O/T Annette,
Some brief answers re: Kosovo-Yugoslavia and a wordy analysis:
1. "...why didn't the Albanians take up arms and fight?"
Ethnic Albanians formed a military force (light infantry, no armor)-- the KLA-- to fight the government forces, primarily launching attacks against police and paramilitary forces.
2. "How come we are not seeing the dead, just people in the relief camps?"
Yugoslavia booted out foreign correspondents several days ago and allowed a few to return; however, most, if not all, are restricted to their hotels and cannot roam freely throughout the countryside. According to news sources and NATO, our signal intercepts and aerial reconnaissance are providing evidence of systematic killings and new mass graves.
Note: earlier spy satellite photography detected the mass graves that, in part, led to NATO bombing in Bosnia and the subsequent Dayton Peace Accords. In that situation, airpower worked, helping to establish the precedent for the current NATO campaign.
Unfortunately for our military campaign, the Yugoslav Serbian people regard Kosovo the home of their historical and cultural ethnicity.
Remember "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
By the way, there are lots of pictures and video of dead ethnic Albanians from earlier massacres, with Raca (sp?) the most recent prior to the air campaign.
Those questions were easy to answer, but the question "What's left to do?", is much more difficult and I don't think our administration has a clue with regard to execution. They/we want the ethnic cleansing to stop, but how?
I say this because CNN mentioned a report that NATO is NOW considering a ground force to move into Yugoslavia. I'm not a military strategy specialist, but I could have told them that they'd be needed BEFORE the air assault was launched (I'm sure the military figured that). Here's a military maxim for you: "Airpower cannot hold ground-- only a soldier or Marine can do that."
I'm sure the U.S. Joint Chiefs and NATO commanders suggested a combined air-ground campaign, but were overruled as far as the ground side was concerned.
The current doctrine of the U.S. is "selective interventionist" in other countries internal matters (Africa (except Sudan)-- don't get me going about Somalia-- Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Kasmir, etc. are places we have not hit with Tomahawks), with military force-- or the threatened use-- applied to hostile regimes as a stick to "get with the program". Once the decision to intervene militarily was made, NATO should have put ground forces into place for possible use in the event airpower didn't succeed in stopping Milosevic' ethnic cleansing.
In any event, slaughtering human beings is a crime against humanity and there are many reasons for Europe to intervene. In a seeming contradiction to what I've just stated, I, personally, was against our involvement, more out of fear that the current administration would not be able to pull it off (i.e., make the Yugoslav government capitulate and sign the peace accord). My apprehension is based on current U.S. foreign policy, which is, in my opinion, disjointed, poll-driven, non-supportive in extremely important ways of some major allies (e.g., Japan and Israel), and strengthening our adversaries (e.g., China and N. Korea) in the name of "engagement".
Successful foreign policy is not an all-or-nothing, something you can "win", affair, but is a process with no end, the fruits being peace and prosperity (for both sides, if possible).
It is not easy.
If you don't believe me, attend a city council meeting in just about any U.S. city or town and see how quickly the tempers can be frayed-- that's when we have (for the most part) a common language and cultural background!
In the end, the only way for the "Kosovo" situation to be resolved, outside of a bolt of "peace" out-of-the-blue (someone persuading Milosevic to sign the peace treaty) is for ground forces to move into Yugoslavia. The longer we wait, the more dangerous it will become, because we are giving Russia more time to react, which gives the Yugoslav government more resolve to endure.
Oh, I forgot...there is another option: stop the war, declare victory, and order more cruise missiles.
Lastly, your comment "refugees look like they are from some third world county, but yet we are getting email from them...."
According to the refugee accounts-- and judging from their appearance-- many have been forced to leave their homes with little more than what they were wearing when the government forces evicted them from their homes. If gunman came into your home RIGHT NOW (while you are reading this on your PC) and said "Leave or else", how would you look on CNN?
Additionally, are there any males between the ages of 16-60 in the house? If so, they will be separated from you and sent "somewhere else". The evidence for this is based on Serb behavior in Bosnia-Croatia and the obvious lack of refugees in this demographic range.
As far as e-mail, there was a news report (sorry, can't cite you the source at the moment) that reported e-mails from an ethnic Albanian teenage girl in the embattled region to someone she met during an online chat, that were being published. After the NATO campaign began, no further e-mails were received (I saw the report late last week, don't know if she's okay).
Your questions and observations helped make me think about what the heck is going on over there-- by answering you and generating an off-the-cuff analysis, I forced myself to confront this issue.
The above are my opinions based on my analysis: remember, you got what you paid for!
Enough serious stuff for today... time to view the cherry blossoms (big deal here in Japan).
Take care to all and Happy Easter!
Conan |
