Kosovo: Washington’s “Controlled Chaos” Proving Ground Serbia, a small, never wealthy, repeatedly debased European country that is nevertheless strong in spirit, is again attracting a great deal of attention of the world’s public. The situation in and around Serbia is the direct result of the degradation of such political ideals as national statehood and sovereignty, as well as the most sophisticated transformation of the international system and formation of an unipolar world structure. Ruling the world from just one centre is only possible if the world is in a state of chaos.
The United States has handled issues of pinpoint influence on the development of individual countries and whole regions since the 1960s. The stake for “the controlled chaos” opened new opportunities to Pax Americana architects. It is known that if a system is in a point of break-up (bifurcation), it can face tremendous upheavals even when affected by minutest impacts. Stephen Mann, one of the chief theoreticians of the state of crisis and a former special U.S. presidential representative in the Caspian region, U.S. Ambassador to Turkmenistan and currently first U.S. State Department undersecretary for South and Central Asia clearly states that “stirring chaos” is a necessary leverage in ensuring U.S. national interests. According to Stephen Mann, the mechanism for the “creation of chaos” in the adversary’s camp is “promotion of democracy and market reforms.” And given that all the countries in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe are now dependent on the global (or, to be precise, U.S.-oriented) organisations and bodies. Serbia is an unusual case. Its is a system of a non-linear structure, unstable demeanour and a strong mustering effect, with an unexpected response to a direct influence, being capable of organising itself into a comparatively steady-ordered unit. So it was decided that in the Serbian gamble it would be the ethno-nationalist card. It is exactly the paradigm of “the controlled chaos” that provides a clue to realise why the U.S. and EU are in such a hurry to grant Kosovo independence. As is known “frozen conflicts” have developed for dozens of years in many disputable territories. The North Cashmere issue has been unsettled since 1947, North Cyrus has been an issue since 1974, and West Bank of River Jordan – since 1967. There are not even suggestions, to say nothing of attempts, to impose unilateral solutions there. Serbia is an exception to the rule! We should all be aware that the Serbian case has nothing to do with near-sighted Anglo-Saxon policies. The matter is much more serious. U.S. politicians count on the maximally possible spreading of the Kosovo virus, a virus of crime, extremism and terrorism that with time could breed havoc in the whole of Europe. “The solution” of the Kosovo issue is effectively an algorithm of activities of present-day and future separatists. As D.Young correctly argues in The Christian Science Monitor that in order to attain their goals all they need is to organise and terrorise local residents, forcing the government to resort to power, followed by an uprising, and claiming their honesty, loyalty to an ethic code and resolve, to entrap foreign troops into a disputable territory. Let us forget all the besotting “politically correct” arguments, rather giving a thought to what in essence is a monstrosity: Kosovo terrorists and cutthroats may form their own (a second Albanian) state in Europe quite soon! People who go on ousting and destroying Serbs, demolishing every trace of their presence in the province (explosions and arsons of Orthodox churches and bulldozing Serbian cemeteries) are now glorified in the West as fighters for freedom and democracy, and heroes! Realising a threat to their own existence, many European states stand out against the hurried resolution of the Kosovo issue. Spain, Slovakia, Hungary, Greece, Cyprus, Rumania and even Germany are concerned over the potential Kosovo precedent for separatist movements. Taking into consideration the growth of resistance to their plans, and apparently losing hope for the victory of their protégé Boris Tadic, global-minded architects of the European chaos decided to accelerate the process of declaring Kosovo independent as best they can. During consultations on January 24, 2008 Xavier Solana, coordinator of EU foreign policies and Hashim Taci, Kosovo’s prime minister agreed to declare the province independent within days. The Serbian political process has directly to do with Russia’s national and state interests. Serbia is for Russia a point of some sort of bifurcation. Looking through the prism of elections in Serbia the real attitude the West has taken towards Russia and Russians is still the clearer. Western media harp on Serbia’s future “in isolation” and “with doubtful Russian graces” (The Financial Times), speaking of “rigid nationalism” and “extremism” of Tomislav Nikolic (The Guardian). Extremism is the nice little word they use to refer to love of people’s native land, and the desire to live in their home country in conformity with traditions and heritage of their ancestors; they even call Serbian standing for truth and law “doubtful graces.” In this respect, an interview T.Nikolic gave to The Christian Science Monitor shortly before presidential elections is quite telling: “We have been under the influence of Western Europe for seven years now. We have done everything the West asked us for, and that was our mistake.” (display is mine – E.P.) The Serbian situation can also be viewed as a provocation. As Giulietto Chiesa writes: Washington needs Kosovo to “make mad Putin’s Russia, no longer a friend or even an acquaintance… The acceleration of the processes in Kosovo is not a necessity, so why provoke it all? Not even all the European countries have supported the idea. Why tightrope them? The answer is evident: Washington is interested in separating and weakening Europe and in setting it against Russia.” (Il Manifesto) We should recollect something in this connection. In his April 1999 interview to Sunday Telegraph Tony Blair vindicated the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia by saying that that was “a battle between the Good and the Evil, civilisation and barbarity, democracy and dictatorship.” But if NATO was then fighting the Milosevic regime (now dead thanks to Western “justice”), who do they in the West associate with Evil and barbarity now that they have turned their bayonets to defend Kosovo’s independence? Is it Serbia? Or Russia? We will get the answer soon http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=1176
