Month: May 2013
Courage
Damian Gunjak, who describes himself as a “former refugee from Yugoslavia, currently exploring life liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in the US, tweeted yesterday in response to my “Freude!”:
tune has changed and the quislings in belgrade are singing according to notes from their american masters.
#kosovo charade
The “quislings” he is referring to are presumably the nationalist politicians in charge of the Serbian government, or possibly he meant the Serb clerics who live and pray in Kosovo. This is rich coming from someone enjoying the pursuit of happiness in the US, where of course he can thumb his nose at the US government while enjoying its protection and avoiding any real knowledge of what is going on in Kosovo or Belgrade.
I hear analogous sentiments from some Albanian Americans, who find it impossible to imagine that their long travails will not end in a single Albanian state. They dwell on the history of Serb mistreatment of Albanians and denounce efforts to achieve interethnic understanding as irrelevant and even traitorous.
These are the voices of fast-fading identity reasserting itself in anachronistic and counter-productive ways.
That is not what I hear however from many people in Kosovo, who resent the mistreatment but accept Serb presence as not only inevitable but also as desirable. Nor is it what I hear from my Serb visitors, who are more interested in their own economic situation than in holding on to Kosovo, which they know would be an expensive enterprise. For educated, cosmopolitan Kosovars and Serbs, how they treat each other is the ultimate test of whether they have achieved a serious democracy and can meet European standards for treatment of minorities.
I would like to see their voices raised in praise of what Bishop Teodosije said two days ago, but words do not suffice. Father Sava in a tweet said it well:
Words heard at the
#InterfaithRKS Conf are important encouragement but also an obligation for all. Need to be put in action.
It is encouraging to see that Serbs are visiting Pristina. It is also encouraging that the Serbian government, in accordance with a decision of the European Court of Human Rights, is preparing to pay pensions it owes to Kosovo Albanians. But we shouldn’t see these moves through rose-colored glasses. We are still far from the level of acceptance that would encourage a significant number of Serbs to return to Pristina. Nor do I expect Belgrade’s payment of pensions to go smoothly. There will be claims and counterclaims. But Serbs and Albanians are starting down the long road that leads, if they manage things civilly, to a significant measure of reconciliation and coexistence.
The two governments managing the process–one in Belgrade and one in Pristina–have impeccable nationalist credentials. Serbia’s President Nikolic and Prime Minister Dacic both tried hard to hold on to Kosovo and even recently would have liked to partition it. Kosovo’s Prime Minister Thaci was the political voice of the Kosovo Liberation Army. Kosovo President Jahjaga comes from different origins, as she is a lawyer and (post-war) police officer, but no one should doubt her commitment to the independence and sovereignty of the Kosovo state, albeit one that treats minorities correctly.
Context matters. Both these governments want to move their countries as rapidly as possible along the road to the European Union. They are on their best behavior as they try for dates to begin negotiations for Belgrade’s accession and Pristina’s Stability and Association Agreement.
Damian Gunjak, whoever he is, has opted to enjoy freedom outside what he would like us to imagine is his native country, as my own grandparents did. The political leaderships in Pristina and Belgrade have chosen a different path. They are guiding their countries into a free world in which they will have to establish good neighborly relations and treat each other with consideration and respect. I don’t fault my grandparents, who made the right decision, but I have to admire the courage of those who remain and try to set things right.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Freude!
Allow me to recommend Serbian Bishop Teodosije’s statement yesterday at the Interfaith Conference in Pec. Here are a few excerpts:
…after the difficult challenges of the armed conflict in 1999 we have managed together with the leaders of other religions in Kosovo to establish a true bond of mutual respect and dialog which we are fostering in our frequent meetings and discussions. True, our religions and traditions have differences but at the same time we share a lot from our common Abrahamic tradition.
…For years together with other people of good will in Kosovo we have managed to develop a concept of inclusive identity which preserves the original identity of religious and cultural sites and at the same time makes them open for members of other communities with which we share this beautiful land. One of our main intentions is to make these sites bridges of reconcilliation and understanding because they are above all the houses of God which are meant to be the home and refuge for all who wish to become closer to God and experience spiritual enrichment. I would take this opportunity to commend the efforts of the international and local representatives who share with us this vision and call upon those who still don’t that the gates of our holy sites will remain open for all who genuinely seek spiritual peace and retreat. The value of one society, culture and tradition has never been in its rigid uniformity but in variety and freedom of expression. Religion is meant to make us more humane and kind rather than champions of aggressive ideologies. Therefore the religious sites must be perceived as patches of heavenly beauty and a blessing to all of us and not the citadels of ideologies and symbols of discord.
…Living and carrying our religious duties in the post-conflict period as well as in a multi-religious surrounding requests from us even more sensitivity towards the others than in other circumstances. If we want others to understand and respect our pain, we must first be ready to recognize and embrace the painful heart of our neighbor, to ask forgiveness and forgive. Seeing other as our true brothers and sisters who are called to enter into the fulness of the God’s grace and love is a sacred obligation and key to our relationship towards members of other traditions and religions. “The Other” is therefore not an enemy as some ideologies teach us but another manifestation of our common human nature and above all the bearer of the image of God. He/she may be different from us in ethnic origin and language but even the science proved the truth of God that we are all more similar to each other than we would admit and that most of our differences stem from different socio-religious context in which we grew and received our education. Therefore, it is us the who call ourselves believers that must play the leading role in healing the wounds which have accumulated in the years of bitter conflict and suffering. For us this is not an ideology of peacemaking but a holy religious duty and a unique opportunity to witness our faith in God by our actions.
Let me point out, the conflict in Kosovo is not a conflict of religions. It is essentially an interethnic conflict which in this form originates primarily from the 19th century when modern Serbian and Albanian national ideologies, emerging from the Ottoman Empire clashed over the ownership of this region. Although not religious, the conflict has nevertheless reflected on religion. Religion played a role in ethnogenesis and the culture or our peoples and our religious sites are still misleadingly seen by many as symbols of national ideologies rather than the houses of God. We must change this perception and this is our primary task now. In modern Europe ethnic conflicts like this, particularly after the World War 2 have been resolved through the dialog and in the perspective of the integration into the wider European family. On the other hand, religions in modern world must distance themselves from aggressive ideologies and every act of violence, focusing on their original spiritual mission of building fellowship among the peoples, spiritual and modern upbringing. In order to achieve this goal we need courage and determination which stems from the power of our faith in God who sees the heart of every human being.
The Bishop did not hesitate to complain about the condition of his Serbian Orthodox flock, reduced in population by two-thirds, many of its monuments damaged and its cemeteries desecrated. He is far from content. But there is no question where he is looking for solutions: in improved relations with Albanians, who at least nominally are mostly Muslim, with support from the international community.
I can’t help but be reminded of Beethoven’s Ninth,which just happens to be the European anthem:
- O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
- Sondern laßt uns angenehmere anstimmen,
- und freudenvollere.
- Freude! (men’s chorus: Freude! )
- Freude! (chorus again: Freude! )
- Oh friends, not these tones!
- Rather, let us raise our voices in more pleasing
- And more joyful sounds!
- Joy! (Joy!)
- Joy! (Joy!)
- Freude, schöner Götterfunken
- Tochter aus Elysium,
- Wir betreten feuertrunken,
- Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
- Deine Zauber binden wieder
- Was die Mode streng geteilt;
- Alle Menschen werden Brüder,
- Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.
- Joy, beautiful spark of the gods
- Daughter of Elysium,
- We enter, drunk with fire,
- Heavenly one, your sanctuary!
- Your magic reunites
- What custom strictly divided.
- All men become brothers,
- Where your gentle wing rests.
For those of us who have worried about the Balkans these past twenty years, this is a moment to savor. Not because the problems are solved–they aren’t. Until all those who want to return to their homes throughout Kosovo can do so peacefully and without fear, the work is not done. But returns on a grander scale can only happen within a framework of mutual understanding and appreciation that makes the people who return safe and secure.
My peacefare hat is off to those Kosovans (that’s the accepted name I believe of the common identity the Bishop mentions) who are making this possible. I have no doubt there will be some difficult days, as there are people in Kosovo and Serbia (and yes the United States) who don’t share the Bishop’s vision or methods. They will do terrible things to try to discredit him and the Albanians with whom he cooperates. But his, and their, cause is just and even saintly. It will prevail in time.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Obama’s speech was about us, not them
I admit it: I liked the President’s long speechon drones and Guantanamo, plus his impromptu remarks on respect for the views of a Code Pink heckler. I particularly liked this:
For what we spent in a month in Iraq at the height of the war, we could be training security forces in Libya, maintaining peace agreements between Israel and its neighbors, feeding the hungry in Yemen, building schools in Pakistan, and creating reservoirs of goodwill that marginalize extremists.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
The Supreme Leader leads supremely
The bleak outlook for the June 14 Iranian elections was discussed yesterday at the Woodrow Wilson Center. Panelists Ali Vaez, Barbara Slavin and Meir Javendafar weighed in on the likely front runners. A second discussion at Brookings was not for attribution.
The bottom line is clear. The Guardian Council has exercised its authority to eliminate the more interesting candidates and limit competition. There is little likelihood of fundamental change. The disputed the 2009 presidential election has made the Supreme Leader extra cautious. He thinks it is better to prevent dissent by controlling the selection of candidates, rather than deal with an angry population after the votes have been counted. Nothing will be left to chance.
The election will exclude President Ahmedinejad and his friends from positions of power and strengthen the position of Supreme Leader Khamenei. But Ahmedinejad may remain influential after the election by using his knowledge of corruption and electoral fraud to challenge the establishment.
All remaining eight candidates make up in loyalty to the Supreme Leader what they lack in charisma. Possible front runners include:
- Saeed Jalili, Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, is uncontroversial and willing to work with other political factions. His election would help the Supreme Leader, to whom he is notably loyal, to marginalize the presidency.
- Hassan Rowhani, another former nuclear negotiator, and Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, the current mayor of Tehran, are popular, centrist candidates, but both likely more independent than the Supreme Leader wants.
Six of the eight candidates were appointed by the Supreme Leader at some point in their careers. Khamanei wants a president who will stay loyal to him and to his vision as he gets older and weaker.
The Iranian leadership plans to keep the election lackluster in an attempt to prevent the growing undercurrent of dissent from spilling over. Candidates will not even be participating in televised debates. Voter turnout is expected to be historically low, though the state media may report record high turnout. Slavin quipped about the 2009 elections:
80% of the population sat a home and watched the news report that 70% of the population had turned out to vote.
From the US perspective, election of Rowhani might seem the best outcome, as he is the closest thing left in the race to someone interested in reform. But he would also likely be the one most at odds with the Supreme Leader. On the nuclear issue in particular, any division in the Iranian regime, as occurred under Ahmedinejad, could cause paralysis rather than generate progress.
The odds of success in the nuclear negotiation are in any case slim. The Iranians see the US as having taken its best shot with sanctions whose impact has been absorbed and is now declining. With time, they figure the sanctions will fray. The aging and ossified Khamenei is extraordinarily suspicious and cautious. For him to decide in his dotage that what Iran really needs is an agreement with the United States to limit Iran’s nuclear program would be out of character.
Revival of the Green opposition, defeat in Syria or a sharp drop in oil prices are all possible “black swans” that could dramatically affect the situation, before or after the election. But all seem unlikely this year.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
No idyll
The Kenyan Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission has finally reported on its five-year effort. While some of its findings will be contested, the overall picture is all to clear. Anyone still thinking of Kenya as idyllic should peruse the executive summary:
The Commission finds that between 1895 and 1963, the British Colonial administration in Kenya was responsible for unspeakable and horrific gross violations of human rights. In order to establish its authority in Kenya, the colonial government employed violence on the population on an unprecedented scale. Such violence included massacres, torture and ill-treatment and various forms of sexual violence. The Commission also finds that the British Colonial administration adopted a divide and rule approach to the local population that created a negative dynamic of ethnicity, the consequences of which are still being felt today. At the same time the Colonial administration stole large amounts of highly productive land from the local population, and removed communities from their ancestral lands.
The Commission finds that between 1963 and 1978, President Jomo Kenyatta presided over a government that was responsible for numerous gross violations of human rights. These violations included:
- in the context of Shifta War, killings, torture, collective punishment and denial of basic needs (food, water and health care);
- political assassinations of Pio Gama Pinto, Tom Mboya and J.M. Kariuki;
- arbitrary detention of political opponents and activists; and
- illegal and irregular acquisition of land by the highest government officials and their political allies
The Commission finds that between 1978 and 2002, President Daniel Arap Moi presided over a government that was responsible for numerous gross violations of human rights. These violations include:
- Massacres;
- unlawful detentions, and systematic and widespread torture and ill-treatment of political and human rights activists;
- Assassinations, including of Dr. Robert Ouko;
- Illegal and irregular allocations of land; and
- economic crimes and grand corruption.
The Commission finds that between 2002 and 2008, President Mwai Kibaki presided over a government that was responsible for numerous gross violations of human rights:
- unlawful detentions, torture and ill-treatment;
- assassinations and extra judicial killings; and
- economic crimes and grand corruption
The Commission finds that state security agencies, particularly the Kenya Police and the Kenya Army, have been the main perpetrators of bodily integrity violations of human rights in Kenya including massacres, enforced disappearances, torture and ill-treatment, and sexual violence.
The Commission finds that Northern Kenya (comprising formerly of North Eastern Province, Upper Eastern and North Rift) has been the epicenter of gross violations of human rights by state security agencies. Almost without exception, security operations in Northern Kenya has [sic] been accompanied by massacres of largely innocent citizens, systematic and widespread torture, rape and sexual violence of girls and women, looting and burning of property and the killing and confiscation of cattle.
The Commission finds that state security agencies have as a matter of course in dealing with banditry and maintaining peace and order employed collective punishment against communities regardless of the guilt or innocence of individual members of such communities.
The Commission finds that during the mandate period the state adopted economic and other policies that resulted in the economic marginalization of five key regions in the country: North Eastern and Upper Eastern; Coast; Nyanza; Western; and North Rift.
The Commission finds that historical grievances over land constitute the single most important driver of conflicts and ethnic tension in Kenya. Close to 50 percent of statements and memorandum received by the Commission related to or touched on claims over land.
The Commission finds that women and girls have been the subject of state sanctioned systematic discrimination in all spheres of their life. Although discrimination against women and girls is rooted in patriarchal cultural practices, the state has traditionally failed to curb harmful traditional practices that affect women’s enjoyment of human rights.
The Commission finds that despite the special status accorded to children in Kenyan society, they have been subjected to untold and unspeakable atrocities including killings, physical assault and sexual violence.
The Commission finds that minority groups and indigenous people suffered state sanctioned systematic discrimination during the mandate period (1963-2008). In particular, minority groups have suffered discrimination in relation to political participation and access to national identity cards. Other violations that minority groups and indigenous people have suffered include: collective punishment; and violation of land rights and the right to development.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
180 miles from disaster
Yesterday’s Friends of Syria meeting occurred in Amman, just 180 miles from the battle for Qusayr, a Syrian town located just off the road from Damascus through Homs to Alawite-populated areas of the west. If the opposition can hold Qusayr and Homs, it will split Damascus from the west. If it can’t, Bashar al Asad will have what he needs to maintain a regime axis that splits the liberated areas of the south from the liberated areas of the north. Either way, the outcome is likely to be a disaster for someone.
The Qusayr fighting involves Lebanese Hizbollah fighting with the Syrian army against mostly Sunni rebels, including Jabhat al Nusra. It naturally has echoes inside Lebanon, where Alawites and Sunnis have clashed in Tripoli. There is a real risk of spillover. While some in Washington may wonder why we should worry about Hizbollah and Sunni extremists associated with Jabhat al Nusra kill each other, it is important to widen the aperture a bit: state structures in Levant are at risk. Were they to collapse, the chaos could be widespread. Syria never has been comfortable with Lebanon as a separate state and established diplomatic relations with it only in the last few years.
It is hard to be optimistic about the preparations for next month’s Syria peace conference. Apart from the parlous military situation in Qusayr, Moscow is insisting not only that Iran be present but that the Syrian opposition come to the table without preconditions (in particular that Bashar al Asad step aside before any political transition). Then and only then is Moscow willing to set a date for the conference.
Iran’s presence is certainly necessary if the conference is going to produce anything like a political solution. The Russians are not wrong about that. Its fighters, and Hizbollah fighters it supports, are very much engaged in Syria. As for Moscow’s pre-condition that there not be pre-conditions, I suppose George Sabra–the current, interim head of the Syrian Opposition Coalition–will figure out a way to fudge that, perhaps by noting the Coalition’s acceptance of the formula already accepted last year at the Geneva conference: a transitional governing body that would exercise full executive powers “formed on the basis of mutual consent.”
More problematic is the Russian transfer of major new weapons systems to Syria and its deployment of warships off the coast. Russian thinktankers claim
non-intervention is now a basic Russian principle…
but that is neither true nor new. Russia is certainly intervening in the Syria conflict on the side of the regime it considers the legitimate sovereign. And it intervened on behalf of rebel forces in Georgia, when that suited its preferences. Russian policy might better be stated as preventing Western intervention in areas it regards as within its sphere of influence. We would no doubt return the favor if they were to muck in the Gulf.
The most sensible comment yesterday comes from Salim Idris, titular head of the Free Syrian Army. He is quoted as saying in a letter to Secretary Kerry:
For the negotiations to be of any substance, we must reach a strategic military balance, without which the regime will feel empowered to dictate … while fully sustained logistically and militarily by Russia and Iran…Such untenable situation requires that the Unites States, as the leader of the free world, provide the Free Syrian Army forces under the Supreme Military Council with the requisite advanced weapons to sustain defensive military capabilities in the face of the Assad forces.
He is said to be seeking anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons. He is correct that a mutually hurting stalemate, which the opposition has not so far been able to reach, is needed before the Syrian regime will negotiate seriously. If Bashar thinks he can do better by continuing the fighting, he will.
Secretary Kerry has limited himself so far to feints: he said yesterday Friends of Syria would consider arming the opposition and supported an effort to lift the European Union arms embargo. He is a man used to the niceties of the US Senate, where sparring is a verbal activity. The Russians, Iranians and Syrians certainly understand what he is threatening, but they doubt he is willing to do it or that his doing it will be effective in the time frame available.
President Obama is fond of saying he doesn’t bluff. It is time for him to play a stronger hand, one way or another.
RSS - Posts
