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.
"you have to at least recognise the proto-fascist streak on Franjo Tuđman's side and lay some blame there."
Sure, but that is very much a cause of dissolution from inside Yugoslavia. I didn't say anything about the independence movement in Slovenia and Croatia being a good thing. I just pointed out that is was very real thing, leading to civil war long before the recognition crisis.
"so that you can give Schröder & Scharping a pass (not to mention other Western powers or Russia)"
Is this a new theory that makes Germany the prime mover in the Kosovo war? Not the US?
In other words, you can do nuance and do not really think that redstar's caricature of a supposedly SocDem view, that "the bad Serbs are responsible for everything", is "the only reasonable way to see things". Shoot less from the hip, less confusion.
Germany the prime mover in the Kosovo war? Not the US?
Not shooting from the hip would also let you to notice nuance when reading what others wrote. That way, you could distinguish between my position and that of redstar. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
As far as recognition was involved I looked up the timeline:
"Germany advocated quick recognition of Croatia, in order to stop ongoing violence in Serb-inhabited areas, with Helmut Kohl requesting recognition in the Bundestag on 4 September."
Recognition by the EU happened on January 15th and Germany jumped ahead and recognized on December 19th.
But at this time the croatian civil war was already under way a full half year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_of_Croatia#General_recognition
And what was my point? That when two years later, Bonn recognises, before everyone else, Croatian and Slovenian independence, unilaterally, with no military contingency plan or negotiations with Belgrade, that this recognition very predictably would escalate into war.
And you don't need to be a Milosevic lover or a Germanophobe or whatever other insults to which some of you are on thread are prone, to recognise this.
This is what I meant by you deal with the world as it is, and not how the social democrat thinks it ought ot be. To which, again, one is either a Milosevic lover or a simplistic carcaturer of social democrats (leaving aside the fact that , predictably, your social democrat interlocutor on this subject immediately started blaming Milosevic for being...Milosevic, which in my world is called a tautology)
Seems to me that you can't call me an idiot because I point out it was naive to think Milosevic was not going to be Milosevic, and at the same time point fingers in the end at Milosevic because he was Milosevic. Because it is precisely that sort of idiocy I am criticising in the first place. The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
The Kosovo crisis is of course very much related, but I do hope you and your interlocutor here can see the nuance and the shift in focus which is undertaken, in both of your rhetoric, which is of course advantageous to the viewpoint you both seem to want to put forth (hard power bad, US hard power very bad).
Remember, my main practical point was simply that German foreign policy relating to the former Jugoslavia in 1991-1992 was irresponsible and played a significant contributing part in the escalation of the wars in Bosnia and Croatia, conflict in which US hard power, in support of diplomatic efforts culminating in Dayton peace accords which hold to this day, was eventually needed, given EU member state armed response was pathetically inadequate. I further avered that if the US has a hard time taking EU diplomacy in this part of the world (today Ukraine) the recent past, and decades of under-investment in security on the part of many EU nations (and especially Germany, which enjoys a security guarantee by the US) can help explain it.
I never of course said that I approved of Ms. Nuland's worldview or words or acts. Simply put them in context.
To this I am treated to...wait for it...accusations of US misbehaviour in the middle east, as if I think those imperial wars were justified. And why not talk about Kosovo, which happened 7 years later (and which I further mentioned, given the strengthening of Milosevic in the first Jugoslav wars in Croatia and Bosnia)? Why not keep misdirecting?
Again, I was commenting on unilateral recognition of an independent state in Europe with a very large Serbian minority, at a time when a nationalist was entrenching his power in Belgrade. It doesn't take a genius to suspect that, given what was known about Milosevic already, the man in Belgrade was not going to take such declarations lying down.
This is just how things were, and stating this does not make one a Milosevic lover, as your interlocutor has explicitly stated.
And my "caricature" of the social democratic response was simply, again, a statement about the inability to be realistic about such things, to recognise Croatia unilaterally without so much as pourparlers with Belgrade or military contigency plans in the event of the inevitable. But this somehow makes me a Germanophobe and "distraught at the state of the French left".
And the reason for this is that we are in the same place with Putin right now, and the EU have a similarly weak response. Again, I am not a Putin lover for saying this. There are times when a military response is warranted, or at the very least a credible threat, else diplomatic pressure can be ignored, something Putin has shown time and again, and any Georgian can tell you about this.
If folks on this site are going to decry lack of nuance, I would suggest folks on this site try to employ it for themselves. The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
If folks on this site are going to decry lack of nuance, I would suggest folks on this site try to employ it for themselves.
If contributors are going to start whining about "this site", I would suggest they go try another one.
Nuance. The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
I see. The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
In almost ten years, very few people have been banned or "invited to leave".
Keep up the pissy insinuations, you're going to be treated as a straightforward troll.
Ad homs on being Milosevic lover? Germanophobe? Et c.? No intervention.
Call people on it? Afew to the rescue.
You may not have a practise of banning people but, let's just say, certain people do have a very strong habit of making others quite unwelcome.
It is a passive aggressive form of the same thing. The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
Nobody called you a "Milosevic-lover", any more than anyone called you an idiot. You are just posing as a victim.
As for people who complain about how "this site" is run, I told you further up. Try another place to see if it fits your style better.
As you have now decided to engage in a ratings battle, I'm warning you that any more of it will see your ratings wiped and your right to rate shut down.
We have done nothing of that sort. Yozu wnated for whatever reason peddle pro Milosevic myth of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. One again: At the time Germany recognized Croatia (unilaterally, but only a few weeks prior to the rest of the EC) there was already a civil war in Croatia raging for half a year. A hard power devotee like you should recognize facts on the ground or not?
And you germanophobia is well known. That was perhaps one of its milder eruptions.
(hard power bad, US hard power very bad).
No. Rather: hard power has its limits. Take Bosnia:the US ended it, but how? By just freezing the frontlines - after Serbia captured the enclaves by the way. And now? Bosnia is de fato still in the same state of frozen frontlines. Is that really a success?
A common EU/USA failure of course - as so often.
And now in Ukraine, what exactly is american hard power doing?
What is it with you and ad hominem? The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
At the time Germany recognized Croatia (unilaterally, but only a few weeks prior to the rest of the EC)
- Jake Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
Slovenia and Croatia Get Bonn's Nod - NYTimes.com
At a fractious European Community meeting last week, Germany announced to its partners that it was planning to recognize Slovenia and Croatia, even if it had to do so alone. To preserve a semblance of unity, the 12 member countries approved a resolution authorizing recognition of new nations that meet certain conditions, including stable borders, respect for democracy, and protection of minority rights. Thousands Killed in Fighting Several European leaders, as well as President Bush and Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar of the United Nations, had urged Germany not to proceed with plans to recognize the two republics immediately. They suggested instead that recognition be withheld until it could be granted as part of an overall peace settlement. Both supporters and opponents of recognition say their position will help end the fighting, which has claimed thousands of lives since since Slovenia and Croatia declared independence this summer. Troops of the Serbian-dominated regular army and militias have taken over a third of Croatia's territory in their attempt to block Croatian secession.
At a fractious European Community meeting last week, Germany announced to its partners that it was planning to recognize Slovenia and Croatia, even if it had to do so alone. To preserve a semblance of unity, the 12 member countries approved a resolution authorizing recognition of new nations that meet certain conditions, including stable borders, respect for democracy, and protection of minority rights. Thousands Killed in Fighting
Several European leaders, as well as President Bush and Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar of the United Nations, had urged Germany not to proceed with plans to recognize the two republics immediately. They suggested instead that recognition be withheld until it could be granted as part of an overall peace settlement.
Both supporters and opponents of recognition say their position will help end the fighting, which has claimed thousands of lives since since Slovenia and Croatia declared independence this summer. Troops of the Serbian-dominated regular army and militias have taken over a third of Croatia's territory in their attempt to block Croatian secession.
I don't understand why you have to defend Kohl & Genscher here: they were clearly wrong in assuming that recognition will end the fighting. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Sute. But the claim here was that the recognition startedthe figfhting. Not quite the same.
Was hardly universally applauded in Geemany bachj then, too.
That said:
"Under the European Community resolution, today was the first day on which a member country could declare that Croatia or Slovenia had met the conditions for recognition. The community set Jan. 15 as the first day for formal recognition, and whether Germany has adhered to that deadline or acted too quickly was described in Bonn as a matter of interpretation. "
Germany was a foreign-policy midget, and should have been treated as such by its EU partners, who should have developed a coherent and morally defensible common position. Public pressure in Germany, based more on previous historical affinities (no, I'm not just talking about WWII) than current events, should not have been the determining factor in recognising the post-Yugoslav republics.
France, as the senior foreign-policy actor in the EU, had the largest responsibility in providing an adequate response. But here too, policy-makers maintained their historic affinity with the Serbs, always their preferred hegemon in the Balkans (going back a long way). Mitterand apparently saw nothing wrong with the Serbs mutilating the Yugoslav federal system in order to seize power. He was such an arsehole in foreign policy. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by Oui - Dec 9 6 comments
by Oui - Dec 5 9 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 95 comments
by Oui - Dec 96 comments
by Oui - Dec 815 comments
by Oui - Dec 620 comments
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 59 comments
by Oui - Dec 44 comments
by Oui - Dec 21 comment
by Oui - Dec 180 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 243 comments
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments