UN Security Council meets on Kosovo

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080218/ap_on_re_eu/un_kosovo

UN Security Council meets on Kosovo
By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press Writer
Mon Feb 18, 2008

Russia tried to block Kosovo's independence during a closed-door emergency session of the U.N. Security Council on Sunday, saying it is deeply concerned about the safety of Serbs living in the territory.

The discussion of the 15-member council continued to expose divisions among members on the future of Kosovo. Russia backs its close ally Serbia, while the United States, Britain, France and other European Union members support Kosovo's majority ethnic Albanians.

China, a veto-wielding U.N. Security Council member that had close ties with the Yugoslav government of Slobodan Milosevic, expressed its "deep concern" Monday over Kosovo's declaration and called on the province to reach a "proper solution through negotiations" with Serbia.

The council met at the request of Serbia and Russia, which argue that Kosovo's declaration of independence from Serbia made earlier Sunday violates a 1999 council resolution that authorizes the U.N. to administer the territory.

The session got off to a rocky start; shortly after it began, it had to be suspended for a couple hours because of a lack of interpreters.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Serbia's president told him that Kosovo's declaration carries no legal weight, while Kosovo's prime minister assured him he was committed to "equal opportunities and no discrimination" against anyone in Kosovo.

Ban urged all sides to "refrain from any actions or statements that could endanger peace, incite violence or jeopardize security in Kosovo and the region."

The Security Council resolution on Kosovo remains in force and the U.N. "will continue to implement its mandate in the light of the evolving circumstances," Ban said.

Before the session, Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Moscow was "highly concerned" about Sunday's decision by Kosovo's parliament in Pristina "to declare unilateral independence of Kosovo."

The government said in a statement it regretted Kosovo's unilateral declaration and hoped it would not bring about fresh tension and conflict in the Balkan region. It said U.N.-backed principles of upholding the territorial integrity of developing nations must be supported.

The past Security Council resolution means the U.N. still runs Kosovo and "it is not obvious at all what could possibly be the legal basis for even considering" Kosovo's declaration of independence," Churkin said.

He specifically addressed the estimated 120,000 Serbs living in enclaves in Kosovo.

"Our concern is for the safety of the Serbs and other ethnic minorities in Kosovo," Churkin told reporters. "We'll strongly warn against any attempts at repressive measures, should Serbs in Kosovo decide not to comply with this unilateral proclamation of independence."

U.S. and other Western countries said there was little danger to the Serbs in Kosovo and that the 1999 resolution does not preclude Kosovo's independence.

"We've knocked it down over and over again. This is an unprecedented situation, it creates no precedent," Alejandro Wolff, the U.S. deputy ambassador to the U.N., told reporters before the session

Wolff said the United States is not "particularly concerned or sees no particular danger to be worried about" with regards to the safety of Serbs in Kosovo.

"We're pleased by the commitments made to respect for religious and ethnic communities in Kosovo," he told reporters. "We're very much pleased that the declaration also reflects a position of the United States that's longstanding."

Council member Indonesia, concerned about its own secessionist movements, said it was following the situation closely but was not yet prepared to recognize Kosovo's statehood.

Kosovo's 2 million population is 90 percent ethnic Albanian, mainly secular Muslims, who do not want to be part of Serbia, a predominantly Christian Orthodox nation.

Kosovo has been under U.N. and NATO administration since a NATO-led air war.

In April 2007, U.N. envoy Martti Ahtisaari recommended that Kosovo be granted internationally supervised independence — a proposal strongly supported by the province's ethnic Albanians, the U.S. and most of the European Union, but vehemently opposed by Serbia and Russia, a traditional Serb ally.

Russia blocked the Ahtisaari plan. An additional period of negotiations failed to bridge the differences between the Serbs, who have offered wide autonomy, and Kosovo's ethnic Albanian leaders, who insist on independence.

Kosovo hopes for international recognition that could come on Monday when European Union ministers meet in Brussels, Belgium. Russia, which has veto power on the council, insists Kosovo is a Security Council issue — not an EU issue — and argues that Kosovo's move sets a dangerous precedent for separatist groups globally.

On Tuesday afternoon, a more formal and open debate is planned by the Security Council at Serbia's request. Churkin said Russia insisted it should be an open meeting, and the president of Serbia will attend.

However, diplomats said it was unlikely the council would be able to reach agreement on a resolution or statement.

Troubles in Brzezinski’s paradise?

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2910.shtml

Troubles in Brzezinski’s paradise?
By Umberto Pascali
Online Journal Guest Writer
Feb 4, 2008

“France's defence minister, Herve Morin, did not budge when Gates asked Paris for more troops.”[Feb. 1, Guardian Unlimited]

“[German defence minister Franz Josef] Jung responded in an equally strong manner, refusing to send the 3,200 troops to the south of Afghanistan that Gates requested to replace US troops” [Feb. 1, Guardian Unlimited]

Europeans refuse to join the new war deployment in Afghanistan that is the first step toward a planned global Operation Barbarossa against Russia.

To jump start such a countdown to war was the raison d’être for the frantic efforts by Zbigniew Brzezinski to impose his hand-picked candidate, Barack Obama, as the next US president. If the final assault against Russia is to have a realistic chance to succeed, the economic, military, propagandistic resources of Europe (especially France, Germany, Italy and Spain) must be put under Anglo-American control and totally integrated with the Anglo American war machine. Figurehead Obama is supposed to supply the ideological rhetoric and hysteria that could get the US public and the Europeans (plus large areas of the Third World), who are both sickened and disgusted by the wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, on the train of total war

What it is to be expected now is a period of increasing pressures on Europe to give up, whether they manage to save of their sovereignty and integrate in the war machine. The situation resembles, mutatis mutandis, the period of the violent debate over the question of the euro missiles. At that time, Europe gave up. Now, however, the situation could be different. The Anglo-Americans do not have the influence and power they once could boast. Russia is led by realistic and skilled persons who know their surrender or defeat would mean Russia's partition and final looting. Russia and China are tied in an alliance based on the common understanding of the existential danger they face. And also, the Europeans could have learned something from the past 20 years.

If the economic and military potential of Europe is not available for the new global Operation Barbarossa, Brzezinski’s plan will fail. Brzezinski's attempt to again use the “Muslim card” (using Muslims populations and terrorists groups as cannon fodder for an upheaval directed against both Russia and China) or to use India will not be enough. Imminent events will make clear whether the Europeans will let themselves be intimidated and propagandistically stampeded into a war. It would not be surprising if new scandals, tiny veiled blackmails, “terrorist” provocations, artificially created internal clashes, and other “dirty tricks” will take over the front page of the media.

A series of events will constitute a litmus test for the chance of success of the Brzezinski plan:

The NATO meeting in Vilnius on February 7-8,

The concomitant detonation of the Kosovo Crisis,

The reactions to the pressures (that will continue) on the European governments,

The status of the Presidential campaign in the US. Will anybody point the spotlight at Brzezinski and his plan?

Later on, the April Summit of Nato in Bucharest.

The Manifesto calling for preemptive nuclear war was presented during the first half of January to both the Pentagon in Washington and to NATO's secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. As was reported recently by the media, five former NATO military leaders signed the unprecedented document: General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint Chiefs of Staff and NATO's ex-supreme commander in Europe; General Klaus Naumann, Germany's former top soldier and ex-chairman of NATO's military committee; General Henk van den Breemen, a former Dutch chief of staff; Admiral Jacques Lanxade, a former French chief of staff; and Lord Inge, field marshal and ex-chief of the general staff and the defence staff in the UK.

Notes:

Germany Rejects U.S. Request for More Afghan Troops, Feb. 1, Bloomberg

US 'sternly requests' more German troops for Afghanistan, Feb. 1, Guardian Unlimited