Kosovo: militant cynicism of the Western democracy
Ilya Kharlamov
Kosovo's Prime Minister Hashim Thaci
and Madeleine Albright
The Western world is literally going hysterical in their attempts to deny the Crimean population its free demonstration of will to return the region to its historic motherland –Russia. However, not too long ago Washington and the European capitals adamantly supported Kosovo's will to separate from Serbia despite the fact that there were significantly fewer reasons for that.
What is the reason for that? Is it caused by the fact that for the West the notions of international law, historic justice and the multi-polar nature of the world are simply an empty sound that only calls for a condescending smile?
The stories of Crimea and Kosovo clearly showed the following: the principle of double standards (the phrase is worn-out, but accurate) is something the West sticks to fully and consistently.
In essence, over the past few decades its main efforts were channeled into one direction: to dominate over the diversity of cultures, points of view, social and political models of society. In the case of an active standoff, they are to be subordinated: the elite – with money, everybody else – with arms. A special type of “geopolitical racism” appeared. Only this paradigm allows us to explain what appears to be an illogical and inconsistent position of the Western countries in some regions with similar problems. Readiness to act upon the instructions of “Big Brother” or its lack thereof becomes the main driver of their further destiny.
The support of the West of Kosovo's separation from Serbia in 2008 should have been demonstrative and instructive for everybody. Nobody paid attention to any resolutions regarding territorial integrity of states, or the UN basic legal norms. It was considered to be purely irrelevant that Serbia viewed Kosovo as their national symbol of national integrity and unity (some battles took place there that determined Serbia's destiny, and some important holy objects are located here). But by completely violating the international norms the West never brought its project to completion, points out Vladimir Bruter, a political analyst.
“The decision made by the Court in the Hague regarding the separation of Kosovo was incomplete in its nature. From the point of view of international law there can be no procedure for the formation of new states because no constitution in the world explains how states split from each other and how they cease to exist. It is simply common sense. By acknowledging Kosovo and promising various bonuses to Serbia in exchange for its acknowledgement, the West is trying to justify the existing situation, but there is no legal solution to-date.”
Actually, the main promise made to Belgrade is a promise to have Serbia join the EU. What that entails, one can see based on the examples of the new entrants to the EU. But that is not the most important thing. The entire conflict in Yugoslavia and the support of Kosovo had one characteristic feature: in most of cases Western judges and politicians accused ethnic Serbs of crimes, including war crimes, and blamed them for everything. Is that related to the historic, spiritual and geopolitical ties between Serbia and Russia, which the West in a manic way keeps viewing as its main threat? The question mark here can be removed. And it's high time to clarify who is a real threat for whom. Over the last few decades it was Washington and the European capitals that initiated the aggression in various places of the world.
Boris Shmelev, the head of the Center for Russia's External Policy, points out that in Kosovo's case the West with the help of the UN violated not only international norms, but also its own decisions, as well as the institution of international law itself, thus creating a dangerous precedent.
“Serbia's constitution clearly defined Kosovo as a part of the consolidated country. It was written that the head of the state was obligated to do everything to preserve the territorial integrity of Serbia. Nobody had the right to agree to Kosovo's separation from Serbia. Resolution 1244 of the UN Security Council signed in June 1999, which summed up the results of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, clearly pointed at the fact that Kosovo was an integral part of Yugoslavia, which consisted of Serbia and Montenegro. But the West went as far as giving up all the documents and supporting the separatists in Kosovo.”
This is truly an amazing integrity. It resulted in the appearance of Europe's map of one of the most criminalized territories with a questionable future. The current situation with the referendum in Crimea showed that from the point of Kosovo's separation from Serbia the so-called developed Europe became even less independent from Washington. It was the Europeans, not the US citizens who live far away from them, that suffer from the dubious projects like the one in Kosovo. But the EU stubbornly continues to play the role of employee and the messenger of its boss across the ocean.
As soon as it came to light that on March 14 the United States prepared a firm resolution for the UN Security Council regarding the situation in Ukraine, the European diplomats literally tried to snatch microphones from each other to express their disapproval of Moscow, which allegedly had claims for an integral part of Ukraine – Crimea. It seemed that as their statements grew louder and more uncompromising, the brighter their political future appeared to them.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Source: Voice of Russia
URL: http://www.a-w-i-p.com/index.php/2014/03/17/kosovo-militant-cynicism-of-the
