The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
It's not a failure of your English. It's a failure of your logic. We are discussing here whether the US was initially predisposed to the breakup of Yugoslavia. The fact that they recognized the secessionists later while the KLA was being trained is not being disputed at all. This is the essence of my very first post on this subject.
You write: "I know that the training of the KLA came later - I mentioned it to support my thesis that the US has been supportive of secessionist movements throughout ex-Yugoslavia.""
How does that support your thesis if it came later AFTER the US recognized the new republics? It doesn't support your thesis at all.
"Europe, on the other hand was AGAINST recognition, except for Germany:"
I just linked to you in the previous post NY Times articles which showed that the US was AGAINST recognition even as the entire EC was for it.
Please explain to me why it benefits the US to refuse recognition even while Ireland and Norway elect to recognize?
What deal with Bonn?
What are you talking about?
Let's go back to 1991. The CIA plans for the breakup of Yugoslavia since the 70s.The "right" people are promoted to power - or supported by the US and Germany once they made it to the top. The arms are delivered in the 80s. Everything's ready to roll, when all of a sudden, the Soviet Union collapses. This provides an opportunity to the US to extend its influence over all of ex-Yugoslavia... which it tries to do, putting it at odds with Germany, on the other hand, which wants to consolidate its influence over an independent Slovenia and Croatia. There's disagreement about spheres of influence and who gets what. Political maneuvering ensues.
Me, I also do that on occasion: there are two kinds of people in this world, I say, the kind of people who split the world into two kinds of people, and the kind who don't.
If you are referring to my lack of "proof" regarding US German collusion, yes it's vague. Tudjman wasn't a buddy of mine. Neither was Slobodan. James & George even less. No, I don't have first hand accounts of the politics at play in January 1992 and this is not the kinda stuff you find on the newspaper stands. But that wasn't even the subject of my thesis.
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 2 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 5 22 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 1 comment
by Oui - May 13 65 comments
by Carrie - Apr 30 7 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 272 comments
by Oui - May 2712 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 231 comment
by Oui - May 1365 comments
by Oui - May 910 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 522 comments
by Oui - May 449 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - May 29 comments
by gmoke - May 1
by Oui - Apr 30257 comments
by Carrie - Apr 307 comments
by Oui - Apr 2644 comments
by Oui - Apr 879 comments
by Oui - Mar 19143 comments