Živadin Jovanović
October, 2017
Dietmar Hartwig, former head of the EU (EEC) Monitoring Mission in Kosovo and
Metohija (ECMM) in his 2007 warning letter:
“MERKEL RESPONSIBLE FOR KOSOVO
PRECEDENT AND DIVIDING SERBIAN PEOPLE”
It seems that the recent developments in Europe, and in particular the push of
secessionism (Catalonia), rings a bell, or rather is reminiscent of certain
events. The ensuing ones are shedding more light on the roles of the EU (EEC),
the USA and Germany. To what extent have they been guided by the principles of
the international law and democracy in the Kosovo crisis? How much did they
appreciate the reports of their (expensive) missions in Kosovo and Metohija
(КDОМ, КVМ, ЕCMM) depicting the realities on the ground? To what extent have
they been defending the right to self-determination and human rights and to
what extent abusing separatism for expansion of geopolitical interests?
As strategies are slow to evolve, recollections of the past may help better
understanding of the interests and roles of the EU in the ongoing Kosovo
negotiations in Brussels.
Over a longer period of time, the leading members of both NATO and the EU have
been supporting the terrorist KLA in Kosovo and Metohija. Allied, they launched
an armed aggression against Serbia (the FRY) in 1999 which, pursuant to the
same principles of the international law (eagerly invoked these days by the EU
officials), was tantamount to a crime against peace and humanity! To sum it up,
the countries and integrations whose spokespersons swear to this day that they
have always been upholding the same principles and rule-based policies, back in
1999 had provoked the strongest blow to the global legal order and to the
United Nations since the end of World War II. The policies pursued by
governments of those countries and by integrations thereof during the Yugoslav
and the Kosovo crises have stimulated the spread of secessions, the expansion
of Islamic extremism, Wahhabism and terrorism in Europe and the rest of the
world. By disregarding and violating the principles enshrined in the Helsinki
Final Act, in the UN Charter and in international conventions and treaties,
they have induced a lasting instability in the Balkans as the most vulnerable
part of Europe. Presently, they are exerting pressure against Serbia, the one
they have been demolishing, deceiving and humiliating by recognizing the
forcible capture of her state territory in the form of an engineered unilateral
and illegal secession of Kosovo, and requesting that Serbia erases it all from
track-record and forgets it all “for the sake of her European future”! What
kind of future could possibly be built upon such foundations!?
The separatist and terrorist genie that the leading countries of NATO and the
EU have unleashed from the bottle in Kosovo and Metohija back in 1998/99 for
the purpose of furthering the geopolitical goals of the USA and some European
powers, such as Germany and the UK, for example, keeps spreading over Europe,
while the EU and NATO believe they would be able to push it back into the
bottle and clear they names and revive their dented unity by scarifying once
again (interests of) Serbia! The real tragedy for Europe is the reasoning that
truth is only what the EU commissioners and spokespersons declare to be the
truth. The dominance of such reasoning is preventing the genuine understanding
of historical maelstrom that has engulfed the Old Continent!
“War on the FRY was waged to rectify an erroneous decision of General
Eisenhower from the Second World War. Therefore, due to strategic reasons, the
U.S. soldiers have to be stationed there.” This quote was the explanation given
by American representatives at a NATO conference held in late April 2000 in
Bratislava, and noted by Willy Wimmer, former State Secretary in the German
ministry of Defense, in his report to Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder dated 2 May
2000.
The first point in this report is an explicit U.S. request that its allies
(NATO members) recognize ‘independent state of Kosovo’ as soon as possible,
whereas the tenth, last point, reads that ‘the right to self-determination
takes precedence over all others”. Should one wonder any further about the
present referendum on secession of Catalonia?
Wimmer’s report also notes the U.S. declared position at the Bratislava
Conference was that the 1999 NATO attack on Yugoslavia without UN SC
authorization is ‘a precedent to be invoked by anyone at any time, and which is
going to be invoked’. This renders any allegations of a principled and
rule-based policy utterly dubious, when the aggression executed in violation of
the UN Charter is declared to be a precedent, and the unilateral secession of
Kosovo directly resulting from such aggression is declared to be ‘a unique
case’?!
In the eve of NATO 1999 aggression on Yugoslavia two major international
missions had been placed in the Province of Kosove and Metohija. One was under
auspices of OSCE known as Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), headed by American
diplomat William Walker and the other under the auspices of EEC (EU) known as
European Community Monitoring Mission (ECMM), headed by German diplomat Dietmar
Hartwig. The later conveyed the often repeated assessment of the leader of KVM
and his entourage that: “There is no such thing as high costs to deploy NATO
in Kosovo. Any cost is acceptable.”
After Kosovo Albanian leadership declared unilateral illegal secession in 2006,
Dietmar Hartwig in 2007 sent four letters to the German Chancellor Angela
Merkel urging her that Germany should not recognize such unilateral act. In
his letter of October 26, 2007 to Chancellor Merkel, Hartwig, among other
points, says: “Not a single report (of ЕCMM) submitted from late November 1998
up to the evacuation (of ЕCMM, KVM) just before the war broke out (1999),
contains any account of Serbs having committed any major or systematic crimes
against Albanians, and not a single report refers to any genocide or similar
crimes… Quite the contrary, my (ECMM) reports have repeatedly communicated
that, considering the increasingly more frequent KLA attacks against the
Serbian executive authorities, their law enforcement kept demonstrating
remarkable restraint and discipline. This was a clear and persistently
reiterated goal of the Serbian administration - to abide to the
Milošević-Holbrooke Agreement (of October 13,1998) to the letter so not to
provide any excuse to the international community for an intervention. In the
phase of taking over the Regional Office in Priština, colleagues from various
other missions – KDOM, U.S., British, Russian, etc. – confirmed that there were
huge ‘discrepancies in perception’ between what said missions (and, to a
certain degree, embassies as well) have been reporting to their respective
governments and what the latter thereafter chose to release to the media and
the public of their respective countries. This discrepancy could, ultimately,
only be understood as an input to general preparations for war against
Kosovo/Yugoslavia. The fact is that, until the time of my departure from
Kosovo, there has never happened anything of what have been relentlessly
claimed by the media and, with no less intensity, the politics, too.
Accordingly, until 20 March (1999) there was no reason for military
intervention, which renders illegitimate any measures undertaken thereafter by
the international community.”
“The collective behavior of the EU Member States prior to, and after the war
broke out, certainly gives rise to a serious concern, because the truth was
lacking, and the credibility of the international community was damaged.
However, the matter of my concern is exclusively the role of the FR of Germany
and its role in this war and its political objective to separate Kosovo from
Serbia…”
“The daily political news reporting over the previous months (before October
2007) made it progressively more evident that Germany not only supports the
American desire to see Kosovo independent, but also actively engages on its own
in dividing the Serbs…You are to be considered responsible for this. The same
goes for your foreign minister, in particular, who knows perfectly well what is
going on in Kosovo, and is presently pursuing your political directives by
tirelessly advocating Kosovo’s independence and, thus, its secession from
Serbia. Instruct him, rather, to promote a durable solution for the Kosovo
issue which is in line with the international law… It is only if all states
choose to observe the applicable rights, we can have the foundations for the
common life of all nations. Should Kosovo become independent, it will be
perpetuated as the place of restlessness… Contribute to achieving the solution
for Kosovo on the basis of the endorsed UNSC Resolution 1244 pursuant to which
Kosovo remains a province of Serbia. American wishes and active efforts to see
Kosovo secede from Serbia and see Kosovo and Kosovo Albanians achieve full
independence, are contrary to the international law, politically deprecated
and, on top of all, irresponsibly expensive…”
“Kosovo’s secession from Serbia guided by ethnic criterion would constitute a
dangerous precedent and a signal for other ethnic communities in other
countries, including in EU Member States, who could rightfully request
the‘Kosovo solution’” – says Dietmar Hartwig in concluding his letter to
Chancellor Merkel.
Enough said about the ‘humanitarian intervention’ and the concerns for the
protection of rights of the Albanian population as the features of the
“uniqueness of the Kosovo case”. American Military base “Bondsteel” in the
vicinity of the town of Uroševac, surely by a pure chance, happens to be among
the largest U.S. military bases outside the U.S.A! Perhaps their anxiety over
being potentially spied on from the Serbian-Russian Humanitarian Center in Niš
merely confirms that the “Bondsteel’s” ’mandate’ is strictly local,
humanitarian and just for short time?!
It was the U.S.A, the EU and NATO, not Serbia, who froze the conflict following
the armed aggression of 1999. They and kept it frozen for the past 18 years by
not allowing complete implementation of UN SC resolution 1244. The forced
Serbia to fulfill all its commitments insisting on the legally obliging
character of the resolution while exempting themselves and the Albanians from
any obligation stated therein. They realize that the full implementation of
UNSC Resolution 1244 equaled preservation of integrity of Serbia, which is
exactly what they do not want since it goes against their geopolitical concept
of expanding to the East. Especially now, when the West is undergoing a
transition from which it may not emerge as mighty as it was during the
uni-polar world order.
At the present the West demands that Serbia ‘unfreezes’ Kosovo “independence
procerss”. How? By compelling Serbia to sign a ‘legally binding agreement’ with
Priština, to recognize a illegal unilateral secession, legalize illegal 1999
aggression, accept the consequences of violent ethnic cleansing of over 250.000
Serbs from Kosovo and Metohija and essentially assume responsibility for all
that!
(The author is the president of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals,
Federal minister for Foreign Affairs of FR of Yugoslavia 1998-2000)
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending
or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security
settings to determine how attachments are handled.
