Fort Dix Albanian Terrorists Plead Guilty

The American Council for Kosovo
www.savekosovo.org
The American Council for Kosovo is an activity of Squire Sanders Public Advocacy, LLC, and Global Strategic Communications Group, which are registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act as agents for the Serbian National Council of Kosovo and Metohija, under the spiritual guidance of His Grace, Bishop ARTEMIJE of Ras and Prizren. Additional information with respect to this matter is on file with the Foreign Agents Registration Unit of the Department of Justice in Washington DC.
Washington, November 1, 2007
KOSOVO ALBANIAN PLEADS GUILTY IN JIHAD TERROR PLOT AGAINST FORT DIX
John Bolton: “I Hope that the U.S. Won’t Recognize a Unilateral Declaration of Kosovo Independence”
American policy on Kosovo continues collision course with reality

Editorial Comment from the American Council for Kosovo – Nothing better illustrates the extent to which U.S. policy regarding the Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija is damaging the American national interest than the guilty plea this week of Kosovo Albanian Agron Abdullahu in connection with the jihad terror plot against Ft. Dix, New Jersey. Abdullahu, who was admitted to the U.S. as a refugee under the Clinton Administration, can be considered an exemplar of supposedly “pro-American” Albanian Muslims grateful for U.S. sponsorship of their quest for an independent state carved out of Serbia. (Three of Abdullahu’s co-defendants in the plot to massacre American service personnel at Ft. Dix also were Albanian Muslims from just south of Kosovo, along with a Jordanian and Turk.) It should be noted that the U.S. Department of Justice successfully opposed Abdullahu’s motion for pretrial release, based in part on a depiction he scratched in his cell of a machine gun shooting at the FBI and graffiti glorifying the so-called “Kosovo Liberation Army” (KLA), a terrorist organization. The fact that Abdullahu and his comrades were even in a position to plot the attack is due to the fact that the U.S. government – notably the Department of State (which does not share the common sense of the Justice Department and the FBI) – supports the KLA and its cause. We have now reached the point that our skewed policy in Kosovo trumps even the priority of homeland defense.

Meanwhile, on the international front, American policy toward Kosovo continues on its collision course with reality. Flouting every concept of legality and morality, official Washington (both the Bush Administration and leading Democrats in Congress) remains dedicated to the proposition that the KLA criminals and jihad terrorists who dominate Kosovo’s Albanian Muslim community should unilaterally declare the province’s independence from Serbia, to be recognized by the United States without any pretense of authority from the UN Security Council. (It should be noted that nothing in the UN Charter gives the Security Council authority to break off part of a state’s sovereign territory without its assent. How much less, then, does any country or group of countries have that right acting even without Security Council action, as the U.S. seeks to do to Serbia.)

But the fact is, Washington’s threats are meaningless, and neither the Albanians’ declaration nor U.S. recognition is inevitable. Given the Bush Administration’s understandable preoccupation with Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Iran, it is hoped a “final solution” for Kosovo can be imposed with a minimum of fuss. If it appears that will not be the case – if the EU does not salute and fall into place (Cyprus, an EU member, has been increasingly vocal that it not only will never recognize Kosovo but even is prepared to veto any such action by Brussels), if important non-EU friends like Canada, India, and, especially, Israel balk – a sustained effort to bully and bribe our way to a new “coalition of the willing” would hardly get Kosovo off Washington’s plate. (And this is not even noting the fundamental fact that Serbia never will sign on the dotted line. As noted by James Bissett, Canada’s former Ambassador to Yugoslavia: “In this regard it is interesting to note that in 1938, at the time of Munich, president Edvard Beneš of Czechoslovakia, bullied by the British and French, signed the agreement to hand over the Sudetenland region to Germany, thus giving his consent to the transaction. It would seem that even Hitler insisted on at least the appearance of following the rules of international conduct.”)
Even if the trigger is pulled on the unilateral scenario after the scheduled December 10 conclusion of the current talks between Belgrade and the Albanians, of course Serbia and Russia will not accept it. Neither would China, India, Indonesia, South Africa, Nigeria, and numerous other counties in Africa, whose own fragile borders reflect not demography but colonial boundaries. Likewise problematic for Washington would be Latin America, where, despite these countries’ historic relationship with the U.S. – or maybe in some cases because of it – there is a high degree of anti-yanqui popular sentiment in the region, as well as a very fastidious view about defending their sovereignty, especially vis-à-vis el coloso del norte, and preserving their protection under the UN Charter.
In short, even supposing Washington were to unleash the illegal and ill-advised course it now threatens, it will solve nothing relating to Kosovo’s status. Instead it would present the region, all of Europe, and the international community with a new and divisive predicament, in which the United States may find itself isolated -- not to mention setting off a new destabilization of the western Balkans, collapsing Serbia’s relationship with the U.S. (and possibly with the EU), and destroying any notion of international legality and territorial integrity of states under the UN Charter, as separatist movements around the world are encouraged to seek independence though violent and intolerant means.
The real question, then, is how much damage the architects of U.S. foreign policy are willing to inflict on American interests in pushing a policy condemned to failure, which even if successful would be harmful to all concerned. The fact that the responsible actors refuse to reassess their course in part reflects the desperation of a lame duck Administration to score a “win” somewhere, anywhere – in this case, following a flawed policy inherited from its predecessor and kept on life support by State Department bureaucrats and the opposition party. Some “win.”
Thankfully, voices of reason increasingly are speaking out. One of the foremost is former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, author of a the soon-to-be released book Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad, which focuses on the State Department’s dysfunctional role in formulating U.S. policy, and not only on Kosovo. Speaking to the Voice of America’s Serbian Service in a recent interview, Ambassador Bolton noted: “I quote, for example, a statement of one senior State Department official who told me once that if they knew how we formulate our foreign policy, Americans would be very dissatisfied.” That should be the epitaph on the gravestone of Washington’s doomed Kosovo policy.
James George Jatras
Director, American Council for Kosovo

Other news worthy of note:

1. In an October 31, 2007 article, “Man pleads guilty to weapons charges in alleged plot to attack U.S. Army base in New Jersey,” the Associated Press reported: A man has pleaded guilty to to conspiring to provide weapons to a group of men accused of plotting an attack at the Fort Dix U.S. Army base in New Jersey. Agron Abdullahu, an ethnic Albanian born in the Serbian province of Kosovo, faces up to five years in federal prison when he is sentenced Feb. 6. Since his arrest, he has been held in isolation at a federal detention center in Philadelphia.
2. In an October 30, 2007 Voice of America interview, Ambassador John Bolton stated: I think that the State Department has had an anti-Serbian policy for more than 15 years. When Yugoslavia was falling apart and Milosevic conducted his policy, there was some logic to our opposition to such a policy. Unfortunately, this biased policy has continued, even though there’s no logical explanation for it. While Serbia is trying to establish an effective and functional democracy regarding human rights and other issues, the anti-Serbian policy has continued, especially with regard to Kosovo, where a decision in favor of its independence could only create other concerns, and such a decision could impact on the democracy in progress in Serbia, and the possibility that the Security Council would step beyond its authority, which would be very unfortunate. This is one of the numerous examples of behavior by the State Department, which is a problem the next President has to solve...I hope that the United States will not recognize a unilateral declaration of Kosovo independence, although I think that things are currently moving in that direction, and I am afraid that it could cause more damage than it can bring good in the Balkans. Such a decision, which would be taken under threat of violence, would actually represent a way to reward bad behavior. The issue of Kosovo should be solved by two parties at the negotiation table. I understand that strong positions are taken regarding the issue by both sides - Albanian and Serbian. These are and will be tough negotiations in order to reach a solution which would satisfy both parties, but this is much better than to impose a solution on one side or the other, based on a wrong understanding of the situation.
3. During his keynote address at the symposium on Kosovo held at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C., on October 23, 2007, Amb. James Bissett stated: The determination of the United States to remove Kosovo and Metohija from Serbia and to grant independence to the Albanians living there is a threat to the Westphalian order and an unequivocal violation of international law. It also has far reaching implications for global peace and security. Shortly after NATO aircraft began the bombing of Serbia in the spring of 1999 I wrote an article in one of Canada’s national newspapers entitled “a return to barbarism,” In the article I condemned the bombing as a violation of international law and of the UN charter and of NATO’s own treaty. But the point of the article was to stress that the bombing marked an historical turning point. As the 20th century was coming to the end there had been a brief period after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall when we were offered the encouraging prospects of a “pax Americana.” Many believed the United States was the one country that might guarantee that the new century would see an end to war and violence. After two cataclysmic world wars and the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world was offered the hope that the new century would follow the principles laid down in the united nations and that the Westphalian order would be restored. Alas, these hopes were shattered with the bombing of Serbia by the US-led NATO powers. This was a naked act of aggression against a sovereign state. Sadly, it had been carried out by the democratic nations whose political leaders never failed to sing the praises of the rule of law and the UN charter. It was a foreboding warning of things to come. The bombing of Serbia established an ominous precedent. It meant the United States and the NATO countries could intervene wherever and whenever they wished. The use of force or the threat of it would be used whether within the law or not and having set the precedent with the bombing of Serbia the decision to invade Iraq was easy. The American insistence on giving the Albanians independence and unilaterally handing over 15% of Serbian territory to the criminal leaders of Kosovo is simply a further example of the willingness of the United States to use naked power to achieve its policy objectives. It would seem the only obstacle in the way of the American desire to create an independent Kosovo is a resurgent Russia. Ironically, it is Russia that is insisting on compliance with the principles of international law and the UN charter before any consideration is given to Kosovo independence. This in itself is a remarkable development. It would almost seem that the new breed of American political leaders—the Clintons, the Albrights, the Holbrookes, the neoconservatives, George Bush and others like them—have betrayed the trust bestowed upon them by the founding fathers of their great Republic. By doing so they have abandoned the very principles upon which America was founded and which are enshrined in the UN charter by doing so they have lost the moral authority that formed the real strength of the democratic countries in overcoming the forces of totalitarianism. They have also delivered a damaging blow to the Westphalian order. It will not be easy to get it back.
4. In October 25, 2007 Jewish World Review article, “The Coming Balkan Caliphate,” Julia Gorin wrote: In September 2001, George W. Bush admonished the world, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." But how will the world know where to stand when America itself is with the terrorists? Such is the America that operates in the Balkans, and such is the question underlying Christopher Deliso's new book, "The Coming Balkan Caliphate", which tells the most terrifying story never told in the War on Terror. . . . Deliso's main focus is Kosovo, which saw the Clinton administration repeat its deadly Bosnian mistake rather than admit it. Regarding Kosovo and the surrounding areas that, like clockwork after our intervention, curiously fell victim to near carbon-copy conflicts of Kosovo (Macedonia, Montenegro and southern Serbia), Deliso again makes quick work of the principal objection one encounters when pointing to how NATO directly Islamicized the Balkans: <<>> The Islamist cause that Deliso refers to is the prevalence of Saudi Arabia, UAE and others who have been active in the Balkans since even before Western interventions there but for whom the interventions were a major boon — and downright coup. Wahhabi groups and "charities" entice Albanians in Kosovo and Macedonia with hundreds of dollars per month for every family member who adopts the strictest form of fundamentalist Islam. To that end, the Balkan landscape has been changing, not only with the new, Saudi-style mosques now dotting the formerly Christian lands, always taller than the nearest (and usually vandalized) church, but also with the increasing prevalence of Wahhabi dress and worship. . . . From Caliphate, a reader begins to understand that Kosovo, which is already infecting surrounding areas, is run by systematic chaos, everyone alternating roles between gangster and hostage: Albanian leaders/gangsters threaten the Islamists should they target the internationals; al Qaeda threatens Albanians with cutting off their heroin supply if they touch the Islamists; and the internationals are threatened with the understanding that the well-armed Albanians have a virtual gun pointed at our NATO troops should we embark on any unwelcome law enforcement. One begins to understand why the State Department has been repeating the mantra that there are no options other than unconditional independence for Kosovo, as per Albanian demands.
5. In an October 29, 2007 article, “Trilateralists hear of Kosovo independence, Albanian leader says proclamation to be made before Christmas,” WorldNetDaily reported: Kosovo's mostly Albanian, mostly Muslim activists will declare independence for the Serbian province before Christmas, a leader told the super-secret internationalists at the Trilateral Commission over the weekend. "Our deputies in the Kosovo Assembly will seek to have a date before Christmas this year set for the proclamation of independence, as well as to inform the international community about this," Veton Surroi told a group founded by David Rockefeller during meeting in Vienna Saturday. Surroi also added that Kosovo now needs "a functional state." "We have arrived at a point where we are tired of negotiating and need to make decisions," he said. "We've been engaged in talks and we see clearly that it would have been better to have arrived at a solution through negotiations, but we cannot stay hostage to such a formula forever…” The U.N., in conjunction with Western powers, has been working toward this end, which they term "the final status." "The biggest lie: the internationals claimed they were coming to stop a genocide," writes James George Jatras, director of the American Council for Kosovo. "In reality, they are facilitating one. For the Serbs in Kosovo 'final status' can only mean a final solution."
6. In an October 19, 2007 article, “Kosovo Police Seize Weapons Cache,” B92 reported: Kosovo police said Friday they seized a major cache of weapons and ammunition and arrested five people. The weapons and ammunition were found in a raid in Đeneral Janković, in southeastern Kosovo, close to the border with Macedonia, police said. The cache included a recoilless cannon, an anti-aircraft machine gun, a mortar, a sniper rifle and 1,300 rounds of various ammunition. The five arrested, aged between 30 and 72, were facing charges linked to smuggling of weapons, police said. Also Friday in Kosovo, police confirmed that an explosive device was thrown at a Serbian Orthodox church in Gnjilane. The bomb, however, did not explode on impact, leaving only a black trace on the wall of the St. Nikola church, a KPS spokesman in the area told journalists. KFOR, UNMIK police and KPS were out in force to block the part of the town where the church is located. Serb sources in town say that two Molotov cocktails were in fact thrown at the Orthodox temple.

1. Man pleads guilty to weapons charges in alleged plot to attack U.S. Army base in New Jersey
Associated Press – October 31, 2007
http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=8137698
CAMDEN, New Jersey: A man has pleaded guilty to to conspiring to provide weapons to a group of men accused of plotting an attack at the Fort Dix U.S. Army base in New Jersey.
Agron Abdullahu, an ethnic Albanian born in the Serbian province of Kosovo, faces up to five years in federal prison when he is sentenced Feb. 6. Since his arrest, he has been held in isolation at a federal detention center in Philadelphia.
Federal prosecutors have portrayed Abdullahu, a 25-year-old bakery worker, as having the smallest role among the six men arrested earlier this year in the Fort Dix case. Abdullahu was charged only with weapons offenses. The others — three ethnic Albanians from the former Yugoslavia, a Jordanian and a Turk — are charged with conspiring to kill military personnel — a crime punishable by life in prison.
He is the first of the men to be convicted in the alleged planned attack on the military installation.
Abdullahu was indicted on charges of providing weapons to illegal immigrants and has admitted letting illegal immigrants use weapons he owned legally, including a Beretta 9 mm pistol and a Yugoslav semiautomatic rifle that. The plot to kill troops at the U.S. Army base was not mentioned during the hearing.
His public defender, Richard Coughlin, said after the hearing Wednesday that Abdullahu would not testify if the case against the others goes to trial because he has no information about any terror plot.
Coughlin said that if a plot is found to have existed, his client had no role in it.
"My client was essentially used by these other individuals," Coughlin said. "It was never a 'Fort Dix Six.' It was a 'Fort Dix Five' plus one other person. That was my client."
"He regrets that he is associated with any plot, which has not been proved," he said.
Federal prosecutors declined to comment on Abdullahu's plea Wednesday. A trial for the remaining five is planned for January.
Authorities said that while Abdullahu provided weapons to the other men and joined them for target practice in Pennsylvania, he resisted the idea of participating in an attack. The government said he told the others at one point that it would be against Islam to kill civilians and that it would be "crazy" to attack the military installation.
The suspects, all in their 20s, have spent many years living in Philadelphia and New Jersey suburbs. The other five — brothers Dritan, Shain and Eljvir Duka; Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer; and Tatar — face life in prison if convicted of conspiracy to murder military personnel. They have pleaded not guilty and are scheduled to go on trial in January.
Coughlin said Abdullahu will likely receive a sentence between two and three years. After that, he could face deportation, but it is unclear where he would go. His family of ethnic Albanians was granted asylum in the United States in 1999 after fleeing Kosovo.
2. Bolton: I Hope that the U.S. Won’t Recognize a Unilateral Declaration of Kosovo Independence
Branko Mikasinovich, Interviewer
Voice of America, Serbian Service – October 30, 2007 (unofficial English translation from Serbian by the brothers Komnenovic)
Shortly before publication of the book of former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, titled: “Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad,” our colleague Branko Mikasinovich talked with Bolton about his experience at the United Nations and the State Department, about US relations with Serbia and about the issue of the future status of Kosovo.
Bolton: I wanted to write a book on the foreign policy of President Bush, in other words about the things we did well or we did badly, especially about decisions in which I have personally participated, and about how the policy is actually formulated within the State Department and the United Nations. I quote, for example, a statement of one senior State Department official who told me once that if they knew how we formulate our foreign policy, Americans would be very dissatisfied. I wanted to point that out so people could have a better understanding of the whole process. I hope that I have managed to do that.
VOA: Is there a denial of reality in US policy regarding extreme Islam?
Bolton: Historically, it is very difficult to identify a new threat, as the case was with Nazism in Europe, and it took us a long time to spot the international danger of Communism. I am not sure whether radical Islam would reach such a level of threat, but the threat is real as we have all witnessed during the terrorist attacks on the US in 2001, attacks in Madrid and London, then in Asia, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian-occupied territories. We need to pay more attention to that threat and we shouldn’t take any steps which would further increase it, especially not in Europe.
VOA: Recently, the Washington Post published an article about your strong disagreement with the State Department regarding some disputed international issues. Is there a disagreement regarding Kosovo too?
Bolton: I think that the State Department has had an anti-Serbian policy for more than 15 years. When Yugoslavia was falling apart and Milosevic conducted his policy, there was some logic to our opposition to such a policy. Unfortunately, this biased policy has continued, even though there’s no logical explanation for it. While Serbia is trying to establish an effective and functional democracy regarding human rights and other issues, the anti-Serbian policy has continued, especially with regard to Kosovo, where a decision in favor of its independence could only create other concerns, and such a decision could impact on the democracy in progress in Serbia, and the possibility that the Security Council would step beyond its authority, which would be very unfortunate. This is one of the numerous examples of behavior by the State Department, which is a problem the next President has to solve.
VOA: In your opinion, what is the most important reason for US support for Kosovo independence?
Bolton: It is an attitude inherited from the 1990s from the policy of the former administration, when some parts of former Yugoslavia, according to legitimate and historic reasons, wanted their independence and their own road to democracy. This trend has continued, so now you have smaller and smaller entities asking for independence, but such a policy is the opposite of democracy. I think that now this has been spotted much better in Europe than it has been here in the United States.
VOA: If the US recognizes a unilateral declaration of Kosovo independence, how could that affect Washington’s relationship with Russia or relations with some countries of the European Union and on the international level in general?
Bolton: I hope that the United States will not recognize a unilateral declaration of Kosovo independence, although I think that things are currently moving in that direction, and I am afraid that it could cause more damage than it can bring good in the Balkans. Such a decision, which would be taken under threat of violence, would actually represent a way to reward bad behavior. The issue of Kosovo should be solved by two parties at the negotiation table. I understand that strong positions are taken regarding the issue by both sides - Albanian and Serbian. These are and will be tough negotiations in order to reach a solution which would satisfy both parties, but this is much better than to impose a solution on one side or the other, based on a wrong understanding of the situation.
VOA: What could Belgrade do in order to influence Washington’s position on Kosovo?
Bolton: I am not sure if there’s anything that can be done at this moment regarding official US pronouncements. It would be best for Belgrade to focus its diplomacy on Europe, where they have a much better understanding of the problems which could arise in the Balkans with a unilateral declaration of Kosovo independence. Since the breakdown of Yugoslavia, we have tried to ensure stability in the Balkans but we haven’t managed to complete it, and there are lots of unresolved issues. However, it seems to me, that the last thing we should do is to sow the seeds for future conflicts under the pressure of one side or the other.
3. Kosovo and the Westphalian Order
By Amb. James Bissett
Chronicles– October 23, 2007
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=375#more-375
The following is Ambassador Bissett’s keynote address at the symposium on Kosovo held at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C., on October 23, 2007.
The breakup of the Yugoslav federation was the first serious diplomatic challenge facing the Western democracies following the collapse of the Soviet Union. They made a mess of it. They are still making a mess of it; and if a decision is made in the coming months to grant independence to the Albanians in Kosovo—as the United States seems determined to do—then the decision will simply add to, and compound, the many errors and mistakes made by the US-led Western powers before, during, and after the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia.
From the beginning of the break up of Yugoslavia the policies followed by the United States and NATO countries have been marked by duplicity, double standards and cowardice. They have forgotten the role played by Serbia in two world wars and they have deliberately demonized Serbia and the Serbian people. They have falsely blamed Serbia for the breakup of Yugoslavia and for all of the atrocities committed in the wars that followed. They have set up that “travesty of justice”—The Hague Tribunal—to perpetuate these myths.
More seriously, western intervention in the former Yugoslavia has shaken the global framework of international peace and security that has governed the relationship among sovereign states since the founding of the United Nations.
The origins of that framework date back to the peace of Westphalia in 1648 which ended the horrors of the religious wars that devastated Germany and other parts of Europe for more almost half a century.
Westphalia laid down the basic tenets of sovereignty—the principle of territorial integrity and of non-interference in the affairs of national states. These are principles that have proven invaluable through the years in the prevention of armed conflict between states. The Westphalian order has frequently been violated, but age has not diminished the principles themselves. They remain the essential components of international law.
Article 2 [4] of the UN Charter includes territorial integrity as one of the key principles prohibiting the threat or use of force in the resolution of international disputes, and it is one of the paramount elements in the Charter relating to the concept of sovereign equality.
There are those who believe the United Nations is a corrupt organization and there is abundant evidence to back up such a charge. Apart from anything else the shameful manner in which the UN establishment has deliberately sabotaged its own resolution 1244 in Kosovo is proof enough of corruption and malicious mismanagement.
Nevertheless, it is one thing to condemn the UN organization but another thing to therefore disavow the principles enshrined in the United Nations charter. These principles represent the difference between the rule of law and the law of the jungle.
Sovereignty, respect for borders and international law, the peaceful settlement of international disputes, and the territorial integrity of states remain as valid today as they did when the UN was founded. These principles were reinforced by the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and were given further emphasis by including a section on the inviolability of frontiers.
Section III of that Act (“Inviolability of Frontiers”) says: “the participating states regard as inviolable all one another’s frontiers as well as the frontiers of all states in Europe and therefore will refrain now and in future from assaulting these frontiers. Accordingly, they will also refrain from any demand for, or act of, seizure and usurpation of part or all of the territory of any participating state.”
Section IV (“Territorial Integrity of States”) pledges the participating states to respect the territorial integrity of each of the participating states: “Accordingly, they will refrain from any action inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations against the territorial integrity, political independence or the unity of any participating state and in particular from any such action constituting a threat or use of force The participating states will likewise refrain from making each other’s territory the object of military occupation or other direct or indirect measures of force in contravention of international law, or the object of acquisition by means of such measures or the threat of them. No such occupation or acquisition will be regarded as legal.”
These are fundamental principles. They were designed as a guarantee that all nations, small as well as large, need not fear aggression by a more powerful neighbor.
They were meant to have universal application and they cannot be set aside because of special circumstances or when they prove inconvenient to the policy aims of the larger powers. Their message is simple and clear. Borders can be changed - but only through agreement by the states involved.
In this regard it is interesting to note that in 1938, at the time of Munich, president Edvard Benes of Czechoslovakia, bullied by the British and French, signed the agreement to hand over the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany, thus giving his consent to the transaction. It would seem that even Hitler insisted on at least the appearance of following the rules of international conduct.
The determination of the United States to remove Kosovo and Metohija from Serbia and to grant independence to the Albanians living there is a threat to the Westphalian order and an unequivocal violation of international law. It also has far reaching implications for global peace and security.
Shortly after NATO aircraft began the bombing of Serbia in the spring of 1999 I wrote an article in one of Canada’s national newspapers entitled “a return to barbarism,”
In the article I condemned the bombing as a violation of international law and of the UN charter and of NATO’s own treaty. But the point of the article was to stress that the bombing marked an historical turning point.
As the 20th century was coming to the end there had been a brief period after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall when we were offered the encouraging prospects of a “pax Americana.” Many believed the United States was the one country that might guarantee that the new century would see an end to war and violence.
After two cataclysmic world wars and the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world was offered the hope that the new century would follow the principles laid down in the united nations and that the Westphalian order would be restored.
Alas, these hopes were shattered with the bombing of Serbia by the US-led NATO powers. This was a naked act of aggression against a sovereign state. Sadly, it had been carried out by the democratic nations whose political leaders never failed to sing the praises of the rule of law and the UN charter. It was a foreboding warning of things to come.
The bombing of Serbia established an ominous precedent. It meant the United States and the NATO countries could intervene wherever and whenever they wished. The use of force or the threat of it would be used whether within the law or not and having set the precedent with the bombing of Serbia the decision to invade Iraq was easy.
The American insistence on giving the Albanians independence and unilaterally handing over 15% of Serbian territory to the criminal leaders of Kosovo is simply a further example of the willingness of the United States to use naked power to achieve its policy objectives.
It would seem the only obstacle in the way of the American desire to create an independent Kosovo is a resurgent Russia. Ironically, it is Russia that is insisting on compliance with the principles of international law and the UN charter before any consideration is given to Kosovo independence. This in itself is a remarkable development.
It would almost seem that the new breed of American political leaders—the Clintons, the Albrights, the Holbrookes, the neoconservatives, George Bush and others like them—have betrayed the trust bestowed upon them by the founding fathers of their great Republic.
By doing so they have abandoned the very principles upon which America was founded and which are enshrined in the UN charter by doing so they have lost the moral authority that formed the real strength of the democratic countries in overcoming the forces of totalitarianism. They have also delivered a damaging blow to the Westphalian order. It will not be easy to get it back.
4. The Coming Balkan Caliphate
By Julia Gorin
Jewish World Review – October 25, 2007
http://jewishworldreview.com/julia/gorin102507.php3
In September 2001, George W. Bush admonished the world, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." But how will the world know where to stand when America itself is with the terrorists?
Such is the America that operates in the Balkans, and such is the question underlying Christopher Deliso's new book, "The Coming Balkan Caliphate", which tells the most terrifying story never told in the War on Terror. An American journalist based in Macedonia, Deliso has been investigating radical Islamic trends in the region for the better part of a decade. He's the director of the independent Balkan news website Balkanalysis.com and a field analyst on Macedonian politics for the Economics Intelligence Unit, London. His book examines the repercussions of the free world's alliance with radicals in Kosovo and Bosnia, one of which surfaced just this month with the attempted bombing of the U.S. embassy in Austria. The vivid picture Deliso paints, one that is corroborated by daily reports that have been streaming out of the region since the Clinton administration rallied NATO countries to the side of "moderate" Muslims against Yugoslavia, is more disturbing than anything that even the most vigilant Jihad-watchers can imagine.
On the first page of the first chapter, Deliso dispels the unanimous, carefully crafted and guarded script that the Bosnian Muslims were innocent, hapless victims of genocidal Serbian aggression:
It would not be until the watershed events of September 11, 2001, that the role of Bosnia as an incubator and catalyst for international terrorism would become impossible to ignore. This embarrassing truth had long been suppressed by the many Western diplomats, journalists, and public relations hacks who had built large fortunes and careers on protecting this myth of their own making…Preliminary to any historical debate, therefore it must be acknowledged that high-powered Washington lobbyists and much of the Western media purposefully distorted, omitted, and concealed key facts on the ground.
Indeed, Caliphate affirms what the 9/11 Commission itself found: that "the Bosnian jihad had essentially created a global empire for terror." It served as a finishing school for terrorists bent on killing Americans and Europeans, but who cut their teeth on the Serbs. The indictment for the 2004 Madrid bombing mentions Bosnia 300 times, and a planned rocket attack on major world leaders at the 2005 funeral of Pope John Paul II, which was summarily unreported, was hatched in a backwater Bosnian village — and thwarted by a tip to the Italians and Croatians from Bosnia's Serb Republic. Further, "a number of key figures associated with the 9/11 plot," writes Deliso, "were veterans of the Bosnian jihad…Bosnia had become one of al Qaeda's most important European assets..." As well, Deliso mentions that the 7/7 bombings in Britain netted the arrest of several Balkan Muslims and British Muslims radicalized by the Balkan jihads. But Caliphate also reminds us of a less known Balkan connection:
Although almost forgotten by now, in the immediate aftermath of the [9/11] attacks, tight-lipped U.S. government sources disclosed an explosive fact: that there was a definite connection between the 9/11 plotters and Albania-based Islamic terrorists. Further, these officials attested that KLA [Kosovo Liberation Army] members had indeed been trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan…
Deliso's main focus is Kosovo, which saw the Clinton administration repeat its deadly Bosnian mistake rather than admit it. Regarding Kosovo and the surrounding areas that, like clockwork after our intervention, curiously fell victim to near carbon-copy conflicts of Kosovo (Macedonia, Montenegro and southern Serbia), Deliso again makes quick work of the principal objection one encounters when pointing to how NATO directly Islamicized the Balkans:
Albanians, whether from Albania, Kosovo, or Macedonia, have scoffed at the idea of a major religious fundamentalist incursion in their midst. So have their Western yes-men. The West heavily backed the Kosovo Liberation Army during the NATO bombing, despite the presence of mujahedin in its ranks, and for Western publics to suspect that this cause has been muddled up with an Islamist one would amount to a public relations disaster for both Clinton-era political veterans and for the Albanians themselves. Indeed, it would call into question the entire rationale for Western intervention in Kosovo.
The Islamist cause that Deliso refers to is the prevalence of Saudi Arabia, UAE and others who have been active in the Balkans since even before Western interventions there but for whom the interventions were a major boon — and downright coup. Wahhabi groups and "charities" entice Albanians in Kosovo and Macedonia with hundreds of dollars per month for every family member who adopts the strictest form of fundamentalist Islam. To that end, the Balkan landscape has been changing, not only with the new, Saudi-style mosques now dotting the formerly Christian lands, always taller than the nearest (and usually vandalized) church, but also with the increasing prevalence of Wahhabi dress and worship.
No apologist for the Serbs, Deliso engages in the standard scolding of the Serbian lobby for its alleged exaggeration of Albanian-connected terror, though he doesn't go on to debunk any specific exaggeration. Rather, his book demonstrates a terror-laden Balkan reality beyond what even the wildest exaggeration could conceive. Among the revelations in the book is that terror-connected, Saudi-based charities were pulling at least some of the strings behind the big Kosovo pogrom of March 2004, in which 35 churches were dynamited, hundreds of Serbian homes burned, 1,000 people injured and 19 killed. Insider revelations about this episode, however, include that "19" was just the "agreed" number, with the actual death toll at more than 30 (indeed, initial, pre-damage-control reports had the number at 31). Two other unreported facts are that the rioters killed six NATO peacekeepers and slashed the throats of Serbian farmers' pigs. Most embarrassing for UNMIK (UN Mission in Kosovo) authorities, reports Deliso, is that the U.S.— and UN-supported Kosovo Prime Minister Agim Ceku's officers "actively aided the mobs."
As Deliso explains, the UN (in concert with the U.S.) "has allowed former KLA leaders and the mafia to control society…Today, this chaotic situation has moved from the unfortunate to the scandalous, with the CIA, MI6, BND [German intelligence], and others eager to build 'special relationships' with Islamic extremists bent on killing Christians, attacking Western targets, and creating a fundamentalist caliphate…Indeed, longtime UNMIK employees in Kosovo who have watched the process disintegrate over the years express disbelief at how the Western media and politicians can get away with calling the intervention a success."
Deliso details the bizarre arrangement by which we've allied ourselves with "nominally Muslim" Albanian mafiosos to feed us information about the Islamists they do heroin and weapons business with, while Albanians, some at the highest levels of Kosovo's U.S.-supported officialdom, moonlight as terrorists themselves. "…[T]he Kosovo Albanian government leaders — the same ones that, according to [British intelligence firm] Jane's, are supplying the United States with 'intelligence' on Islamic extremists in the province — have blocked investigations and staffed the civil administration with the often underqualified friends and relatives of known Islamists. 'The Kosovo Department of Justice won't act on [counterterrorist information],'" Deliso quotes UNMIK Field Coordinator for Protection of Minorities Michael Harrison. "'Because the people inside the institution are from the "other side."'"
One Kosovo jihadist in particular, Samedin Xhezairi, worked for the CIA and Austrian and German intelligence when those countries were helping train the KLA for war against the Serbs in the late 90s — all while acting as an intermediary between Albanian extremists and al Qaeda.
After the 1999 NATO bombing, writes Deliso, "U.S. Military Police removed the old Yugoslav police dossiers compiled on Albanian criminals and paramilitaries, and handed them over to the KLA's leaders. Evidence about the most dangerous men in Kosovo was thus destroyed, but not before the KLA could assassinate Albanian police informers and other "Yugoslav loyalists" named in the files. The KLA, and its criminal partners, it was tacitly understood, would not be touched…'[T]he deal was, you leave us alone, we leave you alone,' a former Swedish OSCE official in Kosovo sums up. 'It had its benefits, mainly, that we were allowed to live.'"…Senior UNMIK officials have ordered the destruction of files that indicate higher-than-reported numbers of attacks against [non-Albanian] minorities. They also systematically fired or relocated employees who speak out or contradict the official line…'" In exchange for their dutiful cooperation, the internationals got other benefits: they "could enjoy the spoils of peace — everything from mafia-supplied [and enslaved] prostitutes to multimillion dollar embezzlement on privatization deals and budget 'discrepancies.'"
In 2000, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) security chief Tom Gambill "personally witnessed soldiers from the United Arab Emirates filming the U.S. military base, Camp Bondsteel [and] by the fall of 2001 the SJRCKC [Saudi Joint Committee for the Relief of Kosovo and Chechnya] had begun conducting 'aggressive surveillance of US personnel and property…[Saudi Red Crescent Society] ambulances were thought to be transporting weapons and explosives — they had never been seen transporting sick or injured locals.'" According to an UNMIK special investigator:
"none of the international big shots seem to care when they are warned about [this trend]. Considering we are supposed to be fighting this so-called 'war on terror' right now, their disinterested attitude — man, it's beyond belief."
In October 2006, this investigator pointed to a case from a couple of years earlier, in which UNMIK police arrested several Islamic extremists plotting terror in a village near Mitrovica…"They were all Albanians, and all of them had British passports, "said the investigator. "Some were related to leading officials in the Kosovo government. It was all hushed up and never reported in the media. "Other intelligence sources have drawn a connection between this group, civil administration appointees, and arrests made by the British government in the July 2005 bomb plots in London.
We also learn of a murky and as yet unreported incident in which six Albanian-American fundamentalists arrived in the village of Skenderaj in the weeks before 9/11. Says Gambill—who in 2005 blew the whistle on the Kosovo mission in an interview with Cybercast News Service—the men had "spread anti-American slogans and stated, one week before 9/11, that the US would soon be attacked."
According to Gambill, the radicals were "linked to a wealthy Mafioso in Mitrovica" — a shock admission linking Islamic radicals and the Albanian mafia. More shocking, however, was the utter disinterest with which UN authorities greeted this apparent "smoking gun" case. While investigators elsewhere were racing furiously to track down anyone and everyone with foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, the CivPol [UN police] officer who identified the agitators, according to Gambill, "was frustrated that no one above him [in rank] was interested, and no one above him really pushed [for this investigation]…there was little said about it — and no follow-up.
From Caliphate, a reader begins to understand that Kosovo, which is already infecting surrounding areas, is run by systematic chaos, everyone alternating roles between gangster and hostage: Albanian leaders/gangsters threaten the Islamists should they target the internationals; al Qaeda threatens Albanians with cutting off their heroin supply if they touch the Islamists; and the internationals are threatened with the understanding that the well-armed Albanians have a virtual gun pointed at our NATO troops should we embark on any unwelcome law enforcement. One begins to understand why the State Department has been repeating the mantra that there are no options other than unconditional independence for Kosovo, as per Albanian demands.
Caliphate distributes blame between the Clinton and Bush administrations accordingly, and the author keeps his discernable leftward tilt to a tasteful minimum, allowing it to surface only in his concern for the human rights of terrorists, in his wagging a finger at European countries that cooperate with America's rendition program, and in his over-cynicism of the War on Terror. (He tars the entire war as "fraudulent" because of an unfortunate case of mistaken identity of a Lebanese-German citizen who had the same name as a bin Laden henchman and was therefore interrogated for months in Macedonia, America and Afghanistan before being determined innocent.) And yet anyone reading this book — indeed anyone who has been following the region and its increasingly far reach since our interventions there — will have a hard time taking the War on Terror seriously, and will be left with a sense that with their investigations of this cell or that, our intelligence agents and police are busily plugging holes in a boat that is already submerged.
Demonstrating an understanding of the complexity of the Albanian community, whose nationalist ambitions and double-dealing with the Islamists predictably got them more than they'd bargained for, Deliso points to what one might call the Big Duh of the civil wars in both Bosnia and Kosovo: "The Bosnian civil war was, in fact, just the prelude to a longer and entirely different battle, one that would not be conducted against the Serbs, Croats, or Western peacekeepers, but against the Bosnian Muslims themselves."
With attention fixed on Iraq, and the Balkans too complex for the public to bother with in the first place, all of this has been allowed to take place in the shadows, and without armed conflict or revolution a silent transition is taking place in the Balkans, increasingly referred to by those in the know as "the new Middle East."
Except for a tedious chapter on Turkish history and a superfluous enumeration of the various methods of terror coordination in the final chapter (Internet, mosques, cyber attacks, use of Western democratic principles and institutions against democracy itself), the book makes for a damning read and a troubled sleep.

5. Trilateralists hear of Kosovo independence, Albanian leader says proclamation to be made before Christmas
WorldNetDaily – October 29, 2007
http://www.wnd.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58392
Kosovo's mostly Albanian, mostly Muslim activists will declare independence for the Serbian province before Christmas, a leader told the super-secret internationalists at the Trilateral Commission over the weekend.
"Our deputies in the Kosovo Assembly will seek to have a date before Christmas this year set for the proclamation of independence, as well as to inform the international community about this," Veton Surroi told a group founded by David Rockefeller during meeting in Vienna Saturday.
Surroi also added that Kosovo now needs "a functional state."
"We have arrived at a point where we are tired of negotiating and need to make decisions," he said. "We've been engaged in talks and we see clearly that it would have been better to have arrived at a solution through negotiations, but we cannot stay hostage to such a formula forever."
The Trilateral Commission brings together politicians, bankers, industrialists and political theorists from around the world, many of whom also hold membership in the Bilderberg Group and Council on Foreign Relations, all of which were founded to promote the dissolution of nation-states and their integration in blocs along the lines of the European Union.
United Nations forces moved into Kosovo in 1999 to "stop genocide." But, according to a blistering report from the American Council for Kosovo, U.N. troops have aided and abetted the deliberate, systematic and nearly complete ethnic cleansing of the mostly Christian Serb population by mostly Muslim ethnic Albanians.
"Every facet of the way of life of the Serbs of Kosovo is threatened by the new reality established since June 1999 under KFOR (the NATO Kosovo Force) and the U.N. and therefore the very existence of the Serbs there is threatened," says the report "Hiding Genocide in Kosovo."
"All kinds of persecution using all types of methods have been adopted," the report says. "Throughout the territory of Kosovo, the Serbs have been persecuted, a persecution that is happening on their own territory, in their own country. They are denied basic human rights and are not equal to their Muslim counterparts under the law. Even though the Serbs were the main targets, they were not the only ones. Consider the situation of the Croats who now number less than 500, or the Roma who have been banished to the edges of the Serb enclaves by persistent terrorization, or the Gorani, Slavic Muslims, who reside in the southwest tip of Kosovo in the mountains and whose numbers dwindle every year."
Using a combination of eyewitness reports, diaries of the dead and interviews with survivors, the report pieces together a harrowing narrative about eight years of mostly low-intensity genocide by the Muslim ethnic Albanians now demanding independence for Kosovo.
The U.N., in conjunction with Western powers, has been working toward this end, which they term "the final status."
"The biggest lie: the internationals claimed they were coming to stop a genocide," writes James George Jatras, director of the American Council for Kosovo. "In reality, they are facilitating one. For the Serbs in Kosovo 'final status' can only mean a final solution."
Ethnic and religious violence between Albanians and Serbs in the Serbian province of Kosovo was not unusual leading up to 1999 when the Albanian majority drew NATO onto their side in an effort to tip the scales in the balance of terror.
Kosovo has been occupied by the U.N. ever since the war ended. But the new report attempts to document the U.N.'s continuing partiality toward the Albanians, who have turned more and more Kosovo Serbs into refugees, virtually emptying out many Serb-dominated villages and burning and defacing churches along the way.
Thirteen months of international talks on the future of Kosovo ended in stalemate earlier this year. Now, three diplomats from the U.S., Russia and the European Union are set to start afresh.
While ethnic Albanians see their independence movement on the verge of success, Serbia turned to its Russian ally to veto U.N. adoption of any independence plan.

6. Kosovo Police Seize Weapons Cache
B92 News – October 19, 2007
http://www.b92.net/eng/news/crimes-article.php?yyyy=2007&mm=10&dd=19&nav_id=44707
PRIŠTINA -- Kosovo police said Friday they seized a major cache of weapons and ammunition and arrested five people.The weapons and ammunition were found in a raid in Đeneral Janković, in southeastern Kosovo, close to the border with Macedonia, police said. The cache included a recoilless cannon, an anti-aircraft machine gun, a mortar, a sniper rifle and 1,300 rounds of various ammunition. The five arrested, aged between 30 and 72, were facing charges linked to smuggling of weapons, police said. Also Friday in Kosovo, police confirmed that an explosive device was thrown at a Serbian Orthodox church in Gnjilane. The bomb, however, did not explode on impact, leaving only a black trace on the wall of the St. Nikola church, a KPS spokesman in the area told journalists. KFOR, UNMIK police and KPS were out in force to block the part of the town where the church is located. Serb sources in town say that two Molotov cocktails were in fact thrown at the Orthodox temple.