

And, finally, in the recomposing Balkans, the right to self- determination is in the interest of
the new architecture of security nd cooperation in the Balkans. There is not much need for
more actors to give this interpretation of the Kosovan reality; and if one says that Kosova is
this or that, no one has the right to deprive Kosova from feeling the right to decide about its

The weekly Koha (The Times) was published in Prishtina (Kosovo) between 1994 and 1997. Edited by Veton
Surroi, a young Kosovar journalist and one of the pioneers of democratisation in former Yugoslavia, Koha
soon became a symbol of quality among the region's media. In 1997 it started to be published daily under the
name of Koha Ditorë. W ith the kind permission of Mr. Surroi, Koha digests were originally posted on
http://koha.estudiosbalcanicos.org.
-1-
own fate and to express this feeling. And, any international policy which wouldn't take into
account this element would play the game of the ostrich, sinking the head in sand. In a near
future we will be surprised: there are more people on the side of this idea outside Kosova that
we imagine, especially in these moments of collective depression.

KOSOVA

NATIONAL TEAM OR LEAGUE?

by YLBER HYSA / Prishtina

The initiative for the celebration of a Consultation of


outstanding individuals and subjects in the Albanian politics,
whose intention was to gather leaders of the political life and
academicians, seems to have slowed down its pace after the first
meeting. Seemingly, the non-participation of president Rugova was
the reason of the non-celebration of the meeting as projected. To
make the situation even more complicated, the press, the rumors
and tattling made the continuation of the Consultation uncertain.
Rugova couldn't (or didn't according to another version)
participate in the meeting because he was busy (he met with Ivor
Roberts, the Aspen Group and Chris Hill), although there were
also unofficial explanations coming even from the LDK that he had
been ill. (A foreign diplomat says that Rugova told him that he
as President of the Republic is not obliged to participate in
these Consultations). Anyhow, it became clear, or maybe it was
imposed by his absence, that Rugova was the central figure of
such Consultation. Building this impression was aided by the fact
that some individuals were willing to mystify everything, thus
making normal communication between Albanian personalities
impossible, in times when it is needed most. "I believe there is
more prejudice than disagreements" - says our collocutor from the
LDK, who wishes to remain anonymous, maybe also because he wishes
not to incite new prejudice. Many other actors of this
Consultation join this logic of silence, always fearing that they
would start unnecessary polemics in the media, in times when
there are attempt to celebrate the second round of Consultations.
This time, the question is how many and how will the meeting be
celebrated (if celebrated), and of course, whether president
Rugova will participate. Again, according to a LDK source, who
also remains anonymous, the issue of his participation will be
solved by his decision (although it is said that he doesn't have
a negative posture toward his participation), but there will be
LDK participation, by all means. There are even rumors that a
previous agreement was reached about a draft Declaration, which
besides the introduction, describes the difficult situation of
the Albanians and their aspirations, insisting on the
reconfirmation of the plebiscitary will expressed in the

-2-
Referendum stressing the necessity of starting serious Albanian-
Serb negotiations, between the legitimate and equal
representatives of both sides, with the assistance of an
international mediator, but not mentioning the temporary civilian
administration (as a guarantee for the peaceful and just
solution), and expressing the need for institutional coordination
between Kosovan and Albanian subjects in general. According to
our sources, this project-proposal was approved to a significant
extent by the LDK and this may mean that an obstacle to the
celebration of the meeting has been eliminated. On the other
hand, it is not certain whether his (non) participation will
bring up a misunderstanding, but the statements made by another
undisputable person, Demaçi, in the meeting with the Swedish
diplomats, "that no one wishes to replace Rugova" seems to be an
explanation meant for the public that the Consultation should not
be understood as a putsch venue. On the other hand, one of the
organizers of the Consultation, PPK's chairman Bajram Kosumi, in
the last issue of "Zëri i Kosovës", published by the People's
Movement of Kosova (whose last issue speaks widely of Rugova's
underestimation of the meeting" and the fact "that the invitees
didn't show up") declares that the beginning of the Consultation
is a very important act in Albanian politics, because we are
looking into the situation without wasting time or looking back
and because there is willingness of the Albanian intellectual
potential towards the realization of Kosova. He finalizes by
saying that "the seriousness of the political moment incites the
need of unity of the political subject and the need to enliven
the Albanian politics...". This should in a way eliminate some of
the "obstacles" to convene the meeting, even though it is very
hard to imagine an institutionalized political movement, as the
Presidency of the Republic of Kosova pretends to be, could be
replaced by a Consultation. If it is so, then either the
Consultation is not one, or the Presidency is not one either.

Anyhow, such hypothetical polarization is seemingly being evaded


by the participants themselves. Especially if it is stressed that
two vice-chairmen of the LDK will participate in the reunion.
Nevertheless, it seems that two questions remain open, and it
seems early to give replies to. First, this is facing the idea
that we must wait to see how things evolve (see what happens
after Christopher's visit) - which always takes us back to the
initial stadium - "are we maybe rushing" and the completely
different dilemma "maybe we are late". It seems that the two
corners comprising these dilemmas are in fact the fundament of
those who participate in the Consultation and to many inside the
Albanian political subject. These are the starting point for
participation in such initiatives, which can be illustrated with
sample thoughts: "should we be moving on" or "should we be
waiting" (because "we can do something in our organization" and
"anyway this doesn't depend much on us"). Anyhow, as one of the

-3-
actors of this drama said - "I don't believe that all of these
dilemmas and prejudices could take us that far that we will stop
talking to each-other"! This leads to the conclusion that
dilemmas - "in favor" of organized action, or "against" result in
the misinterpretations helped with a series of rumors that
observe this initiative as a "national championship" (match
between the teams) or "national team" (playing against other
national teams). The "institutionalization" of this Consultation,
or keeping alive one team and idea - which as Kosumi said -
allows "the Albanian subject to be maximally prepared to face the
political movement", should be observed from this aspect. How
much can this idea stand, we will see soon, maybe even this week
when the next meeting could take place. Until then, we could
witness an attempt to "institutionalize the national team" or
"the national league" (which also implies it's "captain"). Maybe
the most pessimistic option would be the non-existence of the
game, therefore, of the teams too. For the time being, the wish
expressed by the participants, at least in public, is in favor of
the first variant ("the national team"). Let's wait and see...

KOSOVA

UNCLE LEADS US TO EUROPE

by ASTRIT SALIHU / Prishtina

Besa, a small girl from my neighborhood, brought me some poems


one day, and asked me to read them. There was no way to avoid
reading a poem she wrote about the doll her daddy gifted her on
her birthday. The poem was so subtle, so childish. And I liked
this one. But, Besa was surprised, for she had dedicated another
of her poems to Kosova. This was the one "that all her class-
mates liked". There was nothing childish in this poem, it was a
poem illustrated with big words: "enemy", "courage" or "freedom".
On the other hand, comparing the poem about the Doll and the one
about Kosova shows something else too. Where Besa writes about
the doll, it's Besa, but where she writes about Kosova, she is
only a good pupil who has read many children's poems which were
served to her in different publications for children, burdened
with big words.

Besa's case is illustrative if we wish to analyze deeply and


think about this characteristic among us. Many questions could
arise from this case: why do our children write these kind of
poems? Why are verses full of violence created for our children?
Why do our children still sing to our "leaders"? Why do our
children write about Democracy, Republic, Enemy, Death, Heroism?

-4-
These are only some questions whose answers penetrate deeply in
the value axis of our system, which reveals a determined mental
structure, inherited from previous systems. The works for
children seldom reveal new approaches, and when they appear, they
are marginalized. "Rilindja për Fëmijë" (Rilindja for Children)
or "Pionieri" as well as many other works published as special
publications which are offered as winter lecture and maybe
somewhere as summer lecture, are full of old socialist-realist
verses with cosmetic changes in the contents. Thus, e.g., in many
poems we can see how "Socialism" is substituted with "Democracy",
"Xhaxhi Enver" (Uncle Enver) with "Xhaxhi Ibrahim", "Labor Front"
with "Patience", "Worker" with "Martyr of Democracy", etc. Any
replacement of these expressions with one-another gives the same
socialist-realist poetry as a result. The difference is that one
is dedicated to Xhaxhi Enver and the other to Xhaxhi Ibrahim. The
essence is that both are dedicated to the Leader, with a capital
L. This reminds us of the totalitarian slogans which were often
addressed to the children or by the children to the Leader, as,
e.g., one of them says, "The great Leader loves small children".

DEMOCRACY

Good time has come


A bright day covers us
Democracy has spread
it's roots all over us.

The replacement of one expression in this verse could give a


"nice" totalitarian and propagandistic poem we were used to read
in times of Socialism:

SOCIALISM

Good time has come


A bright day covers us
Socialism has spread
it's roots all over us.

The structure of this verse is the same, identical, if it weren't


for the fact that we are referring to two systems. But, the
approach is the same, not to say that experiencing democracy and
socialism is the same. This model resembles the samples of the
administrative forms which contain blank spaces for different
words.

The same goes for the poem dedicated to the Leader:

OUR LEADER

From the first grade

-5-
you teach us patience
You will be immortal
Uncle Ibrahim

How does this poem sound if dedicated to another leader, such as


Enver Hoxha, it is easily illustrated:

OUR LEADER

From the first grade


you teach us to be clever
You will be immortal
Uncle Enver

The comparisons to do not speak of Ibrahim Rugova and Enver


Hoxha, but speak of a similar mental structure inherited and
which continues to be reproduced among us. Rugova has not
manifested such totalitarian tendencies so far, but this makes us
express our doubts about Rugova's awareness about the soc-realist
atmosphere that is surrounding him ever more. His counsellors and
the system's institutions that he presides, should be conscious
of this, by all means.

This is only one aspect in which we could analyze literature for


children. On the other hand, is we analyze the contents of the
poems, stories and the proverbs served to them, we will soon
enter the gender of horror. The verses of our children are full
of blood, death, corpses, black crows, bayonets, rifles, tears,
poverty, cold, starvation, etc. We can't explain all of this only
with the factive reality in Kosova. This approach is being
imposed.

Even the verses of our writers for children are such that they
serve them as models for them to write in the same way. But, the
good luck is that children have always original and ironic
replies.

While Mic Sokoli is very often presented as a historical figure


in "Rilindja for Children" and "Pionieri", the joke the children
made, contains some amortizing humor to this burdened psycho-
pathologic situation. Now the young will ask:

"Why was Mic Sokoli standing in front of the canon?"

"Because he didn't know what it was", is the reply. Maybe this is


the sanest reply of the young Albanians to all that brutality
that is imposed on them in Kosova, or as an erudite Kosovan
writer for children would say, in the "Albanian-Illyrian-
Dardanian" lands. Some stories for children contain formulations
such as: "When the general fatherland-statal-human interest is

-6-
overlapping with personal interest (!)...." What is this
formulation? What child is aware of what statal interest is? When
have the statal and human interest met? This is not something our
political activists know. Not even our national interest has a
clear definition, and we want our children to know it, or to have
them define it in their verses!

The child that dedicates its writing to democracy or the


Republic, heroism or martyrs, is an insincere child, he/she is
not a child, because it can't operate with such political
concepts. The verses written by children, which express all this
quantity of morbidity, are only imitations created by our
writers.

The publications for children are full of facts that can orient
towards a fruitful psycho-social analysis. These writings and
publications are accompanied by poor illustrations of non-
ecologic factories and primitive socialist technology in times of
software and the elevated ecological conscience.

This only speaks of the fact that our children are still served a
determined pattern of thinking and expression. A totalitarian and
authoritarian pattern, which restricts the rich imagination of
children, the imagination that is nourishedfrom chocolate houses
in nice fairy tales.

BRUSSELS

THE GAME ON KOSOVA'S BACK

by VISAR REKA / Geneva

The recent developments in Brussels - when a conference discussed


the recognition of FRY - Serbia and Montenegro- by the EU,
reminded us of the days of high tensions in the relations between
Europe and the USA about the Western policy towards Bosnia.
According to the first reactions of the involved governments, but
also of the commentators, it seems as if the same play is being
performed by the same actors. The Americans will not recognize
FRY "until a satisfactory solution for Kosova is found", while a
part of Europeans believes that Serbia should be recognized
because of its assistance to peace in Dayton! This controversial
situation certainly needs a deep geo-political expertise, but
some of the known facts give sufficient grounds to more or less
foresee what directions will the events in Kosova and around
Kosova be developed in the next couple of months. This because,
despite the differences in the rows of the western allies, they
agree in one: the Kosova question should be solved, the sooner

-7-
the better.

The process of finding peace in Bosnia and Croatia, was


characterized with large over-seas frictions in regard to joint
postures towards the crisis in the former Yugoslavia. These
frictions, which at one stage brought the relations between USA
and Britain to the lowest level since the Suez crisis, are again
emerging.

The euphoria of the western allies after the treaty was signed
and the beginning of its implementation by NATO, is getting ever
paler. And, instead of statements about "the great success" and
the "renewed unity" among the westerners, there are again
contradictory opinions about the next steps to be undertaken in
the Balkans, first of all in Bosnia but also in rump-Yugoslavia,
in which the Kosova question is (at least publicly) very
disputable. In regard to Bosnia, the western allies have started
quarrelling about IFOR's mandate in the field and about the
American plans to train the governmental army of Bosnia for self-
defence. The Europeans are not happy with the American idea to
"create a military balance between the parties in conflict", nor
with Washington's posture to withdraw its' soldiers after one
year in Bosnia. The British and the French have started warning
that they will stay in Bosnia even after the American's withdraw.
How do they think they will manage without the Americans - they
are the only ones to know, but he experts say that this is only a
bluff so the Americans are kept longer in Bosnia.

As in the case of Bosnia, it is evident that the Europeans wish


to take a milder posture towards Serbia, compared to the
Americans who wish the contrary.

If we go back, during the past four years, the differences


between Bosnia were mostly connected to the lifting of the
embargo of arms against the Bosnian government and the air-
strikes against Bosnian Serbs and as a consequence, the Europeans
barely saved their respect, for the Serbs ere finally bonded, the
peace was signed and the Americans are (re)organizing the Bosnian
army.

The international public asked and keeps asking why wasn't this
action undertaken earlier, but so many victims had to fall so the
hard option against Serbs would win. The UN was sacrificed in
Bosnia, because it was evident that the application of a more
aggressive policy against Serbs was being stopped by the European
governments, mainly France and Great Britain, but also in a way
but differently, Germany, which is very important for Kosova too,
because of the Albanian "myth" on the "historical friendship"
or the "traditional" one between the Albanian and the German
peoples.

-8-
Anyhow, the recognition of the FRY and conditioning the
recognition with Kosova, is only the peak of the ice-berg in the
divergences about Kosova. These is a huge gap between the allies
for the final solution of Kosova's problem.

The old/new crack among the western allies, first of all, is in


the relations between the USA and Europe.

When we talk about Europeans, if we rely on Bosnia's experience,


we will see that the British and the French were during the whole
process against the "any military intervention in a civil war"
and in this way, they were actually trying to acknowledge a
status quo created by force. The Germans on the other hand, by
siding with Croatia, diplomatically and through the economic
power managed to take the advantage of the Bosnian misery and the
US sympathy to convert Croatia into a winner. This was achieved
politically, when the Federation/Confederation was signed and
militarily by arming the Croat army and bombing Bosnian Serbs,
always exerting economic and political pressure against Serbia -
because of its role in the aggression against Bosnia.

The Bosnians say now that they will never forget the arms'
blockade imposed them as well as the obstacles that the German
Intelligence Agency puts before them in their attempts to
purchase weapons in the former East Germany. At the same time,
this service has actively worked on arming the Croats and giving
logistic assistance to the Croat Army. But, Bosnians' anger
reaches the culmination because of "badly kept secret" that the
German diplomacy in Dayton, promised the Serbs that the Muslim
part of Bosnia will soon "be placed" under Croat patronage. In
the meantime, the same rumors claim that in relation to Kosova,
the Germans were very active to convince the Americans that it
should not be part of the Dayton package. The controversial role
of Hans Koschnik, the administrator of Mostar - and his idea to
divide Mostar in two towns, is the freshest example of the German
policy in the former Yugoslavia.

Germany's role in the former Yugoslav issues is very important,


and in some cases was even proven decisive. Its real influence of
former Yugoslav states, including Serbia is big, before all
because of the German economic strength. Germany is an
irreplaceable economic partner for all republics and any economic
revival can't be imagined without the active German
participation, which could mean that Serbia would have to
activate it's relations with Germany if it wishes to come out
from the social misery it is living in. The Americans are also
aware of this fact, and this is why when there is talk about the
normalization of life in the former Yugoslav space, it is evident
that the most valuable vote belongs to Germany. having all this
in mind, it would be logical to conclude that Germany could exert

-9-
pressure on Serbia to solve Kosova's problem. However, the
experience so far proves that reality is different from rhetoric.
Instead of the pressure, the German government favors Belgrade
and Shkup respectively.

Apart from the Dayton story, in other two occasions was Germany
an obstacle to the American initiatives. Firstly in 1994, when
the German diplomacy insisted on not including Kosova as one of
the conditions for the lifting of the sanctions and secondly,
last week when the German minister Kinkel categorically refused
the American request to have Kosova as one of the conditions for
the recognition of FRY. Kinkel has reportedly told Christopher
that the only condition will be the recognition of Macedonia by
Belgrade.

The diplomats and experts following the developments in the


former Yugoslavia evaluate that Germany has realized fully its
strategic goals in the north-western part of this ex-country, and
that it now very much interested in starting doing business, and
in this aspect, the Albanians' secessionism in Kosova is a
potential danger for the destabilization of the whole region and
therefore such ambitions of the Albanians should be "killed"
immediately. Another issue should not be forgotten: the issue of
Kosova asylum seekers in Germany - they can't come back without
Belgrade's cooperation. The negotiations with Belgrade are going
on since some time, and the requests of the Serbian side can only
be imagined - they are probably not in favor of Albanians and are
a strong card in Milosevic's hand.

In these circumstances, in the coming months, according to a


western diplomat, proposals that would favor the Albanian
expectations should not be expected. differing from Bosnia where
the end to the war was the motive for a more determined action ,
the interest about Kosova is totally restricted "to human
rights", which according to this diplomat "is a process that goes
parallel to the development of democracy".

BRUSSELS

THE CHRONICLE OF AN ANNOUNCED RECOGNITION

by BATON HAXHIU / Prishtina

Brussels displayed the dilemma about the recognition of new


Yugoslavia. The recognition of this new state was "pending" in
the last ministerial meeting and drew the differences of the EU
member states about this problem. Brussels EU Conference
discussed whether this was the successor to the former state or

- 10 -
was it a newly created country - because of the importance of the
rights that derive from succession. If the previous state was
disintegrated (and this was Badinter Commission's posture) then
all the states created in the territories of the Former
Yugoslavia must undergo the procedure to be recognized. Since
France and England are requesting the recognition of the
continuity of Yugoslavia, then what will happen with the
principles of Badinter's and the Dayton documents? And, if the
political arbitrage and international relations rules are still
valid?

It is precisely that these violations of international rules (the


problem of the recognition of states was codified in 1885), rises
the dilemmas whether the third factor has not harmonized the
proclaimed principles with the concrete interests. And, is it
evident that each time the interest of a subject of the
international community is endangered, it hardly waits to change
even the principles. Or is this matter of lack of power, which
as became evident in the case of Bosnia and Croatia is taken into
account by the third factor?

These are questions arising in political couloirs in Kosova


because of the French-British insisting on recognizing the
sovereignty of FRY and consequently it's sovereignty on Kosova.
In regard to this, Zejnullah Gruda, professor of International
Law, declared to KOHA that "the British-French posture pretends
to make the recognition of FRY possible without subjugating it to
the juridical criteria, but only based on the political
opportunity of only some countries, which is no surprise for
those who know the policy applied by these states in the
Balkans".

The French minister De Charette and the French Charg‚ in


Belgrade, Keller, spoke of the recognition of the new state,
immediately after Brussels Conference ended. Their declaration is
identical: "In regard to the recognition of the new state of
Yugoslavia, France will individually recognize it. The debate
about the recognition doesn't pertain France, because we never
interrupted the diplomatic relations with Yugoslavia, we only
reduced them. Our jurisprudence, says De Charette, states that if
we have diplomatic relations, then we should only elevate them to
the level of ambassadors".

What is the comment to this? The President of the Constitutional


Court of France, Badinter, has declared that "the state of
Yugoslavia is dismantled and that all states coming out from the
former Yugoslavia must undergo the procedure to be recognized".
It is true that the recognition of new states is always done
individually by other states, which can also be done by France.
But, if it is said that diplomatic relations should only be

- 11 -
continued, then this would mean to accept the continuity of this
state. Therefore, France is the first one to violate the game
rules by denying Badinter's document and the Dayton Agreement,
which France has signed. France's posture was also supported by
England and Italy, i.e., both ministers of exterior, Malcolm
Riefkind and Susana Agnelli. Riefkind thinks that "Kosova's
problem should not be linked to the outer wall sanctions, because
we have signed a peace document on the Former Yugoslavia and
Kosova's problem should be solved within Yugoslavia's
sovereignty". Agnelli was even more cynical to say that "Some
think that Kosova is more important than the recognition of
Yugoslavia".

This is a clear view of the new political bloc in Europe and the
divergences about the recognition of the new state.

President Rugova almost forgot the importance of the recognition


of Yugoslavia and declared to KOHA: "I wish not to comment
different statements, but it is important that we have good
diplomatic relations with these states and in the future they
will open their embassies here". This is what Rugova says,
knowing that these states recognize the sovereignty of Serbia
over Kosova. On the other hand, Fehmi Agani declared that "...it
should be clearly said that the initiative of France and England
as well as the violation of Badinter's and Dayton documents,
doesn't oblige us to respect the decisions linked to them".
Professor Gruda comments on the EU initiative. "The posture of
the EU is completely normal having in mind that one of the most
important purposes of the EU is to rigorously defend and advance
human and minority rights. The respect of these rights is almost
the most important criteria for the recognition of new states in
European structures, and this derives from the European
Convention of Human Rights and Badinter Commission's document.
Some are trying to avoid these criterions, and this can only be
explained by political and not juridical criteria. I believe that
a just decision would be only the one made after the consultative
opinion of the International Tribunal of Justice is obtained on
whether the new state fulfills the conditions to be acknowledged
by the European Union. For example, the reinstallment of
ambassadors would be interpreted as something that belongs to the
political and not juridical opportunity".

Therefore, the Conference didn't link the issue of the


recognition of the new state with outer wall sanctions, according
to which Serbia and Montenegro are obliged to cooperate with The
Hague Tribunal and also where Serbia is obliged to solve Kosova's
problem. This is why Warren Christopher will be visiting
Belgrade. According to well informed circles, Christopher will
not give up on Dayton's document and will clearly tell Milosevic
that Kosova's problem is linked to the outer-wall sanctions.

- 12 -
These sources say that the American Secretary of State will
"oblige" Milosevic to start the dialogue with the Albanian party
as soon as possible.

INTERVIEW

RICHARD MOORE, Member of the European Parliament

DAYTON IS JUST A CEASE-FIRE

Interviewed by AFRIM GJONBALAJ / Brussels

KOHA: Killing in Bosnia stopped, or at least this is the


impression. There are many opinions about the actual situation in
the Former Yugoslavia. What is yours?

MOORE: I share my personal opinion with the other 53 Liberals in


the European Parliament. Unfortunately, the majority of the MPs,
belonging to the Socialists and the People's parties have a
totally different posture about the real situation in Yugoslavia.
It is good that killings stopped. I fear that the Dayton
agreement is more a pause than peace. Dayton has in fact
legitimized ethnic cleansing, which is catastrophic. This
agreement has it's deficiencies too. In fact, nothing has been
solved in Dayton. This is only a truce.

KOHA: Do you believe that this agreement is only a step towards


the division of B&H in two or three parts?

MOORE: Yes. Bosnia has been split in two. Either the Serbs leave
Pale, either B&H will totally be separated in the future, at the
administrative, cultural and political levels. Before war this
country was a multi-ethnic state, but the committed crimes will
need too much time to heal. I am sorry that the international
media made no mention or vaguely mentioned the Croat aggressor,
and this is why the conflicts in Mostar still continue. The
Bosnians had no other way out but accept this "cease-fire", i.e.
the Dayton agreement. In fact, all previous agreements were in
favor of the Bosnians and the existence of their state. The
Carrington Plan offered more to them than Dayton. They rejected
it - the circumstances and demands then were different.

KOHA: After having isolated Milosevic for 4 years, now Europe is


sitting with him at the negotiating table. Do you believe this
happened just too soon, before the war criminals were processed?

MOORE: Milosevic is a very elastic person in politics. When I say


this, I mean that he changes his opinion too often. Because of

- 13 -
his politics, Serbia finds itself in a catastrophic situation. It
shouldn't be forgotten that thousands of Serbs were killed and it
is surprising how after all, he comes out a winner. I am really
surprised why has the Serbian people supported him. I just
visited Belgrade, and there I was told by all that Milosevic
makes all the decisions. When it comes to negotiations, I would
have conditioned them with the persecution of war criminals. But,
I would like to add one more practical thing: European states
have supported the Croatian state despite the crimes they have
committed. I am not against Croatia, but I am against all
criminals, whoever and wherever they are.

KOHA: Is Kosova's peaceful resistance the reason why Kosova was


not invited to Dayton?

MOORE: It is not Rugova's fault why Kosova was not in Dayton. It


is Milosevic's fault to not have spoken to Albanians before
Dayton. I personally think that Rugova was aiming at evading
bloodshed. It is hard to know whose fault it is.

KOHA: What do you think about the Americans' presence in the


former Yugoslavia and the fat that they will remain there only
one year?

MOORE: It is true that their stay will be brief and that it is


linked to the elections in the USA. However, it shouldn't be
forgotten that their presence is indispensable and that they were
in Macedonia before that. This presence has prevented the evil,
Serbia's invasion, which was ready to do it. But, they will
really be present only in some areas in Bosnia. I believe that
their presence would be welcome in Kosova and Krajina. We the
Liberals believe that their presence is welcome and we support
it.

KOHA: If Yugoslavia is recognized, do you think that Kosova will


be forgotten?

MOORE: No, for sure not. Kosova is in a very difficult situation.


It shouldn't be forgotten that it is very expensive for Serbia to
act thus towards Kosova. I believe the Americans will do more in
this direction. It is a very small detail, the one to open the
USIS office in Prishtina, but they are the only ones who can
prevent the conflict which could explode in the future. In regard
to an open conflict in Kosova, I am sorry to be so pessimistic. I
am revolted about the attitude the Europeans have in regard to
the eventual recognition of Yugoslavia. This recognition will
take Europe back to the beginning. If the recognition takes
place, then we will for sure see the weakness of the Europeans in
this direction.

- 14 -
KOHA: Do you believe that the Balkans problem is in the same
phase as before the conflicts?

MOORE: No, I don't believe so. The minorities in the Balkans have
more rights today than they used to have. I am a bit worried
about Macedonia, for Greece is the only EU member that hasn't
recognized it. But, the essential thing is that if there is a
conflict in Europe, it will start in Kosova, and in this case,
Albania would intervene, together with Montenegro and Macedonia.
This would be catastrophic for us Europeans. And, I repeat again,
that the situation in Kosova today has a priority - the
misfortune is that it depends on the media.

KOHA: Do you believe that Albanians will be betrayed in this


rump-Yugoslavia?

MOORE: Yes. Dayton doesn't take Kosova into account. The problem
is not solved; this will provoke, and this is my personal
opinion, war or difficulties in the future.

KOHA: In your visit to Prishtina, you met with Rugova. What do


you think about his politics, don't you think he is too "soft" at
times?

MOORE: I believe that he played an important role trying to


defend the human and the legitimate rights of Albanians in
Kosova. It was a brief meeting in which I was informed about his
political vision. I think that if Milosevic doesn't reply to
Kosova's demands, Rugova's peaceful policy will be invalid in the
new circumstances Kosova is living.

I saw very difficult circumstances in Kosova. I would like to


stress that the Albanian people could react any time and they
have not much to lose. This political situation needs special
attention, especially of the European politicians who are not
undertaking anything to solve this problem.

KOHA: You message at the end?

MOORE: I will be brief: if Milosevic "changes", he'll do this for


tactical reasons only. In reality, he will remain the same.

- 15 -
MACEDONIA

ROBESPIERRE IN THE BALKANS

by SELADIN XHEZAIRI / Shkup

Several days ago, a person named Hashim Toplica died in Tetova.


His name is mentioned in the so called White Book dedicated the
relations of Yugoslavia with the neighboring countries: after the
end if World War II, he fled to Albania, where, with some
"interruptions" he spent 37 years in Enver Hoxha's prison,
accused of being a "Yugoslav agent". He used to say that he was
the second in the list of persons that had done the longest time
in Albania's prisons. But, what made us referr to the old man
that knew a lot, but whose story was not registered because of
the unawareness of the journalists, is the following: Hashim
Toplica came back immediately after Communism fell apart. Holding
an alien's passport issued in Albania. In Tetova, he applied for
a Macedonian passport. But, the reply was more than
disappointing: since in Tito's time he was deprived of Yugoslav
citizenship, he couldn't get it back now. He was given an alien's
passport issued in Macedonia. The explanation was: because of the
files...

And, the opening of these files finally came on the agenda of the
Parliament of Macedonia. The MPs insisted and finally managed to
have this extremely sensitive issue regulated by law. The
Macedonian government (maybe it is the last one belonging to the
former Eastern world to open the files!) claims that there are 14
thousand files, while MP Rufi Osmani declares to KOHA that this
number is much bigger, without excluding the possibility that a
part of the dossiers could have been lost. He also expresses the
conviction that 90% of the dossiers are related to Albanians".

The regulation of this burden from the past, undoubtedly, would


signify a kind of national (or inter-ethnic) reconciliation in
Macedonia, but the Association of the Albanian Former Political
Prisoners warns that the "dossiers are still living in the heads
of the people and the corresponding Macedonian services", among
others because the registration of this association is refused,
and because the former political prisoners are denied the right
to get a job because of the existing dossiers...

Human rights in Macedonia were at the center of the attention


last week, when Elizabeth Rehn visited Macedonia. At the end of a
two-days visit she ascertained that the key problem minorities
are facing is related to education in their mother tongue, but
also to the actions of the Macedonian police which are not
according to the European standards. In regard to the first
problem, Rehn compared it to the status of the Swedish minority

- 16 -
in Sweden: "I finished elementary and superior studies in my own
language, and in areas populated with mixed population, Swedish
is in equal use with Finnish - said the Swede, former defense
minister of Finland.

However, in the meeting with her, Gligorov seemed not to share


her opinion: referring to the position of the nationalities in
Macedonia, he proposed the elaboration of a study on "Balkan
minorities", a proposal commented by Albanian politicians as
"drawing the attention elsewhere", as Robespierre used to do...
The former "Special Envoy" of president Gligorov, Dr. Vasil
Tupurkovski, while commenting the Macedonian-Albanian relations
in FOKUS weekly reiterated again, that a historical agreement
between the two was necessary, and it would be based on the
following: "First - depoliticize the relations between the
nationalities, in the sense of disengaging the elite political
circles, which in a way manipulate with national communities
under the excuse of "protecting their interests". The second
element, according to Tupurkovski, is that of developing the
civic dimension in the country and its realization through inter-
ethnic relations, through the mobilization of the citizens,
taking them to the position of holders of rights and obligations
and the power in the political system, so they can see what their
real interests are and thus overcome their problems, living in
this state as its citizen: "The ones that can't see the
historical aspects of the Macedonian-Albanian relations, and if
you like, of all national relations in the state, and insist on
the dominating position of any nation in our very complicated
national architecture, they are in a position which is
objectively judged to fail historically. Hoverer, this failure
will not have a low price, it will have to be paid with huge
national and statal debts" - ends Tupurkovski, explaining that he
doesn't reduce the historical Albanian - Macedonian agreement to
the level of the solving communal problems.

ROUND TABLE

OUR ARGUMENTS (III)

Conducted by BATON HAXHIU / Prishtina

RAMADAN VRANIQI: It is important to stress, if negotiations with


Serbs start, that Badinter's Commission concluded that Yugoslavia
doesn't exist. This would help us, because we used to be an equal
unit of the federation, we had the decision-making power. Since
Yugoslavia used to be the warrant of the '74 Constitution, the
borders of Kosova and some other issues, then we can't be the
constituents of a new Yugoslavia. Secondly, the destruction of

- 17 -
the former Yugoslavia doesn't mean that the new Yugoslavia
should be recognized the continuity. It should be recognized as a
new state. And in that case, we should be asked whether we want
to be part of it or not.

BAJRAM POLLOZHANI: In regard to the juridical principle


Restitutio in Integrum, I believe it should be fully applied in
the case of Kosova. It can be presented in the period when Kosova
declared itself in favor of the association in the Federal
Yugoslavia that disintegrated. But, we should have in mind that
this term is being used erroneously in regard to the '74
autonomy. This is unacceptable and impossible in the juridical
aspect. Because if Yugoslavia disintegrated, then this means to
go back to the positions of the constitution of that federation.

ZEJNULLAH GRUDA: The question is whether the people of Kosova has


the right to declare itself about its future, and I believe it
has, therefore Kosova has the right to stay where it was, to
secede or to become fully independent.

BEHLUL BEQAJ: I agree that the conditions have changed and they
are quite unfavorable for the Albanians, but the change of the
circumstances does not change the right to declare the political
will of Albanians. I believe that the right to self-determination
has not been consumed.

ZEJNULLAH GRUDA: The will is eternal.

FATMIR FEHMIU: Since this will is not consumed, then the will of
this people is going back to the situation when it decided to
become part of the association. Yugoslavia disintegrated and it
is normal for Kosova to declare itself once again.

RAMADAN VRANIQI: Why should the situation go back? The people


have the right to decide whom will they live with. This is self-
determination. This right belongs to all people.

ZEJNULLAH GRUDA: Nevertheless we must stress that this is a


category that doesn't prescribe - it can't be taken away unless
it's flagrantly violated.

BAJRAM POLLOZHANI: In regard to the issue about the need of


having a third party in the negotiations with the Serbs. The
third party is not necessary to give us advise, but to rather to
give guarantees to Kosova and to sanction any eventual agreement
to be reached between Albanians and Serbs. With out a well
determined schedule, there would be no political and juridical
logic for the solution of the problem. The coexistence and
experience so far proves that Albanians should not start any
conversations without the third factor that would sanction the

- 18 -
juridical effect.

RAMADAN VRANIQI: Albanians need the third party, because


experience teaches us that Serbs are not trustworthy. I would
rather say that people that represent Serbia shouldn't be
trusted, and that this regime is just continuing the policy of
the old Serbian regimes. There are still some sane forces among
the Serbian people, and we need the third factor. It is hard to
convince the Albanians that they can trust the actual Serbian
regime.

BEHLUL BEQAJ: I will mention three reasons why we need the third
party's presence. In the reasons I will state, I will also
express my opinion about the grounds the FRY was established on.
Firstly, the distrust of Albanians is a result of the century
long discrimination by the Serbian hegemony - created through
myths whose victims were the Albanians. Serbia tries to cover up
this discrimination without any witnesses and judges around.
Objectively, there are no relevant forces in Serbia which would
discuss about Kosova as an issue outside Serbia, therefore there
is no willingness to emend the anti-Albanian policy.

The second reason is formal. Albanians have no trust in the self-


proclaimed Yugoslavia because it was created contrary to the
constitutional definition. It practically functions as a
contractual association of independent and unequal states, which
was evident in Ohio, when instead of being represented by its
President, it was represented by the presidents of both
republics. Albanians can't trust a state which can't trust
itself. It is defined as a democratic state and it functions as a
police state. It is defined as a state of equal citizens and it
functions as a national-chauvinist state.

Thirdly, the dialogue between the two parties without the


presence of the third can't be successful because they are
fearing from what they have done to the others, and thus they
don't trust the opponents. In other words, the couldn't solve the
Serbian question without the presence of a third factor, they
didn't make it a internal problem of Serbia, but on the other
hand, they treat the Albanian question as an internal matter.
Absurd!

ZEJNULLAH GRUDA: Normally, conversations start with the


participation of the authorized representatives, i.e., the
President of the country, the Premier, ambassadors or other
experts. The conversations should be prepared well and the
presence of a third party is more than necessary.

FATMIR FEHMIU: Any disagreement between different subjects should


be solved by peaceful agreement. When we are referring to Kosova,

- 19 -
not only is the presence of the third necessary, but it is a
condictio sine qua non at the same time a warrant for the
realization of the problem. The reason is the following: this
regime has first ruined the autonomy with police-military forces;
further on, it established a colonial - apartheid - rule. This
regime knows only the language of the force... but, there are
many other arguments that explain why the presence of a third
party is necessary.

KURTESH SALIU: If there were will on the side of Serbia to solve


the problem of Kosova, maybe there wouldn't be any need for the
third party. But, in these conditions, it's upmost necessary.
The other argument is that all the problems regarding the former
Yugoslavia are being solved with the presence of a third party.
Kosova's problem, after all, is the most complicated altogether.
I would also add that the new Yugoslavia was created in the same
way the old one disintegrated - on anti-Constitutional grounds.
Therefore, the procedure of the adoption of this constitution in
fact started from the war option, the option of force. The
misfortune in all of this is that the MPs from Kosova didn't
participate in it's adoption, although grounded on the
Constitution in force, should have been invited to declared
themselves whether they want to be part of the new association or
not. This constitution is not compelling.

BAJRAM POLLOZHANI: Who has the right of representation? First of


all, the Government of Kosova, which is the only institutional
organ which has continuity and whose mandate was extended with
the Kaçanik constitution, then the President of Kosova who has
gained this right when elected. But, it would be necessary that
the Parliament of Kosova decides about this. Any other negotiator
from this side would not be "valid".

KURTESH SALIU: There is not much doubt about the representation:


the President, the Government and the Parliamentary bodies.

RAMADAN VRANIQI: I don't consider things to be that simple. We


have come to a situation in which we can't enforce the will of
the people. We can't deny the referendum, therefore I believe
that all other subjects in Kosova should participate in
negotiations - and we should not restrict the list.

BEHLUL BEQAJ: I believe the political platform should be


elaborated by all political subjects - and it must have their
consent. No one else but our legitimate representatives can
represent us - but I fear that the legitimacy will be determined
by the external factors rather than the people.

FATMIR FEHMIU: The disintegration of Yugoslavia created a new


position for Kosova. Based on the Constitution of Kosova and the

- 20 -
elections the legitimacy belongs to the Speaker of the
Parliament, if constituted, the President, the Premier, all based
on the competencies defined in the constitution.

(The End)

- 21 -

Anda mungkin juga menyukai