| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| International-UN-NGOs | |||
| NATO, U.N. Accused of Failing in Kosovo | |||
| 2004-07-26 | |||
PRISTINA, Serbia-Montenegro - A leading human rights organization blamed NATO and U.N. police Monday for failing "catastrophically" to protect minorities in Kosovo during ethnic violence earlier this year.
Among other charges, the New York-based Human Rights Watch accused NATO-led peacekeepers of locking their gates and standing by as ethnic Albanians burned Serb houses just outside their bases during the mid-March riots that left 19 people dead and 900 injured. "The NATO-led Kosovo Force and U.N. international police failed catastrophically to protect minorities during the widespread rioting," the group said in a 66-page report entitled "'Failure to Protect: Anti-Minority Violence in Kosovo, March 2004." The report also accused the international community in Kosovo of being in "absolute denial about its own failures." "While international actors have been universally and accurately critical of Kosovo Albanian leadership during and after the crisis, the dismal performance of the international community has escaped similar critical scrutiny," the report said.
A NATO spokesman in Kosovo said the report does not do justice to peacekeepers' attempts to normalize the situation. "These reports coming from (an) armchair position do not pay any respect to the efforts of the soldiers," said Col. Horst Pieper of the NATO-led peacekeepers in Kosovo. He said the peacekeepers "quickly stabilized the situation within hours during the riots and prevented ... civil war." "The soldiers ... did their utmost to de-escalate the situation and to save many lives," he said. NATO-led peacekeepers said after the riots that they chose to save people's lives instead of buildings. Over 1,200 of those fleeing the rampage found temporary refuge inside their military bases. Mobs of ethnic Albanians targeted Serbs and other minorities in a two-day rampage in mid-March, triggered by the deaths of two children allegedly chased into a river by Serbs. Beyond the dead and injured, 4,000 people — most of them Serbs — were displaced, and at least 600 homes and Orthodox Christian churches were burned. The March violence was the worst since the end of the 1998-99 war, which led to U.N. protectorate status for Kosovo after a NATO air war stopped Serbia's crackdown on independence-seeking ethnic Albanians. Some 18,000 NATO-led peacekeepers are in the province working alongside some 10,000 U.N. and local police officers. The events raised questions about peacekeepers' ability to prevent or quell violence, and represented a dramatic setback for international officials intent on reconciling the bitterly divided ethnic Albanian and Serb communities. "This was the biggest security test for NATO and the United Nations in Kosovo since 1999, when minorities were forced from their homes as the international community looked on," said Rachel Denber, acting executive director of Human Rights Watch's Europe and Central Asia Division, in a statement. "But they failed the test," she said. "In too many cases, NATO peacekeepers locked the gates to their bases, and watched as Serb homes burned." According to the report, in at least four instances the peacekeepers were confined in their bases, without crowd-control equipment, as crowds of ethnic Albanians walked past them and set houses, churches and monasteries ablaze. In the northern village of Svinjare, French NATO soldiers stayed inside their base as 137 Serb homes were burned and neighboring ethnic Albanian homes left untouched, said the report. In another instance, German soldiers in the southern town of Prizren "failed to deploy to protect the Serb population and its historic Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries," despite calls for assistance from their German compatriots at the U.N. police in the same town, the organization charged. The village of Belo Polje in western Kosovo, adjacent to the main Italian military base, was burned to the ground, the report said.
| |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #16 Actually, I don't think there is any common ground between the American intervention vs all of the other things that have affected Yugoslavia's history. We were disinterested observers looking to right what we thought was a wrong. It appears that we misread the situation, and the Serbs and the Macedonians are now paying the price. Close. The reason for going into Kosovo was almost the same as it was for going into Somalia. Plenty of visual imagery, followed by the resulting pressure to "do something". I suspect even Mr. Dole would have had to take some sort of action. I'm not sure if it was a mis-read as an exercise in overly-extreme caution. Having been burned by mission-creep in Somalia and having to extend troop deployments to Bosnia, the pendulum swung to trying to avoid any involvement on the ground. Hence, deployed helicopters that were grounded, patrols around the border, and campaign that practically consisted of nothing but aerial bombing. The State Department made it a very public point not to do anything that smacked of collaborating with KLA (UCK). Once the Serbs were stopped, that was the end of US involvement. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2004-07-26 11:49:50 PM |
| #15 That's some cold hard reasoning there Aris. Sounds pretty correct to me. |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2004-07-26 7:57:31 PM |
| #14 Good Lord, how can a nation who threw away half its currency reserves on an Amway Scheme cause so much trouble? Ahhh... I being redundant. Aris are you interested in making a little extra dough while buying discounted name brand products? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-07-26 6:17:26 PM |
| #13 I will now give you my person theory on way we have ethnic strife in various parts of the world. Religion has nothing what so ever to do with it. Religion only spices up the debate. 5,000 years ago somebody stole somebody elses goat. Pure and simple and they have been at each others throats since |
| Posted by: cheaderhead 2004-07-26 6:14:24 PM |
| #12 AK: One of the problem with the Balkans is that it's been a game between regional powers that are themselves played (and inconsistently at that) by global superpowers. Actually, I don't think there is any common ground between the American intervention vs all of the other things that have affected Yugoslavia's history. We were disinterested observers looking to right what we thought was a wrong. It appears that we misread the situation, and the Serbs and the Macedonians are now paying the price. Would Bob Dole have intervened in Kosovo? I suspect not - being a WWII veteran, he would have been conscious of Serbia's contribution towards tying German divisions down in Yugoslavia - at great cost to themselves. Not only was Serbia an ally during WWII, it kept clear of the Soviet orbit throughout the Cold War - ensuring that this flank of the Balkans was at least secure. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-26 5:25:37 PM |
| #11 The right of the Yugoslav republics to secede was enshrined in the Yugoslav constitution. If the Germans gave the "green light" to the Croats to secede, then good for them -- they gave them the green light to do what was in their right to do, especially since Serbs were going nationalistic and dominating on the other republics. You remember the ethnic cleansing of the Krajna Serbs. But please do keep in mind that this followed the attempt of the Krajna Serbs to in turn secede from Croatia -- and not just that, but also the attempt of the Bosnian Serbs to ethnically cleanse the whole of Bosnia. Not to mention that in Bosnia more than ethnic cleansing occured -- it was genocide. In those two wars -- in Croatia and in Bosnia -- all sides commited crimes, but the Serbs were in the clear WRONG, because it was clearly in the right that Croatia and Bosnia had the right to leave the federation. In Kosovo, the situation is different. That war began with the attacks of the Albanian terrorists of the UCK, not just seeking to have their own nation (they already had Albania) but rather seeking to create a Greater Albania by means of terrorism, ethnic cleansing and in the end separationism. Kosovo did *not* have the right to secede. In short the way that the Serbs acted in Croatia and Bosnia (trying to build a Greater Serbia through ethnic cleansing, tearing apart other nations), now the Albanians were doing in Serbia. And the Serbs reacted to the Albanians of Kosovo, the way that the Croats reacted to the Serbs in Krajna -- through their own attempt at ethnic cleansing. If they had been let alone, if no bombings had occured, then hundreds of thousands of people would have lost their homes, same as in Krajna... But it wouldn't be genocide. They'd find homes in neighbouring Albania. Albanians already had their own nation. It would be a sad end to the history of Kosovar Albanians, but it would also have been the end of Albanian imperialism -- same way that the expulsion of the Krajna Serbs was an end to Serb expansionism against Croatia. Worse things have happened in human history than Serbs being forced to go to Serbia or Albanians being forced to go to Albania. And when you wrongly begin a war, you often end up losing territory. Both Krajnan Serbs and Kosovar Albanians were in the wrong when they began the war. But the bombings happened -- and Albanian expansionism thrives. It tore apart FYRO Macedonia, since now the Albanian separationists of *that* nation also want to ethnically cleanse a territory and then break it away towards the creation of Greater Albania. One of the problem with the Balkans is that it's been a game between regional powers that are themselves played (and inconsistently at that) by global superpowers. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-07-26 4:30:50 PM |
| #10 As long as American interests are set back, they are for it. Wag The Dog! |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2004-07-26 4:23:41 PM |
| #9 Were we wrong to side with the Serbs? Not exactly, but we should have neutered the Kosavars before we let them back in power. The Serbs were in fact killing the Kosovars and trying to make room for Serbian refugees (from Croatia) in Kosovo. The Serbs thought nothing of displacing whole villages and repopulating them with refugees. The Kosovars were 3rd class citizens in the eyes of the Serbs so if a refugee family needed a farm, they just told the Kosovars that they might farm better over there. Now the Kosovars put up with this for a long time until they started to rise up and started an Armed resistance to the policies of Belgrade. Which is to say they would go to a village or farm that used to be Kosovar and kill a few (or all) the people and terrorize those left over. Since Belgrade had forces tied down in Bosnia they could only send a token force down to Kosovo to protect ethnic Serbs. Of course the Serb patrols would summarily execute anyone they suspected of being in or supporting the Kosovar Liberation Army (KLA). Being a male and over age 12 was good enough to make you a suspect. When the Serb Army left Bosnia (under NATO Supervision) the Serbs just redeployed them to Kosovo to crush the KLA once and for all. It was at this point that the Arabs started to raise a stink about the treatment of their peaceful brethren in Kosovo. Also there were a LARGE amount of Arab fighters in Bosnia and Kosovo and they were also being killed by the Serbs. Well we bombed the Serbs, they left Kosovo, and the KLA was back to practice the Islamic version of ethnic cleansing. This is opposed to the Serbian variety of ethnic Cleansing or the Croatian model. The KLA was financed by most of your Islamofacists organizations and the local Albanian mob/drug dealers. We disarmed the Serbs in Kosovo and left the KLA structure in place. I think Clinton/Albright were figuring that the KLA would evolve into some sort of liberal government and police force. Mark my words, that is one dog that is going to come back to bite us. Much like the time we allowed Arafat to become a ?legitimate? leader. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) 2004-07-26 4:17:33 PM |
| #8 end of prior comment: Still, there's nobody whose pure as the driven snow in the Balkans, so if we don't want to wake up smelling like a pig, we shouldn't get in bed with any of them. And no matter what we do, they'll probably still be trying to kill eachother off in 1,000 years. |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-07-26 3:44:52 PM |
| #7 Robjack Michael Savage was on the Serb side at the time. He was not syndicated then, but I'm sure if you call him, he'll be happy to say I told you so. He was not focused on the religious angle at all, mostly on the fact that the Serbs had been our allies in WWII and why were we putting it to them now? Remember that Yugoslavia fell apart after the German reunification. Apparently the Germans needed more lebensraum, so they gave the green light to their allies from WWII, the Croats led by Franjo Tudjman, to seceed from Yugoslavia. Bush I did nothing about it and the term ethnic cleansing was introduced into our vocabulary when the Croats forced all the Serbs out of Krajina during the Clinton administration. The Serbs historic ally is the Russians, but they were otherwise occupied at the time. So after the Serbs got kicked out of Krajina, they decided to get even with the Albanians and kick them out of Kosovo. This time the world paid attention. The Serbs have the misfortune to have hired the same PR firm as the Palestinians |
| Posted by: Mr. Davis 2004-07-26 3:43:15 PM |
| #6 The report also accused the international community in Kosovo of being in "absolute denial about its own failures... You bet, and the failure and denial don't end there. NATO-led peacekeepers said after the riots that they chose to save people's lives instead of buildings. If we are to assume that lives were valued over assets, we might cheer; however, that is a rash assumption. |
| Posted by: jules 187 2004-07-26 3:41:49 PM |
| #5 Human Rights Watch says NATO is failing in Kosovo? Let's turn the province over to Human Rights Watch. Better still, let's turn it back to Yugoslavia. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-26 3:37:30 PM |
| #4 Robjack: Am I the only American who feels that Clinton may have jumped the gun prematurely in siding with the Albanians against the Serbs? I thought it was a good thing we did there, but now I'm not so sure. The Serbs have never been our enemies - I've never heard of Orthodox Christians wanting to mount a crusade against America. In retrospect, I think this is more of the Democratic policy of alienating America's friends (among pro-American, but authoritarian governments around the world) and sidling up to America's enemies (such as China, North Korea, et al - you name it, they appeased it). As long as American interests are set back, they are for it. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2004-07-26 3:35:39 PM |
| #3 Am I the only American who feels that Clinton may have jumped the gun prematurely in siding with the Albanians against the Serbs? Seems that we only got one side of the story from our media back then - I for one didn't notice how one sided they were at the time. Now we hear many tails of the Albanian Muslims burning and killing and carrying on as we know the ROP likes to do. Is there any chance that they had it coming to them? If there are any serbs blogging here today - I'm sorry we stopped your program - it looks as if we'll be heading down that slope ourselves in several years. |
| Posted by: Robjack 2004-07-26 3:08:48 PM |
| #2 But the left still want's to put these bozos in charge of Iraq. What better way to ensure failure? Failure in Iraq ensures victory in November. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2004-07-26 2:23:28 PM |
| #1 But the left still want's to put these bozos in charge of Iraq Where they would be on the side of Islamacist rioters once again .... that's consistent. |
| Posted by: too true 2004-07-26 2:22:27 PM |