How Labour showed their guts

jkitleft Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:58:05 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

I have criticised the government frequently, and when we discuss why they are lagging, I say it is because of their lack of a radical streak. But a couple of weeks ago, they defied the trend of so many other countries. They showed guts. They recognised the Republic of Kosovo.

The UN, has no moral credibility. Many on the liberal-left are vehemently critical of the US's attitude to the United Nations. They forget that it was the credulous, reprehensible, racist, sadist fascist that was Saddam Hussein that violated several resolutions. But back to Kosovo. The UN has more tactical voting than the Eurovision Song Contest. China uses it's veto to defend the fascist regimes, that masquerade themselves as Marxist-Leninists, Mugabe, Castro, Kim Jong-Il etc. and of course the vile regime that mixes pseudo-communism with superstitious nationalism, in Rangoon.


The last couple of weeks have descended into playground politics. Russia, has carried out the actions that Serbia can't take, by blackmailing other countries. Spain, Sri Lanka, China, Israel, Georgia have taken the credulous positions of bleeting about international law, because they are worried for their sovereignty. It is not in defiance of international law, we know this empirically: we've seen how World War 1 started. The most futile war in history, was started because Russia leapt to the defence of their good friends, the Serbs.


How dare the left-wing demagogues of Latin America, and beyond: Bolivia, Cuba, Venezuela, as well as left-wingers elsewhere (who bleet about international law, while forgetting that the Russians would block any attempt for the new secular, democratic republic, to submit their case to the Security Council) criticise the country as an outpost of "Western Imperialism", and then accuse the United States and the United Kingdom of going into the Middle East wth an 'Islamaphobic motive', while all the while helping the Serbs to be pumping anti-Muslim innuendos into the Balkans.

By the by, next time we all think of Christain Extremism, don't think of those who blow up an abortion clinic in Montgomery, or Selma, or Biloxi. Think of how Serbian Orthodox extremists, in conjunction with the Croation Catholic funamentalists, commited mass genocide of an ethnic group, for the first time on European soil, since the other western countries likewise stood idly by, while the Jewish ethnicity was systematically decimated. 

So where did Labour's radicalism come in? Well, while countries facing their own nationalist movements, took a passive, cowardly response, one government, while facing a devolved government in the north of the country, who wanted to declare independence, recognised the Republic of Kosovo. Within the first day (unlike how Canada and Belguim waited before declaring). That was our government. Labour reversed the very worst policy, of probably one of the very worst UK governments. They led the world stage, in calling for intervention in Kosovo. 4 weeks ago, we sustained our rallying call, for the self-determination of the people of the Balkans.






tags: , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
How Labour showed their guts | 17 comments (17 topical)

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#1)

by red flagger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 12:26:31 PM GMT

I agree with the recognition of Kosovo, but from a slightly different angle one can see Serbia being driven away from the EU because of it and into the arms of Russia... which, in this 'new cold war' atmosphere, could cause a bit of a problem. But that's just the social scientist in me talking.


Re: How Labour showed their guts (#2)

by doctordunc on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 03:09:51 PM GMT

Obviously I disagree with some of the detail in this, but will leave that for another time (I'm not sure we're likely ever to see eye-to-eye on the issue of Latin American governments, for example!)

But I think you have to look at this in considerably more detail before reaching some of the sweeping conclusions you have reached.  I actually think we have been rash, rather than radical, and taking a more collective approach would be sensible.  After all, many of the countries you list are hardly led by 'demagogues'.  I think, eventually, Kosovan independence is inevitable but, despite my support for peaceful self-determination in general, I am not entirely sure it is desirable.

First of all, the desperately sad recent history of the Balkans has been the sad story of petty nationalism.  Nationalism has been the wrong answer to all the questions posed by the Balkans in the last 20 years, and it seems unlikely that it should suddenly have become the right answer now.

Furthermore the history of Kosovo itself is far more complex than you suggest.  One might almost think that history stopped when NATO took over.

It did not.

Take the 2004 pogrom, for example, when thousands of ethnic-Albanian rioters swept through the whole province burning the homes of Serbs, Roma and other ethnic minorities.  The ethnic cleansing of Serbs, Roma and other minorities under the very eyes of NATO troops started almost as soon the war ended in 1999.  Vicious right-wing petty nationalism is not the preserve of Serbs alone, there's a lot of it about.

Kosovo, as a NATO protectorate, was asked to meet a long list of criteria before it could be recognised as an independent state.  As far as I can tell, it has met none of them, so this is not necessarily a good precedent.

While I always argued, throughout the 90s, that a secular, multi-ethnic confederation which recognised the democratic and confessional rights of all members was what socialists should campaign for (and I rather gather from your posts on other issues that that would be your usual inclination) I accept now that another nation-state has emerged in the region.  But I don't think there is any place for self-congratulation in this business.  It is rather a dark chapter in the history of NATO and one which I think, with the perspective time gives, we will look back on with very little satisfaction whatsoever.


Re: How Labour showed their guts (#4)

by jkitleft on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:00:22 PM GMT

Of course history did not stop, and I wasn't mentioning that all those countries were led by demagogues. But most of those countries, and I forgot to mention Azerbaijan, were acting cowardly.


Of course nationalism is not desirable. But it was the Serbian nostalgic nationalism of a war in 1389, that subordinated other countries, into accepting the undesirable quasi-jingoism that followed the collapse of Yugoslavia.


The oxygen-stealer that was Slobodan Milosevic was once discussing with Lord Carrington. Carrington told Milosevic that he understood why Serbia had concerns over countries, like Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia, that had significant Serb minorities. But why exclusive control over the Kosovo region that had a 90% ethnic Albanian population? "That, is for historical reasons." the fascist replied coldly.


I know the history of Kosovo to be complicated, but I also know that Kosovar nationalism was only exacerbated by the Mladic and Milosevic figures of the Balkans.


In theory, I would have supported a secular, democratic, confederate republic. However, Milosevic's transformation from Communist into Fascist, destroyed any hopes of this. Is the nationalism that has arisen from the ashes of the dead Yugoslavia desirable? Of course not. However, lets not pretend that Kosovo is the Balkan equivalent of Jerusalem. It has some Serbian and Orthodox sites, with aesthetic sublimity. But the West's refusal to intervene in the early 90's only prolonged the moratorium that was to 'cleanse' the Balkans, and this manifested into what you rightly call petty nationalism.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#3)

by NorthernMonkey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:34:32 PM GMT

Independence for Kosovo was bound to happen and should be accepted, but I don't think it was particularly desirable.

Unlike countries such as Montenegro, Croatia or Slovenia, Kosovo was never a separate republic within Yugoslavia - it was always part of Serbia where as Montenegro wasn't.

Now of course, because of the ethnic conflicts within the former Yugoslavia it would be impossible for Kosovo to stay part of Serbia. But it's independence may set a worrying trend across Eastern Europe.

What's to stop Abkhazia or South Ossetia from breaking away from Georgia? Or Nagorno-Karabakh from Azerbaijan? Or Transdniestria from Moldova?

All of these small enclaves which want independence will now feel emboldened and will say - well if the West recognises Kosovo, then why not us?

You might ask, well what's wrong with allowing these tiny break-away states from having independence? Well the most fundamental reason is war. Russia in particular is most against independence for break-away states given its own tenuous situation with Chechnya. If you upset the Russians too much, they will fight back at some point.

Also, it can be argued that many of the small enclaves haven't had time to 'bed down' in what are relatively new nations themselves. Do we really want sovereign nations constructed on purely ethnic lines? Often it's better to keep nations together as they are rather than splitting them up because of old grievances, which causes further tensions as a result.


Re: How Labour showed their guts (#5)

by jkitleft on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 08:30:31 PM GMT

Actually NM, Kosovo has never been a part of Serbia, it was a part of Yugoslavia. Serbia's 'claim' to autonomy can be based on the reversal of the Ottoman's hold of the region from (1389) 1455-1912. Apart from the Soviet Union's reorganisation of Eastern Europe in 1945, Kosovo has never been recognised as Serbian territory in Yugoslavia, or by any international treaty outside Yugoslavia. It was only ever recognised that Belgrade had sovereignty over Kosovo, as Belgrade was the capital of Yugoslavia. Tito granted more autonomy in 1974, which was reversed by Milosevic in 1990, bringing to an end, any hope of a democratic confederation.

Indeed I have heard the independence arguments from some of the countries who have acted in a cowardly way. But how many other countries are comparable to this case, where a national minority has been subjugated, and imprisoned by an artificial state or an empire?


Of course in an ideal world, we shouldn't have states based upon ethnic or religious lines. But Milosevic had the oppertunity to unite the countries in a secular, democratic confederate republic. He obliterated this idea. His racism, breeded more racism.

Ultimately, we are all racist. It is a universal concept. And keeping the harmony in a multi-ethnic, pluralist state is difficult, but not impossible. We must remember history though, and why Kosovo had to resort to declaring independence.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#6)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 12:57:59 AM GMT

Actually NM, Kosovo has never been a part of Serbia, it was a part of Yugoslavia.

Sorry jkitleft, but that's not true. Kosovo was part of Serbia which was in turn was part of Yugoslavia. Kosovo (and Vojvodina) were both Socialist Autonomous Provinces within the Socialist Republic of Serbia, which was in turn part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Kosovo was not separate from Serbia - it was part of Serbia (although it had great autonomy).


This map of the former Yugoslavia might provide a little help here:




There were six Socialist Republics in Yugoslavia: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Macedonia and Serbia. Serbia in turn had two autonomous provinces - Vojvodina and Kosovo (which are shown within dotted lines on the map).

Kosovo throughout the 1970's did gain increasing autonomy within Serbia which gave it all of the trappings of government, but it was always an autonomous region of Serbia - never separate from it.

After Tito's death, the Kosovans pushed harder for recognition as a separate republic within Yugoslavia equal to Serbia, but this never happened.

When Milosevic came to power he eventually stripped Kosovo of it's autonomy too.

All the links to the information are on the wiki pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Yugoslavia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Autonomous_Province_of_Kosovo


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#7)

by jkitleft on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 10:26:23 AM GMT

Serbia annexed the territory in the Balkan wars of 1912-1913.


Once the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires collapsed after the internal war of the Balkans spread to Europe and indeed the rest of the world, a Princeton professor, a Welsh lawyer, and the angry, ageing soldier from the war in 1871 between Germany and France, cut Eastern Europe up like a cake. Wilson later admitted "countries I was ashamed to say I had never heard of", were those that happened to be, in Kosovo's case, being turned into an artificial state.


Serbia merely had Kosovo, as 'de facto', by right of conquest. Treaties over the autonomy of Kosovo were agreed between Turkey and Yugoslavia. It remained the case until Yugoslavia collapsed, that it was recognised that Belgrade had sovereignty over Kosovo, but solely because Belgrade was the capital of Yugoslavia. So if Stalin's endeavours into the tactics of cutting up countries that we saw with the Treaty of Versailles, after his artificial re-creation of Yugoslavia, is exempted, Kosovo has never been recognised as part of Serbia, and NEVER, by ANY International treaty, outside the former Yugoslavia. 


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#8)

by doctordunc on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 01:12:29 PM GMT

While this is in many ways a pointless debate - Kosovo will be independent, and good luck to it - the Treaty of London, 1913 - as the armistice of the Balkan War you refer to - secured the borders of Serbia as including modern-day Kosovo. 

Kosovo had about 40 years or so as a province within the Ottoman Empire (having previously been parts of numerous other provinces) - if we are to say that it is Serbian only through conquest, then the same can be said of the status of all provinces and regions ceded to any nation following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.  Such a rationale for determining nationhood would be a recipe for chaos.

Of course, there is a much simpler rationale - that of the will of a majority - and clearly the majority in Kosovo today, whatever the history, do not wish to be part of Serbia.  As such I can think of no logical, progressive case for forcing them to remain so.  But we should not ignore other questions that emerge from this: do we state benchmarks for nationhood only to ignore them when it suits? What if a majority in Kosovo wish to become part of a Greater Albania? What if other provinces follow suit?  To ignore those questions would be very dangerous indeed, and that is why I think those countries that are taking a more measured approach to this are actually the countries that should be praised.  It is easy to get carried away with seeing cheering people greeting a new status they have fought for so long.  It is easy to miss the people packing up and leaving, or to forget about the broader consequences.

Kosovo will be independent (though, as I said previously, a multi-ethnic federation would be preferable) - but it has to be handled cleverly, and that isn't what's happening right now.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#9)

by rwendland on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 02:17:14 PM GMT

The will of a majority argument cannot alone be the deciding factor. Would we support the Basque area breaking away from Spain and France, and Catolonia from Spain? The Kurds breaking away from Turkey? Alaska (with all that oil) from the USA?

Closer to home I'm sure the majority on the Isle of Sheppey would have a very bright future breaking away from the UK - as a tax haven so close to Canary Wharf they would do wonderfully well! I know I'm being silly, but where is the line drawn where the majority will of an area does not hold sway?


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#10)

by doctordunc on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 02:34:21 PM GMT

As a closet Yorkshire secessionist, I'm not too sure!

No, you make a valid point, but I suppose when an area has some sort of territorial integrity, autonomy, etc. then it gains a degree of legitimacy as an area.

Of course, it does lead to the likelihood of gerrymandering and creating social engineering when the borders of provinces are drawn up and autonomous areas are drawn up.  The difference between Ulster (as a historic region) and Northern Ireland is a clear example of this, and to a certain extent the splitting of the historic Kosovar region between Serbia and Montenegro could be seen in a similar light.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#11)

by jkitleft on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 03:51:55 PM GMT

I see the validity in saying 'where do we stop?', if we allow secessionists. As with some of my arguments about liberal interventionism (with the exception of Iraq, despite my sympathies in principle for intervention, it was clear from the outset that it would have been handled badly), my point is 'where do we start?'.
 
For instance, in rwendland's points about secessionists, I'm sceptical towards many self-determination movements in the Western world. But I believe, for instance, that an independent Kurdistan should be established, as they are the largest group of people on this unhappy globe without a land. The Kosovars are also a people who have long been denied their own sovereignty.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#12)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 05:29:31 PM GMT

Kosovo certainly has been recognised as part of Serbia - indeed whilst the former Yugoslavia existed there was never any doubt that Kosovo was part of Serbia, which was part of Yugoslavia.

The Kosovan people I'm sure were aggrieved by the situation, but that does not mean that they were automatically separate from Serbia.

As doctordunc points out, the 1913 Treaty of London officiated Serbia's new borders, inclusive of Kosovo.

Indeed the Serbian Constitution of 1974 even declared "the Socialist Republic of Serbia comprises the Socialist Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo, which originated in the common struggle of nations and nationalities of Yugoslavia in the National Liberation War (the Second World War) and socialist revolution".

The precise reason why the Kosovan people were rebelling against Tito was that they wanted originally to be separate from Serbia and form their own Republic within Yugoslavia, but this was denied.

I'm not sure where your understanding lies that Kosovo was not part of Serbia when the former Yugoslavia existed, because it is clear that Kosovo was part of Serbia, albeit with a great deal of autonomy (like Vojvodina) until Milosevic came to power.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#13)

by Redflag85 on Sun Mar 23, 2008 at 01:16:17 AM GMT

"The will of a majority argument cannot alone be the deciding factor. Would we support the Basque area breaking away from Spain and France, and Catolonia from Spain? The Kurds breaking away from Turkey? Alaska (with all that oil) from the USA?"

Yes. 

In the same way that we support unity by consent in northern ireland.

Self determination is an important part of the ethos of the UN and has been since after WWI. Rightly so, in my view.

If you can rip it up when you don't like it, the determination is 'self' in name actually; it is actually whether anyone objects which does the determination.

For obvious reasons, this makes a mockery of the principle. 

 

 


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#14)

by Redflag85 on Sun Mar 23, 2008 at 01:16:58 AM GMT

apologies; I meant 'name only'.


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#15)

by doctordunc on Sun Mar 23, 2008 at 11:48:47 AM GMT

I agree with you, but there is the potential for a grey area.  After all, the principle is 'national self-determination', but the concept of 'national' is a social construct, a mythical notion.  So you still have to deal with the silly but pertinent suggestions - what about the people on Harrogate Avenue?  They're a funny bunch down there and may want self government!


[ Parent ]

Re: How Labour showed their guts (#16)

by AlanJi on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 01:27:08 PM GMT

A very interesting discussion and I'd like to add some key points linking the history, practise and principle.

By the end of the Napolenonic wars the Spanish empire had collapsed, and lots of new independent countries came into being.

At the end of WW1, the Russian, Ottman and Austro-Hungarian empires had collapsed and lots of new independent countries came into being. More coutnries and people lived under conditons of legality and democracy than ever before.

The project to create international legality began with the founding of the League of Nations. But there were lots of dictatorships and colonialism was still around, so it didn't work. (At this time, between the first election with a majority voting in 1919 and the first one adult on vote election in 1950, the UK could be called an emerging democracy - not a view that fits the Whig version of history.)

At the end of WW2, the years of the remaining European empires were clearly numbered.  The project to create international legality was renewed with the founding of the United Nations.

And since then wars have thankfully been much smaller. Colonialisam and the Soviet Union have gone. More countries and people live under conditons of legality and democracy than ever before. It is generally expected that others will follow.

All these steps forward have involved a mixture of institutionalising the boundaries of the time, or creating new ones for communities escaping previous oppression and trying to find their own way to legality and democracy.

That last point is the crucial one in assessing future claims for secession. Czechs didn't generally oppress Slovaks, but Slovaks still thought separation was their route to legality and democracy following the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and Comecon. The last Czechoslovak government decided that the enlightended and honourable thing was to accept that.

Now try applying all that any any three conflicts you can think of!


Re: How Labour showed their guts (#17)

by swatantra on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 06:51:15 PM GMT

Nowadays its a bit more complicated than that; mineral rights, oil rights and even water rights, impact on whether a 'nation' wants to secede or be allowed to secede. What happens to the economy of the state left without, as could happen if the Kurds of Iraq have their way. Where Kosova was concerned, very little resources apart from the people.


[ Parent ]

How Labour showed their guts | 17 comments (17 topical)