TO ALL partly**OT** re: KOSOVO
as nato keeps on reminding everybody, attacking serbia is no cakewalk.
here's why:
yugoslav forces:
army:
75,000 soldiers
approx. 150,000 reservists
1,300 tanks
570 armored infantry vehicles
60 surface-to-air missile launchers
air force:
15,000 personnel
15 MiG-29s , 64 MiG-21s
90 other fighters
8 surface-to-air missile regiments
navy:
7.500 personnel
4 frigates, 4 submarines
interior ministry forces:
75,000
add to that whatever the russians eventually manage to slip in through the back door and remember you're looking at well trained and battle-hardened forces.
to anyone wondering why the balkans are such a perennial flashpoint, i recommend samuel huntington's book 'clash of civilizations' which deals with the foreign policy challenges of the west following the end of the cold war.
throughout history warfare has had a generally positive effect on the u.s. stock market. usually a nervous period shortly before the outbreak of hostilities is turned into a decent advance once the shooting starts in earnest. so the question is: could serbia somehow still upset the applecart here? at the moment most market participants seem to have concluded that this will be the same clear-cut high tech strike that has worked so well in driving iraq out of kuwait (notwithstanding the fact that saddam seems to be as firmly entrenched as ever).
now, while nato has not stated it's aims as clearly as one would wish, it *has* said it wants the refugees back where they belong, in a safe and sound environment.
mark my words: this cannot possibly be achieved without the use of ground troops, barring a miracle. while western politicians continue to insist publicly that the 'airstrikes-only' option is still the way to go, nato has already started to move ground troops + a coordinating HQ into albania, to assist with the refugee crisis. this seems to me is in preparation for what the military planners surely know is inevitable: nato will have to invade kosovo and establish a protectorate there.
the only alternative would be for nato to back down, which is out of the question since it would destroy it's credibility forever. on the other hand, milosevic won't back down either, since his very survival hinges on not backing down.
i suspect that as soon as the necessity for the use of ground troops starts getting sold to the public, the market may well catch a cold,as fresh uncertainties would emerge. kosovo is after all a terrain very different from the iraqi desert, and the serbian forces can be expected to be a great deal tougher than their iraqi counterparts.
for now kosovo serves as a sort of 'wall of worry' backdrop to the market, but that could change quickly.
consider this: of the countries surrounding serbia only croatia and hungary seem reasonably stable and reliable. all the rest are still liable to be drawn into the conflict in one way or another,especially if milosevic should conclude that this would serve his purpose (which it would).
even russia is still something of a wild card here, although primakov seems level-headed enough, so i don't expect anything major as long as he firmly holds the reins.
another potential danger i see on the horizon is that nato's preoccupation with serbia might induce other rogue states to stir up trouble in their respective backyards. north korea and even china come to mind, not exactly paragons of predictability, except for the fact that one can count on their expansionary leanings.
so, however distant serbia may seem to most of us, the developments there demand the closest attention if one is engaged in the stock market. as i have said, the historical evidence favors the bulls for now, but with the market so highly valued any kind of escalation of the conflict is bound to trip it up.
blasnik
|
