Aleksei Ostrovsky, head of the Duma’s Committee for CIS Affairs has recommended that the Russian Government create diplomatic missions at the territories of three unrecognized republics – Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Trans-Dneister (Pridnestrovie).
According to Interfax, the document, which has been prepared for discussion and further confirmation in the Duma, recommends that Russia work to “achieve representatives’ participation of Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Pridnestrovie in all international organizations and forums, where their interests are discussed and touched.”
Also it was recommended that Russia should “resist firmly any attempts of external pressure – political, economical or military – concerning these three republics” and that the Russian Parliament suggest to the Russian Federation government that it“maintain existing forms of peacekeeping operations to settle conflicts around Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Pridnestrovie based on mutual conventions”.
According to the report:
“Nowadays the situation in the zone of Georgia-Abkhazia and Georgia-Ossetia conflicts becomes more and more complicated. Politics realized by Tbilisi is extravagant, unpredictable and sometimes destructive. Georgia is trying to break existing algorithims of conflict settlement and compromise the Russian peacekeepers’ mission. This gives a reason to Abkhazians and Ossetians to believe that Georgian administration chooses military option”.
The report’s authors note that mandate of peacekeeping forces, which are operating in the territory of the conflicts between Georgia and Abkhazia, Georgia and Ossetia, only allows them to “split the rivals, maintain regime of security and stop the fire”. To change this mandate would require the agreement of all sides. But neither Abkhazia, nor South Osetia have given their agreement, because they are afraid the departure of Russian peacekeepers would lead to destabilization of the situation in the region.
The authors of the project believe that the precedent set in Kosovo, wich recently declared its independence will have consequences for other “frozen conflicts.” If these conflicts remain “frozen,” this will be provoke new stage of confrontation between conflict sides. And this confrontation will be negative for the population.
Nugzar Ashuba, the head of Parliament of Abkhazia, speaking in the Duma, asked Russia to recognize independence of this self-proclaimed republic as soon as possible. He told Duma members that:
“The Russian Federation now (after the Kosovo incident) has enough reasons to declare the independence of Abkhazia all over the world. By doing this Russia will establish its international weight.”
Ashuba also mentioned that the Georgian government must be interested in recognition new status of republic, because Abkhazia has proved that it was able to survive as an independent entity.
“We think that if Georgia recognizes independence of Abkhazia, its government will solve many other socio-economical problems and the Georgian people will be free from waiting for war every moment.”
The rest of the Duma’s discussion was closed to journalists, but according to one source, some Duma deputies consider that Russia has to support these self-proclaimed republics, because they will never be part of Georgia again.
It is the time to remember words of President Putin during the visit of Angela Merkel last week. He reminded us that case of Kosovo would have a lot of consequences for the world.
Now we have the beginning. Who is next?
About Andy Young
Heribert, I dont disagree that the invasion was illegal. But I have come full circle and am now convinced the US went there with good intentions, not bad.
Well, at least we agree on one out of two points.
As for that pile of rubbish TTT, I dunno why its even been spoken about. All this was dealt with at huge length at SRB, with Mike Averko reaching astounding levels of repitition, no answers and more no answers …
There’s a proverb in German … “Wessen Brot ich ess, dessen Lied ich sing” … which is similar to the English language proverb “He who pays the piper calls the tune”. “Our” proverb is a little more precise …
“He, who provides my bread … calls the tune / song I sing”
As Mike is desperately in need “to be published” somewhere, and only finds “media” like Serbianna and TTT willing to do so, he has to sing their song. If he wouldn’t, they wouldn’t “publish him”.
If some fancy “media”, all about garden gnomes on mars, would offer him a column, Mike would be the most enthusiastic and determined promoter regarding the existence of garden gnomes on mars.
No reasonable Serb reads Serbianna, and quite honestly, I have no idea who reads TTT.
sirivanho98,
There is an unfortunate error in the OCR version of your source article: the number of Kosovo Albanians in 1961 is listed as 346 thousands instead of 646. You should redo your math.
Oddly enough, I think the invasion of Iraq was actually legal – because of the UN resolution authorising the ‘allies’ to take whatever action against Iraq they deemed appropriate.
(Sorry – can’t remember the details of the resolution right now, but will look them up later).
However, equally oddly, had the US decided to invade Iran for the same reasons, it would have been entirely illegal – because of the lack of a UN resolution.
In my view, the US invasion of Iraq was legal, but on a technicality.
Merely speculation on your part, if not arrogant to presuppose you know what was written in the book wihtout reading it.
I am not presupposing to know what is written in the book, I am quite clearly guessing. Therefore, there is no arrogance.
You might be surprised or worse, disappointed.
I doubt it. But to settle this, would you care to write a couple of sentences summarising what Ambrose believes to be the motives for the US committing to the defence of West Berlin?
The parralels with modern states are in the political machinations to secure revenue for the treasury through trade and victory over enemies (the looser paid a peace tribute usually in gold and soldeirs), alliances with neighbours, friends and even enemies if there was a greater enemy to defeat.
No modern state has taken this approach in over 60 years, and this is in no way relevant to the US invasion of Iraq. Why you suggest that somebody should read the history of the Byzantine State is unclear, and the point I was making in my first post on the subject that to do so would not advance ones understanding of the current Iraq situation one jot.
I’m still waiting for the evidence showing the US wanted to keep heroin prices down. Talk about bullshit.
Oddly enough, I think the invasion of Iraq was actually legal – because of the UN resolution authorising the ‘allies’ to take whatever action against Iraq they deemed appropriate.
I am of this opinion as well. I think the reason nobody with any authority on that matter, i.e. the UN or other international bodies declared the war illegal is because they new that if it ever came to any kind of court to determine the status of the war, the US would have a reasonable, if not particularly good, case that Saddam Hussein was in breach of the existing UN resolutions and by doing so the US – as the military force behind the existing resolutions – was authorised to invade.
There could have been a powerful case pesented by those in the UN opposed to the invasion, but they would have had to answer some pretty tough questions for which they almost certainly had no answers. Russia and France would have had to explain why the continually vote for the continuation of sanctions whilst simultaneously making huge steps towards normalising relations with Saddam Hussein by signing huge oil deals. Russia, France, and China would have had to explain why it is only the US and UK who are left enforcing the no-fly zone, which Russia, France, and China consistently voted to uphold at the UN. Russia, France, and China would have had to explain why they have contributed precisely nothing to the containment of Saddam Hussein and the restablishment of the weapons inspections when they consistently vote at the UN to ensure the burden of doing so falls squarely on US shoulders. No doubt the failure of the sanctions would have been addressed, and all the dirty laundry from the oil for food scandal aired.
No wonder Russia, France, and China moved quickly in the UN to authorise the US occupation once they’d spent months opposing the actual invasion. The last thing on earth they’d want is to be dragged before an impartial court to explain their actions vis-a-vis Iraq for the past 12 years, even if the Americans and Brits are stuggling to justify their own proposals and actions.
Andy
I did post and cite sources…look above March 22, 9.44am. Here is an excerpt. Do the math.
A Radio Free Europe Reasearch (see links below) shows some statistics from 1971 and a decade earlier. It shows that over the 10 years to 1971, Kosovo’s population doubled from 664,000 to 1.244 million. The number of people identifying themselves as Albanian had increased by 570,000 people (10.25% per annam!!), to represent 73.8% of the population, compared to 67.1 in 1961. That is a 265% increase in the number of Albanians. A decade or so earlier (1945-1950) Albanians would have represented 50% of Kosovo’s population and possibly less.
By comparison, the Serbian population grew by a mere 1,500 persons. This is during the golden years of economic prosperity globally and in Yugoslavia and during which the population grew throughout Yugoslavia. The post war baby-boom was not unique to the West.
Such statistics support the hypothesis that:
1. Kosovo Albanians had a higher than normal birth rate – but even this alone would not fully explain the 10.25% population growth.
2. Influx of illegal immigration from Albania – would account for a large proportion.
3. Ongoing pograms against Serbs, forcing their departure in large numbers – definitely. Even a modest 2.5% growth should have seen the number of Serbs closer to 300,000.
4. A plagua the only affected Serbs. Pigs might fly too.
However you look at it, Kosovo should not have been given to the Albanians on a platter. They had no legal or moral right to it.
Website: http://files.osa.ceu.hu/holdings/300/8/3/text/3-1-72.shtml
original PDF document: http://files.osa.ceu.hu/holdings/300/8/3/pdf/3-1-72.pdf
Ger O’Brien
I can almost imagine you…frothing at the side of your moutn, not from drinking beer, as you dismiss practically anything anyone posts that opposes your viewes and describe it as …crap, or a conspiracy theory, and accuse them of having a lower intelklect than yours trully.
First of all, I dunno why you are typing all that. You -YOU -not me-originally made to fucking ridiculous statement that you felt the US invaded Afghanistan to keep the price of heroin down. Now either back up that point with actual empirical evidence or stop wasting bandwith talking in circles.>>>>>>>I did concede I made the comment in gest few days ago, You can rant about it as long as you like. The point is, that you offered no plausible explanation. When I did, you say …it was old news.
”>>>>I don’t care whether you call it an Empire or a SUPERPOWER, it is one and the same. Read the History of the Byzantine State”
_______________________________________
This is the oldest load of claptrap in the book. Please substantiate as to why the US would bankrupt themselves invading a Middle Eastern hotspot like Iraq.
>>>>Definitely not to liberate the Itaqis.
____________________________________________
I have already eliminated oil and WMDs as a reason which I notice you had no response to..
I would have thought I did. But I believe you called it moving the goal-posts. Here is my attempt again
>>>You have eliminated both, but I am not sure the rest of the world would agree with you. You should look up the law that the Iraqi government proposed to pass regarding the sale and distribution of oil in that country. It favoured US and UK companies. There was a huge furor over it at the time. Not sure what happened in the end.
>>>>As for WMD – You can say what you bloody well like. But, the US Secretary of State Colin Powell, is on record in the United Nations. Bush’s is on record in his speech too.
____________________________________________
Your belief is that the US simply occupies countries because it wants to be an empire, is that correct?
>>>>> It is a bloody Empire by another name. It has military bases in over 150 countries. The biggest one outside USA is in KOSOVO!!!
______________________________________
Please show me exactly what purpose this serves the US, especially considering its budget deficit and the fact that the US already has extensive obligations in Saudi Arabia, not to mention a collapsing economy at home.
>>>>> Strategic positioning. It is natural behaviour. Have you been in business, worked for a large corporation planning strategy? Do you understand how financial markets operate? How capital flows and its consequences on an economy and on a nation? This is not shifting the goal posts, but it is background to give you some understanding of what is at stake. USA cannot sit idly whilst it’s ecnomy, its energy supplies, it’s lifestyle and ultimately its global position is being threatened strategically by the likes of China or even Russia.
I will give you a little example: In 1999, Macedonia’s police drove Chryslers, a year or so earlier they drove some old beat up crap. The only thing that changed in the intervening period is the discussions about EU/NATO membership. 3% of Macedonia military is fighting side by side with NATO forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. They are using NATO supplied weapons. The weapons were paid for by Macedonian taxpayers. This is just a microcosm of what happens.
________________________________________________
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis also died during Saddams reign and the country was impoverished, inspite of astounding oil reserves.
Let’s do the math. Undewr Saddam’s regime maybe 300,000 died so Saddam cxan stay in power. Under Western sanctions maybe 500,000 died from malnutrition, illness etc to punish Saddam. Under Bush’ military intervention maybe 500,000 have died to liberate the Iraqis and impose a regime more in line with western image of itself.
I dont believe the US believed that the situation would become as bad as it has,
The US believed a lot of things. The conspracy theorists siting on the sidelines argued the obvious. Don’t do it.!!!
_____________________________________________
There can be no other reason, unless you suscribe to ‘US empire’ bullshit, which I simply dont.
There iare a host of other reasons. They got their assumptions wrong. They stuffed up, and now use the liberation and freedom mantra as the main motivation, which you have swallowed hook line and sinker.
To repeat, Bush and Blair had no right to invade Iraq, particularly to kill hundreds of thousands civillians so as to liberate them. None whatsover. And this without consulting the Iraqis. Oh Sorry, they did consulat the Iraqi charlatan Chalabi, and his brother in law who gave “false intelligence” on Saddam’s capability.
sirivanho98
I did post and cite sources…
Can you read at all? There is an OCR error in your source document (I have pointed out where exactly), that’s why your math is totally off.
For instance, according to your own source, On 1 April 1971 the province’s total population was 1,244,755 — a 29.1 per cent rise in comparison to the 1961 census, yet you somehow conclude that over the 10 years to 1971, Kosovo’s population doubled.
You should look up the law that the Iraqi government proposed to pass regarding the sale and distribution of oil in that country. It favoured US and UK companies. There was a huge furor over it at the time. Not sure what happened in the end.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the proposed oil law favoured US and UK companies. This is pure speculation on the part of ill-informed commentators. The proposed oil law would have (sensibly) opened up the Iraqi fields to foreign companies under a PSA, and would not have favoured British or American companies any more than French, Russian, Italian, Chinese, or any other nationality. If anybody has evidence that the oil law favoured British or American companies, it has yet to be published.
Currently, there is not one major British or American oil company operating in Iraq. The major foreign oil company closest to starting operations in Iraq is Lukoil, who are Russian. And the only engineering services company I know of which is contracted to execute a major project in the post-Saddam Iraq is Stroytransgaz, who have recently signed a contract to build a pipeline from Iraq to Syria.
Have you been in business, worked for a large corporation planning strategy? Do you understand how financial markets operate? How capital flows and its consequences on an economy and on a nation?
I have. I am now, in fact. General Manager of the Russian branch of a multinational oil services company. Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
Ger O’Brien
I have. I am now, in fact. General Manager of the Russian branch of a multinational oil services company. Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
I guess we have to differ on that subject. If you have read up some on Political Economy then you would udnerstand how many of the pieces fit.
”can almost imagine you…frothing at the side of your moutn, not from drinking beer, as you dismiss practically anything anyone posts that opposes your viewes and describe it as …crap, or a conspiracy theory, and accuse them of having a lower intelklect than yours trully.”
You’re getting me mixed up with Mike Averko. I’m actually quite embarrassed that it’s happened. I need to comment less.
Change your mental picture. I’m almost invariably smoking a cigarette – think of me as like the smoking secret guy in the X-files who meets Mulder now and again. Except without interesting secret info, of course. But really, take a chill pill -I’m not getting annoyed, I’m sure you’re not too, and at the end of the day no-one gives a shit what we’re saying.
”Definitely not to liberate the Itaqis.”
Why else so? It wasnt oil, it wasnt WMDs -the only thing left is US empire nonsense. I have noticed above you used an example from the Byzantime empire – how relevant to 2008 this is I simply dont know, but it most certainly does not convince me that the US is an empire.
”You have eliminated both, but I am not sure the rest of the world would agree with you. You should look up the law that the Iraqi government proposed to pass regarding the sale and distribution of oil in that country. It favoured US and UK companies.”
Please post evidence of this; I have heard this before and seemingly it is patently untrue. Citations please -you are presenting what you deem to be fact, not opinion, and that requires references.
”I dont believe the US believed that the situation would become as bad as it has,
The US believed a lot of things. The conspracy theorists siting on the sidelines argued the obvious. Don’t do it.!!!”
Didnt the teachers in school tell you that hindsight is 20/20 vision? That the US did not fully predict what would happen does not mean that it wanted things to be this way nor wished it so. And by the way I’m not calling you a conspiracy theorist, but much of what you reference is from that vein of thinking.
”There iare a host of other reasons”
Such as? Lets make ourselves clear, yes? What other reasons could the US have invaded for, leaving aside vague allusions to ‘US empirialism’? Give me a good reason why the US went in, apart from oil and WMDs, which we have I think discounted thoroughly now.
”To repeat, Bush and Blair had no right to invade Iraq, particularly to kill hundreds of thousands civillians so as to liberate them. None whatsover.”
We know all this already. But that wasnt the point, was it? The point was why the US went to Iraq.
”Ger O’Brien
I have. I am now, in fact. General Manager of the Russian branch of a multinational oil services company. Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
guess we have to differ on that subject. If you have read up some on Political Economy then you would udnerstand how many of the pieces fit.”
Now you’re confusing me with Tim Newman. I am a forensic toxicologist who teaches college students, not GM of a multinational oil company branch. Sadly. Means Newman earns much more money than me.
DB
Yes I can. From the table of data.
1971
Albanian 918,864
Serb 228,641
Montengro 31,528
Turk 12,151
Gypsy 14,711
Other 38,960
1,244,855
1961
Albanian 346,621
Serb 227,016
Montenegrin 37,638
Turk 25,764
Gypsy -
Other 26,989
664,028
”For instance, according to your own source, On 1 April 1971 the province’s total population was 1,244,755 — a 29.1 per cent rise in comparison to the 1961 census, yet you somehow conclude that over the 10 years to 1971, Kosovo’s population doubled.”
I just love DB. There isnt a doubt in my mind that he’s a scientist or engineer. People like him are the reason we can get on a plane and be confident of getting to our destinations in one piece. Brilliant. The devil really is in the detail. Arts degree twats call this ‘nitpicking’. Well done db, you’re a charlatan hunter if ever there was one.
DB. Thit is what I see.
Albanian 1971 (918,864) 1961 (346,621)
Serb 1971 (228,641) 1961 (227,016)
Total 1971(1244,855) 1961 (664,028)
Do the math…perhaps you are seeing smething I am not. As for the commentary in the analysis, it is not supported by the data in the table. Hence my own calculations.
I’ve told you already, the figure 346,621 is incorrect: the first digit should be 6, not 3.
sirivanho98:
You’re badly misreading the accidentally garbled table. Here, right?
10.25% per annum
Consider. The author says that “[t]he structural composition shows that the Albanians comprise 73.8 per cent of the Kosovar population in comparison to 67,1 per cent in 1961,” and that Kosovo’s population grew by 29.1% between 1961 and 1971.
346,621 out of 664,028 equates to 52.2%–a far cry from 67.3%, I’m sure you’ll agree, and a profound complication. 646 621 out of 964 028, now, produces a percentage of … 67.1%. The table was in error.
Going here, official figures for Kosovo’s population are provided.
1921: 439 thousand
1931: 552 thousand
1941: 728 thousand
1951: 808 thousand
1961: 964 thousand
1971: 1,245 thousand
The Kosovo population evolved in a not unexpected manner, growing by 2.3% per annum in 1921-1931, by 2.8% in 1931-1941, by 1.0% in 1941-1951, 1.8% in 1951-1961, and by 2.5% in 1961-1971. The Second World War clearly produced a severe shock, but by the 1960s population growth had recovered, with an acceleration in population growth likely coming from improved medical care.
(Note that the figure for Kosovo’s 1961 population, 964 thousand, is exactly what it would be if the table was in error.)
I’ll look into this table matter as well. As Aleks suggested, perhaps the numbers game is a bit stretched. Treating Kosovo as something separate from the whole that it’s a part of (Serbia, as per UNSCR 1244, in conjunction with the overall history of Kosovo, inclusive of the demography for much of it) can serve to take attention away from other matters related to the discussion.
Since I last appeared, there’ve been several replies to what I said. I’ll start with Andy, followed by the deceitful and a note to Sir Ivan.
Andy, in reply to your support for the 2003 attack, how do you respond to:
- UN Resolution 1441 not being allowed to work its course.
- An influential force in the US wanting war no matter what.
- Iraq wasn’t seen as a threat prior to the attack. Note the views of Syria, Turkey and other nations that supported the 1991 attack unlike the one in 2003.
- The situation in Iraq since the attack
Now for the deceitful replies. I don’t get paid to post informal (non-article) comments here or anywhere else. Talk about paranoia. Some people choose to misrepresent taking a righteous stand. If anything, one can wonder about the ongoing efforts of two individuals here who repeatedly slur yours truly with half truths and outright lies. This includes the rehashed misinformation about some news and commentary sources, which provide a good service. Much different from the restated bullshit made here against them by sources which haven’t been as positive.
Schindler keeps babbling bullshit about me without mentioning these aspects:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Serb+Politics%2C+Kosovo+and+the+Moscow-Washington+Divide%22&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Kosovo+and+Some+Other+Disputed+Territories%22&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Debunking+the+pro-Kosovo+Independence+Claims%22&btnG=Google+Search
Others include guest panelist appearances on the BBC and a couple of 50K watt news radio shows. Schindler hasn’t come close to matching these examples. I feel no shame in my media activism, which has been very well received throughout the world. Much unlike the manner of Schindler’s overall disgusting performance here and elsewhere.
Can it already and conduct yourselves civilly.
Sir Ivan:
“db” has a penchant for selective nitpicking that could be political, mixed in with the bizarre troll patrol like befriending that’s suggested in how some of these characters willingly state how they contact each other via email. I’ve seen first hand evidence (care of such garabage being emailed to me) of the kind of warped mindedness affiliated with this perverse manner. Note that “db” doesn’t do this to a number of others, when it could be done; and rarely if ever makes an analytical point of his own. It’s not paranoid to see clear evidence of a troll patrol that cheapens the discussion.
“I just love DB. There isnt a doubt in my mind that he’s a scientist or engineer. People like him are the reason we can get on a plane and be confident of getting to our destinations in one piece. Brilliant. The devil really is in the detail. Arts degree twats call this ‘nitpicking’. Well done db, you’re a charlatan hunter if ever there was one.”
****
BULLSHIT! He carries on like a troll with selective nitpicks that noticeably don’t include corerctions against a number of others when mistakes are made.
When has “db” made an analtyical point as opposed to the selective nitpicking of which he’s sometimes wrong?
Love not how some ******* think their purported education in a certain field serves to make them an authority in another area that they clearly don’t know much about.
Schindler:
FYI prominent Serbs read Serbianna. Some of them have simultaneously contacted and complimented me.
You obviously can’t relate to such a level.
Just setting the record straight again.
Randy
You’re badly misreading the accidentally garbled table. Here, right?
Looks like it. Seeing that srouces matter, I decided to check the official Yugoslav Government Statistical Book at the local library. I found the 1968 book. It has data of the 1961 census. I have ordered books for 1974,1983 and 1991.
From recollection the 1971 is the last census in which Albanians participated.
As for the data. Yes. The number of Albanians in Kosovo in 1961 is 646,631 not the number in the table shown in the Radio Free Europe link.
The fact remains. The number os Serbs in Kosovo over the ten years to 1971 remains static, whist Albanians grew by a disproportionate margin, granted not the 10.25% but still considerably higher (3.5%) compared with population trends for Serbs.
The statistical book also shows that in Kosovo the number of households with family members exceeding 10 people is 23,034 or 15.1% of the total. In Vojvodina the number is 1,852 or 3.3%. The proprtion for the remaining part of Serbia (excluding Vojvodina and Kosovo) is 1.8%, confirming a higher rate of birth among Albanians in Kosovo compared to Yugoslavia as a whole. The trend has remained unabated for four decades.
Ger O’Brien
Sorry about directing one of my responses to you, rather than to Tim.
Thanks for your comments Mike.
I did not trust Radio Free Europe, because it is a source of propaganda. In the end the substance of what I had said remains.
Through higher birth rate and intimidation of Serbs Albanians in Kosovo have displaced Serbs as the dominant ethnicity.
No problem Sir Ivan and there’s no need for you to apologize, given the rude manner exhibited.
Tim
I have. I am now, in fact. General Manager of the Russian branch of a multinational oil services company. Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
The point I was making is that national governments undertake similar stratgic analysis as do businesses, particularly multinational businesses. You know, the usual SWOT analysis, stratgies, policies and actions emerge from these. Liberating Iraqis in such US government deliberations would have received as much attention as did liberating Cambidians during Pol Pot’s regime. None! The American’s supported him and the British SAS were training him. Under their watchful eyes, the Pol Pot regime exterminated 2 million of his own people.
The fact that you are working for a multinational oil company in Russia has a lot to do with your government openning the doors to Russia’s markets. And at some point berfore that, the leadership of your company or its industry association would have lobbied the government to work on allowing access.
Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
Iraq’s massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are about to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies under a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament within days.
The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi crude and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/future-of-iraq-the-spioilis-of-war-431114.html
sirivanho98:
“I did not trust Radio Free Europe, because it is a source of propaganda. In the end the substance of what I had said remains.”
It remains only in part. You did acknowledge that Kosovo Albanians had an above-average birth rate, but you also said that there was an “[i]nflux of illegal immigration from Albania.” That wasn’t the case: The Albanian majority exists because of the natural reproduction of the Albanians living there.
“Through higher birth rate and intimidation of Serbs Albanians in Kosovo have displaced Serbs as the dominant ethnicity.”
That happened long before the 20th century. If I had to make a guess, I’d say that it occurred in the 19th century, perhaps some time late in the 19th century when Christian states in the Balkans were expelling Muslims and the Ottoman Empire was badly mistreating Christians. Maybe; there’s still abundant evidence in favour of a concentrated Albanian population in the south of Kosovo.
Regardless, for the first half of the 20th century the proportion of Albanians to non-Albanians in Kosovo remained stable at a ratio of 2:1. it was only when Yugoslavia’s demographic transition began, Serbs in Serbia ahead of Serbs in Kosovo ahead of Albanians in Kosovo, that this ratio began to shift.
“The fact remains. The number os Serbs in Kosovo over the ten years to 1971 remains static, whist Albanians grew by a disproportionate margin, granted not the 10.25% but still considerably higher (3.5%) compared with population trends for Serbs.”
Given the numerous cultural barriers existing between Albanians and the rest of Yugoslavia, it’s not surprising that Albanisns were late to follow their fellow citizens down the route to low-fertility regimes. Kosovo Serbs, it’s worth noting, fell in between Kosovar Albanians and Serbs in inner Serbia on these ratings.
“The statistical book also shows that in Kosovo the number of households with family members exceeding 10 people is 23,034 or 15.1% of the total. In Vojvodina the number is 1,852 or 3.3%. The proprtion for the remaining part of Serbia (excluding Vojvodina and Kosovo) is 1.8%, confirming a higher rate of birth among Albanians in Kosovo compared to Yugoslavia as a whole. The trend has remained unabated for four decades.”
It has changed, actually. Kosovo’s current fertility rate sees each woman give birth to 2.7 children per woman, down–if I recall–from something on the order of 7 children per woman in 1981. That’s still the highest rate of any national population in Europe, but it’s a marked reduction.
The crude birth rate of Kosovar Albanians also “>decreased sharply in the past half-century.
“In Montenegro the birth rate declined from 30/1000 in the 1950s to 15.6/1000 in 1991. In Vojvodina the birth rate declined from a low of 23/1000 to 11.4/1000 during the same period. Central Serbia reached a low birth rate of 11.6/1000 in 1991 but at a much slower pace. In the high birth rate regions of Kosovo and Metohija the birth rate was around 40/1000 in the 1950s and declined to 26.6/1000 in 1991. In central Serbia municipal birth varied from 7.5 to a high of 32.3. Less variation in city birth rates was evident in Vojvodina, where about 70% of urban population had very low birth rates. Montenegro had very low urban birth rates with the exception of the Muslim-dominated city of Rozaj. The total fertility rate in Vojvodina and central Serbia declined from 2.1 in 1961 to 1.7 in 1991. In 1991 only Montenegro had a fertility rate of 2.048. By 1991 the fertility pattern was modern with a concentration of births among women 20-24 years old, and 74.3% of births were first and second born children. Traditional fertility was evident in Kosovo and Metohija, with only 53.1% of births during the 1990s to women with 1 or 2 children.”
Natural increase has changed relatively little because the death rate has kept going down, cancelling out part of the growth.
On the subject of migration, it’s worth noting that the major population movements in the SFRY saw diasporic populations heading to their republican homeland. Thus, Serbs migrated to Serbia and Vojvodina from Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia, Muslims from the Sandzak moved to Bosnia, Bosnian Croats migrated to Croatia and Macedonian Albanians settled in some numbers in Kosovo.
While there was plenty of conflict in Kosovo, there were also very good economic motivations for potential migrants. Had Kosovo Albanians been plugged into Yugoslavia–if there were, say, large gastarbeitar communities in the rich north–then they might also have migrated in large numbers. As it happened, language and other barriers were so high that moving to points elsewhere in Yugoslavia was no different from leaving the SFRY.
Mr. Averko:
“Treating Kosovo as something separate from the whole that it’s a part of (Serbia, as per UNSCR 1244, in conjunction with the overall history of Kosovo, inclusive of the demography for much of it) can serve to take attention away from other matters related to the discussion.”
Treating Kosovo as separate from the whole makes sense since we are talking about a discrete territory named Kosovo, not a random collection of territories.
As for financial marketsa, captal flows and war on Iraq.
And he criticized President Bush for doing “what no other president has done” by cutting taxes at all income levels during a time of war, and he attacked John McCain for his call to extend those tax cuts.
The war, he said, had also made America less safe because Washington was paying for its costs “with loans from China.”
“Having China as our banker isn’t good for our economy,” he said.
Add Russia, India and Japan to the list for bankers.
Things are indeed grim.
Andy
It remains only in part. You did acknowledge that Kosovo Albanians had an above-average birth rate, but you also said that there was an “[i]nflux of illegal immigration from Albania.”
Yes. I advanced three explanations for the population growth derived from the figures in the table, which now turns out was incorrect. Two explanations remain valid. The third, illegal immigation, I will check when I get the rest of the statistical material. But, I would not expect illegal imigrants to be lining up to complete the census form. Perhaps that is why Albanians ceased to perticipate in censuses in Koasovo and in Macedonia for around three decades.
As for the decline in birth rates of Albanian women, I will check the figures. I was referring to four decades from around 1960, give or take a couple of years. If it has abated recently, the redection has not been sufficient to make a difference to the ethnic mix in Kosovo.
As for causes of Serb migration from Kosovo to Serbia, I have already posted links to articles reported in the western press of Albanian initimidation of Serbs in KOsovo. Similar tactics were employed in Macedonia.
Nothing the US has done vis-a-vis Iraq bears any relevance to business, business planning, business strategy, financial markets, capital flows, and basic economics. None whatsoever.
Nothing the Spaniards have done vis-a-vis the natives in Latin- and South America during the Conquista of that continent beared any relevance to gold, systematic exploitation, slavery, [...] . None whatsoever.
Asking someone of today’s “oil industry”, about the motivation behing the 2003 invasion of Iraq, inevitably produces the same determined reply a Spaniard in the “gold industry” of the 16th century would have given when asked about the conquest of e.g. the Inca Empire.
It was all about the rescue of the poor souls living there, about unselfish charity, about christianity … . Everything happened out of pure philanthropy, without any commercial interest. It was all about the freedom of the people. Deus lo vult. Amen.
Although these are the defence minister’s own words, the strategic reason for ongoing military presence in Iraq is not something that Australia’s government could have conceived in isolation let alone execute. Australians are there because of the Americans. He did not mention liberating Iraqis as a motivation. It took the Leader, the Prime Minister to set his minister straight. i.e. to announce the official mantra ‘to liberate Iraqis’.
Oil concerns
Australia was involved in the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and has about 1,500 military personnel still deployed in the region.
There are no immediate plans to bring them home.
In comments to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr Nelson admitted that the supply of oil had influenced Australia’s strategic planning in the region.
“Obviously the Middle East itself, not only Iraq but the entire region, is an important supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world,” he said.
“Australians and all of us need to think what would happen if there were a premature withdrawal from Iraq.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6272168.stm
Proves the point about stragic thinking and planning…down to participating in military action. Nuff said.
This is comical.
The Great Iraq Swindle
How Bush Allowed an Army of For-Profit Contractors to Invade the U.S. Treasury , –From Issue 1034
The bid that Custer claimed to have spent “three sleepless nights” putting together was later described by Col. Richard Ballard, then the inspector general of the Army, as looking “like something that you and I would write over a bottle of vodka, complete with all the spelling and syntax errors and annexes to be filled in later.” The two simply “presented it the next day and then got awarded about a $15 million contract.”
The deal charged Custer Battles with the responsibility to perform airport security for civilian flights. But there were never any civilian flights into Baghdad’s airport during the life of their contract, so the CPA gave them a job managing an airport checkpoint, which they failed miserably. They were also given scads of money to buy expensive X-ray equipment and set up an advanced canine bomb-sniffing system, but they never bought the equipment. As for the dog, Ballard reported, “I eventually saw one dog. The dog did not appear to be a certified, trained dog.” When the dog was brought to the checkpoint, he added, it would lie down and “refuse to sniff the vehicles” — as outstanding a metaphor for U.S. contractor performance in Iraq as has yet been produced……
At the very outset of the occupation, when L. Paul Bremer was installed as head of the CPA, one of his first brilliant ideas for managing the country was to have $12 billion in cash flown into Baghdad on huge wooden pallets and stored in palaces and government buildings. To pay contractors, he’d have agents go to the various stashes — a pile of $200 million in one of Saddam’s former palaces was watched by a single soldier, who left the key to the vault in a backpack on his desk when he went out to lunch — withdraw the money, then crisscross the country to pay the bills. When desperate auditors later tried to trace the paths of the money, one agent could account for only $6,306,836 of some $23 million he’d withdrawn. Bremer’s office “acknowledged not having any supporting documentation” for $25 million given to a different agent. A ministry that claimed to have paid 8,206 guards was able to document payouts to only 602. An agent who was told by auditors that he still owed $1,878,870 magically produced exactly that amount, which, as the auditors dryly noted, “suggests that the agent had a reserve of cash.”
In short, some $8.8 billion of the $12 billion proved impossible to find. “Who in their right mind would send 360 tons of cash into a war zone?” asked Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight Committee. “But that’s exactly what our government did.”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/16076312/the_great_iraq_swindle/2
The only saving grace for Bush is that the $12 billion did not cost the Government that much. Afterall it was money that was printed by the Government for its own use.
sirivanho98:
“Yes. I advanced three explanations for the population growth derived from the figures in the table, which now turns out was incorrect. Two explanations remain valid. The third, illegal immigation, I will check when I get the rest of the statistical material. But, I would not expect illegal imigrants to be lining up to complete the census form. Perhaps that is why Albanians ceased to perticipate in censuses in Koasovo and in Macedonia for around three decades.”
Albanians participated in the 1981 censuses, at least in Kosovo. They opted out en masse from the 1991 census, and the post-1999 population records have mainly been extrapolations and projections.
Immigration from outside of Yugoslavia isn’t necessary, since Kosovo Albanians’ high rate of natural increase does an adequate job of accounting for this. Even if–for argument’s sake–the extra 0.5% of growth of Kosovo Albasnians over Republic of Albania Albanians represents immigration, that still leaves nearly 2.5% of growth that’s natural increase.
Illegal immigration played a marginal role if that in the 1980s, and if anything the direction of migration would have been outwards in the 1990s. Kosovo became, in that time period, a repressive police state that governed one of the poorest territories in Europe. Why would anyone from the Republic of Albania in their right mind want to move there?
“As for the decline in birth rates of Albanian women, I will check the figures. I was referring to four decades from around 1960, give or take a couple of years. If it has abated recently, the redection has not been sufficient to make a difference to the ethnic mix in Kosovo.”
? I don’t understand you. Kosovo Serbs’ birth rate declined earlier and more quickly than Kosovo Albanians’, although Kosovo Serbs still evidenced higher complete fertility than their co-ethnics elsewhere in the SFRY.
“As for causes of Serb migration from Kosovo to Serbia, I have already posted links to articles reported in the western press of Albanian initimidation of Serbs in KOsovo. Similar tactics were employed in Macedonia.”
1. Ethnic conflict, in the context of an increasingly poor province where different ethnic groups competed for scarce resources, is to be expected. What I’m saying is that there were also other reasons for Kosovo Serbs to migrate from Kosovo to Serbia and Vojvodina in the 1970s and 1980s, just as there were reasons for Kosovo Albanians to migrate to western Europe in the 1980s and 1990s.
2. This is, honestly, the first I’ve heard of anything comparable in Macedonia. Cites, please?
Randy
Illegal immigration played a marginal role if that in the 1980s, and if anything the direction of migration would have been outwards in the 1990s.
The period of interest for me is the three decades to the break-up of Yugoslavia i.e up to 1991.
Kosovo became, in that time period, a repressive police state that governed one of the poorest territories in Europe. Why would anyone from the Republic of Albania in their right mind want to move there?
The UCK activities required stronger police measures. They were kidnapping and executing people – policemen, civillians. Albanians refused to pay for services such as power water and the like. They took salaries and pensions from the Serbian government but continued undermine the government i.e. sabotaging public utilities by trowing carcasses of dead animals in the water supply, destroying generators at power supply companies. That was their way of weakening the economic infrastructure of the Serbian government.
Kosovo was economically better than Albania. I will check up statistics on Albania’s census. From recollection, that country showed negative population growth, but I am not sure in which period.
I don’t understand you. Kosovo Serbs’ birth rate declined earlier and more quickly than Kosovo Albanians’, although Kosovo Serbs still evidenced higher complete fertility than their co-ethnics elsewhere in the SFRY.
I will go back to the library and check the year book. It should have data on birth rates.
This is, honestly, the first I’ve heard of anything comparable in Macedonia. Cites, please?
First heard about intimidation in Macedonia? For a person who shows so much knowledge on Kosovo, its demographics, migration and birth rates, I find it difficult to understand your comment. You ask for citations? Albanian aspirations in Koaovo and Macedonia are the same side of the coin. YOu cannot be informed about one wihtout the other. Tetotvo, Gostivar, Struga, Tanusevci.
Albanians bombed public buildings. Destroyed centuries old monasteries. In one monastery near Skopje they defaced the frescoes – I took photographs of that act of vandalism in 1998. They executed policemen and are still at it, as recently as last year.
The detail I am sure you are capable of sourcing yourself. But here are some snippets.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2216541.stm
________________________________________
Six bomb attacks and as many victims have shaken a fragile peace in Macedonia since the start of this year, threatening lasting ethnic conflict with a new dimension – urban terrorism.
“It is too early to call this a wave of terrorist attacks, but two simultaneous explosions in Skopje are nothing less than an act of terror,” a western intelligence source told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.
Similar tactics were used in neighbouring Kosovo, prior to the NATO intervention in 1999. “Bombs were exploding in Pristina cafes, Both Serbian and Albanian … the town would empty as soon as night fell”, the source said.
http://www.publicinternationallaw.org/docs/PNW2/PNW.30June_03.htm#Macedonia
_______________________________________
This one is a gem.
Ambassador Frowick was forced to hastily leave Macedonia under the threat of being declared persona non grata, after it was revealed, on May 23, that he had sponsored a secret and illegal pact of “cooperation and joint action” between the ethnic Albanian leaders, members of the Macedonian government, and KLA leader Ali Ahmeti. The pact was signed in Kosovo, following secret talks encouraged by Frowick, while Macedonia was at war with the terrorists,
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2001/2824_kla_macedon.html
The fact that you are working for a multinational oil company in Russia has a lot to do with your government openning the doors to Russia’s markets.
Firstly, I’m not working for a multinational oil company, and secondly my working for my company in Russia has nothing to do with the British government and everything to do with us having the winnning tender submitted to a large Japanese company.
The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi crude and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.
Linking to an opinion piece, in which the authors offer not one shred of evidence, does not strengthen your argument. A similar article was written in March 2007, and it was quite clear that the author did not have a clue what he was talking about. This is almost certainly the case with this article.
So I’m sorry. If you’re going to convince me that the war was all about oil and that the new oil law is about to allow western supermajors unfettered and preferential access to the Iraqi oilfields, you’re going to have to produce some actual evidence and not links to opinion pieces written by people who happen to believe what you do.
The point I was making is that national governments undertake similar stratgic analysis as do businesses, particularly multinational businesses. You know, the usual SWOT analysis, stratgies, policies and actions emerge from these.
I am rather skeptical that the US government bases its actions on the outcome of SWOT analyses similar to those employed by large businesses, but I am willing to have my mind changed on the production of some evidence.
Asking someone of today’s “oil industry”, about the motivation behing the 2003 invasion of Iraq, inevitably produces the same determined reply a Spaniard in the “gold industry” of the 16th century would have given when asked about the conquest of e.g. the Inca Empire.
Inevitably? I’ll hazard a guess that you haven’t actually asked anyone in today’s oil industry this question.
Were you to ask me, I would say I believe the primary motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion was to secure the safety of the Kuwaiti and Saudi oilfields from Saddam Hussein, a threat which was only kept at bay by the US having a large and extremely unpopoular military presence in Saudi Arabia for 12 years, at a time when the policy of containment was clearly not working and shortly due to collapse.
So, not so inevitable, eh?
The only saving grace for Bush is that the $12 billion did not cost the Government that much. Afterall it was money that was printed by the Government for its own use.
So the US government simply prints money to pay its bills? I don’t think you understand economics very well. A government printing off $12bn in cash results in massive and rapid inflation, along the lines of what Zimbabwe is experiencing now. That inflation is not going through the roof in the US is proof enough that the US government is not, in fact, printing off money to pay its bills.
Tim
So the US government simply prints money to pay its bills?
Of course it does. Practically every day of the year. The balancing act is to make sure the amount of notes printed is consistent with economic growth and demand, so that the amount of new money released in the economy does not cause inflation…
The central bank usually sets a broad target for the supply of money, taking into account notes, coins, deposits, bonds, etc.
I don’t think you understand economics very well. A government printing off $12bn in cash results in massive and rapid inflation, along the lines of what Zimbabwe is experiencing now.
Do you? The $12 billion was printed and delivered to Iraq where it was used to pay all and sundry. It had bothing to do with America’s economy. They might as well have printed monopoly money and sent it to Iraq. Redeemable war coupons would have achieved the same result.
If that money every found its way to USA, then perhaps it would cause inflation. But that would depend on how much of it would come back, over what timeframe and how it is used. In a $10 trillion econmy the $12 billion would represent a drop in the ocean. As a percentage of the total supply of money in USA, again, a small fraction. Even as a percentage of the amount of US currency floating outside USA, estimated at $3 trillion, the $12 billion is a negligible fraction.
I would expect the $12 billion to be causing inflation in Iraq.
Tim
So the US government simply prints money to pay its bills?
It is a bit more subtle than that. The central bank prints notes and minits coins, and sells them to the private banks at face value. The difference between the face value of the currency sold and the cost of production, the amount it has spent to produce the money is called MARGIN. That margin is HUGE, I would guess 60%-70% oeverall after overheads, but the marginal profit (let’s call it gross margin) from printing notes alone would be much higher..
Each year the central bank balances its books and makes a surplus, from printing money, from being a lender of last resort to the banks, from currency trading etc which is then paid to Treasury as a dividend. That dividend, a large part of which is from printing notes is used to PAY Government Bills via the budgetary process.
Tim
Under which letter in SWOT, would the following statement, made by Australia’s the defence minister fall?
In comments to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr Nelson admitted that the supply of oil had influenced Australia’s strategic planning in the region.
“Obviously the Middle East itself, not only Iraq but the entire region, is an important supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world,” he said.
As for Iraq’s law on oil etc. Before the war, it was a nationalised industry. We shall see what comes out of it and who gets to play there. The pundits might have miscalculated the public opposition to the proposed law. The Kurds are playing their own game.
The central bank prints notes and minits coins, and sells them to the private banks at face value. The difference between the face value of the currency sold and the cost of production, the amount it has spent to produce the money is called MARGIN.
It’s not called margin, it’s called seignorage, and there is a vst difference between a government having seignorage as an income and a government printing off money to pay its bills.
Tim
Were you to ask me, I would say I believe the primary motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion was to secure the safety of the Kuwaiti and Saudi oilfields from Saddam Hussein, a threat which was only kept at bay by the US having a large and extremely unpopoular military presence in Saudi
I would buy that rationale ahead of the altruistic one, to liberate Iraqis. Particularly because American military bases in Saudi Arabia had closed.
Under which letter in SWOT, would the following statement, made by Australia’s the defence minister fall?
I have absolutely no idea.
Tim
Try T for Threat – in your own words a threat which was only kept at bay by the US having a large and extremely unpopoular military presence in Saudi
Aleks:
Bangladesh bears no resemblance to Kosovo. Talking legally here, not the law of the jungle pov.
Bangladesh gained its independence in 1971. The Helsinki Final Act of 1975 clearly states that separation of territory can only be by the agreement of both parties.
That’s true, but it’s implementation has been quite ambiguous. The Baltic States declared their independence with Soviet consent, but Slovenia and Croatia did the same without Yugoslavia’s consent and got recognized nonetheless. Most spectacularly, Russia got together with Ukraine and Belarus to declare the Soviet Union defunct without bothering to consult with the Soviet government or the othr Soviet republics.
1975 still happens after 1971, however one may try to bend it and I am sure that Bangladesh does not exist in a temporally different universe to the rest of us.
1975 does come after 1971, but the Bangladesh precedent still exists. The Helsinki Final Acts do exist, but their implementation on the ground has been decidedly patchy.
You also failed to pick up on the same point I was making with my comment on California and Mexico, though I should have been more explicit.
California will have a hispanic majority in the not too distant future.
A quick Googling refers to projections which claim that by 2042, 52% of California’s population of 60 million will be Hispanic. A 52% majority can’t carry such a big decision, as referenda elsewhere have demonstrated. More to the point, California’s Hispanics don’t constitute a single population, with Mexican-Americans being the largest contingent alongside a dozen other notable Latin American contingents and with the Spanish language simply not being passed down from generation to generation. The differences with Kosovo–a long-established and homogeneous population with a strong cultural coherence–are obvious.
If (for whatever reason) they decide to secede without agreement of the rest of the US, China could recognize their right to independence using Kosovo as a precedent.
Hmm. The Bangladesh-Eritrea-Kosovo precedent is generally seen as an exception to the general rule that when federations dissolve, they have to do so with the agreement of their constituents. For this precedent to work, you’d need a large and relatively homogeneous population concentrated in a specific territory that had been subjected to such serious atrocities by the central state as to delegitimize its rule. If, in fact, the United States did do that to California or any other of its territories, I really wouldn’t have a problem with China and the world recognizing the battered Californians right to independence in their own sovereign homeland.
srivanhoe98:
The period of interest for me is the three decades to the break-up of Yugoslavia i.e up to 1991.
Documentation of this illegal immigration would be welcome. I’ve heard many people claim very large figures for it without referring to primary source materials.
The UCK activities required stronger police measures. They were kidnapping and executing people – policemen, civillians. Albanians refused to pay for services such as power water and the like. They took salaries and pensions from the Serbian government but continued undermine the government i.e. sabotaging public utilities by trowing carcasses of dead animals in the water supply, destroying generators at power supply companies. That was their way of weakening the economic infrastructure of the Serbian government.
The KLA only appeared after the mid-1990s, when Rugova’s strategy of a parallel state failed to produce dividends. Consequently, it’s irrelevant to a discussion of Albania-Kosovo migration trends before the mid-1990s.
Kosovo was economically better than Albania. I will check up statistics on Albania’s census. From recollection, that country showed negative population growth, but I am not sure in which period.
1. The paper Internal Mobility and International Migration in Albania” refers to Greece and Italy as the dominant recipients of emigrants; Kosovo comes up only inasmuch as ALbania received 450 thousand refugees in 1999. Similarly, Migration Information’s August 2004 Albania survey quotes precise figures.
“By the present day, approximately 25 percent of the total population, or over 35 percent of the labor force, has emigrated. The country has approximately 900,000 emigrants, now residing mainly in Greece (600,000), Italy (200,000), and most of the remainder in other Western European countries, the US, and Canada. Albania’s migration flow has, since the early 1990s, been five times higher than the average migration flow in developing countries.”
I simply can’t find any evidence of any significant Albanian migration to Kosovo in the 20th century. Most of the references I come across refer to the Albanian refugees from Kosovo, or occasionally to Albanian exoduses from the Ottomans to Italy in the 15th century and from Serbia proper to Kosovo in the 19th century, to Albanians who claimed to be Kosovar refugees, and to Serb emigrants from Kosovo.
2. The paper “Regional Cooperation in Southeastern Europe” suggest that in 1989 Albania’s GDP per capita was $700 versus Yugoslavia’s $2500. In light of these incomes differences, migration from Albania to Yugoslavia would only be expected if there was a lax border regime. There wasn’t; Albania was tightly sealed off from the rest of the world. More to the point, Kosovo wasn’t an attractive destination for migrants, “Southeast Europe: History of Divergence” suggesting that Kosovo’s gross social product (roughly comparable to GDP) per capita was one-quarter or so that of Yugoslavia’s, so something on the order of or less than Albania’s GDP per capita. Kosovo’s unemployment was never less than in the double digits from at least the 1960s.
Where would Albanian migrants to Kosovo get jobs? Why would they not continue heading north, to richer parts of Yugoslavia and to western Europe? How would they get passed frontiers which were hermetically sealed past the 1980s?
Now, Intute claims that Kosovo’s GDP per capita one-third Albania’s. It would be surprising if Albanians moved to Kosovo; if anything, the flow should be in the opposite direction.
3. Finally, population growth among Albanians both in the Republic of Albania and in the SFRY was quite high, well over 2% per annum well into the 1980s. Albania did see a sharp population decline after the end of the Communist regime and the beginning of emigration; Kosovo may see the same process in a few years. Balkan countries have always been too good at producing emigrants.
I will go back to the library and check the year book. It should have data on birth rates.
I provided some information in the links I cited in my previous post, and I cited some information in links in this post.
First heard about intimidation in Macedonia?
This is the first specific mention I’ve heard of ethnic conflict in Macedonia akin to that alleged to exist in Kosovo in the 1980s, yes. I’m not terribly surprised, since many of the same characteristics apply, with low-level interpersonal hostilities on the ground coupled with bad political movements (Albanian separatist militias on the one hand, stupid Macedonian nationalists on the other).
You ask for citations? Albanian aspirations in Koaovo and Macedonia are the same side of the coin. YOu cannot be informed about one wihtout the other. Tetotvo, Gostivar, Struga, Tanusevci.
“Albanian aspirations”? Let’s please not bring up the chimera of a Greater Albania that’s profoundly unpopular on the ground and doomed by ALbanian-Kosovar tensions in the bargain. For all that it’s used, “Greater Albania” is not much more meaningful today ss “Greater Germany,” certainly much less so than “Greater Serbia.”
A 2002 shooting of two policemen and 2003 bomb attacks suspected to be committed by Albanian groups don’t point to such a big conspiracy.
More to the point, the 2001 Macedonian conflict was triggered by, among other things, the notable underrepresented of ethnic Albanians in the Macedonian public sphere. It was hardly a case of Albanians picking on poor Macedonians! Both sides went to it.
Inevitably? I’ll hazard a guess that you haven’t actually asked anyone in today’s oil industry this question.
Well, guess again. Just because I don’t bragg about my employment status or income doesn’t mean I not talking to people in the oil or gas industry.
Were you to ask me, I would say …
I know what you will say before even asking you. Just like I know which part of the lyrics the old scratched vinyl record, which sits somewhere on my shelf, keeps repeating over and over and over as soon as I put it on the turning table. Do I really have to quote old Sean again ?