[Marxism] Kosova independence fighter: One step forward, three steps back

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Following these comments, I include the introduction by Karadjis, followed
by this valuable statement on the current situation by a Albanian leader who
is still fighting for independence, not for privileged client status under
an occupation regime.

I see this statement as an important and positive development, although I
think Karadjis' endorsement runs counter to his tendency to see the course
followed by Albanian leadership as a process of "self-determination," which
Lenin said consisted exclusively of independence, although I think Trotsky
saw the matter more broadly.  Neither I believed would have viewed the
current situation in Kosova as an advance toward self-determination.

Note the meaning of this stance. Kurti was prepared for a longer, in some
ways more difficult struggle for Kosova independence, in order to achieve
the real thing, while the KLA opted for supposedly leaping over the
obstacles by supporting imperialism seizing Kosova from Yugoslavia, and
supposedly turning it over to the KLA. That is, he supported a continued
struggle for independence, rather than accepting the supposed gift of a
phony "independence" which has placed the KLA in the baggage train of the
occupiers.

Kosova was not liberated by the KLA.  It was seized by US imperialism as its
prize in a war on Yugolavia, such as it was at that time.

Supporters of the Karadjis position make light of my placing the
"independence" (actually imperialist slavery) won thus far by Kosova in
quotes. They insist that the US seizure of Kosova, supported and called for
by the KLA, was not an act of aggression against Yugoslavia. Since the
current process of "self-determination" can only exist under imperialist
occupation, they are forced to accept the presence of imperialist and
imperialist-backed forces as the price of continuing to advance
"self-determination" on this line including through the cynical declaration
of "independence." 

For them, in fact, "self-determination" -- yes, in quotes, for it is a fraud
on the ground -- is a principled question and imperialist occupation, while
clucked at, is basically a secondary and tactical question.

And to cover their position, they make the claim that I favor "handing over"
Kosova from the Americans and their Albanian allies to the main enemy -- the
Serb government. That is because I favor the complete, immediate,
unconditional withdrawal of imperialist and imperialist-organized foreign
forces from Kosova, regardless of the immediate effect on the current
process of "self-determination" or independence.

They try to paint me as a Albanian-phobe Serbophile who wakes up screaming
from dreams of "Greater Albania" while they tilt toward the Serbophobe line
of the imperialist media, and wake up screaming at dreams that Milosevic was
not the Serbian Hitler -- what else could be the meaning of Karadjis'
charges that Proyect was a "holocaust denier" because he questioned some of
the facts that went into the imperialist war propaganda against Serbia --
some of which were simply not true. 

Proyect has his own problems -- although, like Karadjis, he has his
strengths as well -- but my crime is that I place the issue of Kosova
independence in the framework of an actual, living world struggle against
imperialist domination, whereas the defenders of the declaration of
independence as a step forward place self-determination and independence for
Kosova outside and above that framework, which provides ideological
reinforcement for turning the struggle for self-determination and
independence into a process of "self-determination" and "independence"
through imperialist occupation.




I view this as a very important document. This active Kosovar Albanian
movement called VETËVENDOSJE (Self-Determination) has been challenging the
imperialist overlords for some years now, with mass demonstrations and the
like. A year ago, a mass protest was shot at by UNMIK troops, killing 2 and
injuring 83 demonstrators. The leader, the youngish Albin Kurti, has been
under house arrest since. 

Kurti was a student of veteran K Albanian leader Adem Demaci, who spent 
28 years on and off in Serbian prisons for advocating Kosovar
self-determination. Demaci has always been an extremely political figure,
essentially left-wing, anti-imperialist and anti-chauvinist. He placed
himself at the head of the KLA in the second half of 1998, but quit when the
KLA majority accepted NATO's terms at Rambouillet in March 
1999, which led to the NATO bombing, as these terms included the KLA giving
up the historic K Albanian program of independence and accepting instead
"autonomy" within Serbia, the US program. He opposed the NATO intervention.
In the aftermath of the war, he has been the foremost figure demanding both
complete Kosova independence, and withdrawal of imperialist forces, but also
vigorously denouncing attacks on the Serb minority and forming an
inter-ethnic committee to try to resolve differences. 

Kurti has also vigorously denounced attacks on Serbs. However, the problem
is his outright opposition to any negotiations with Serbia -which e views as
imperialism merely trying to prevent real kosova independence by making even
more concessions to Serbia - is probably not seen in a good light by the
Serb minority, given current conditions and consciousness. His vigorous
opposition to this imperialist-imposed "supervised independence" is spot-on,
of course, and his posing f complete independence instead poses questions to
those on the left who have not only opposed "conditional independence", but
in effect oppose self-determination outright, or at least "in current
circumstances," whatever that means. I expect the betrayal of the real
independence aspirations of the Albanians to lead to a growth of this
anti-imperialist wing of the Kosovar Albanians, despite their confused
consciousness on certain issues. 

However, his opposition to the broad autonomy for ethnic Serb regions in
Kosova, allowed direct links to Belgrade, is mistaken I believe. He believes
this is both a restriction on real independence (the links to Belgrade) and
an ethnic partition (he believes in normal rights for all rather than ethnic
autonomy), restrictions imposed by imperialism to try to bring Serbia into
the picture. This is true to an extent, but the reality is of course that
Serb and Albanian in Kosova are already deeply divided, and such concessions
are necessary for the Serb minority to be on board - in fact I personally
think much greater concessions, up to turning an independent Kosova into two
federated 'entities' (one serb and one Albanian) are necessary. But it is
the imperialist *imposition* of these 'multi-ethnic' aspects (including a
new flag with no Albanian colours or symbols and denial of union with
Albania), via all these "supervisory" bodies that are the problem. 

The issue is clearly complex, and various slogans that various lefties like
to throw around often don?t have much reality about them. 

Finally, the claim below that the independence declaration was "one step
forward, three steps back" sounds very much a vindication of the very
cautious position we took in GLW that while we condemn the imperialist
denial of full independence via all these "supervisory" bodies, and demand
their exit from Kosova, that nevertheless we should cautiously welcome the
"partial fruition" of the century-long struggle of the Albanians of Kosova
for independence. 

MK 

One step forward ? three steps back 

Wednesday, 20 February 2008 The announcement of the Declaration of
Independence and recognition by the US, France, and the United Kingdom is a
step forward. Kosova for the first time has been recognized as an
independent state from these significant states of the world. 

However the Declaration of independence has turned Kosova three steps back. 

1. EULEX ? the direct restriction of internal self-determination, in the
sense that Kosova will not be able to govern itself in the future 
2. The Package of Ahtisaari ? the creation of an autonomous Serb entity
inside Kosova under the direct control of Serbia 
3. The party ? the euphoria created by the announcement is being exploited
to distract attention from: ? The reaction of the parallel structures of
Serbia (the burning of the police and customs stations of Kosova in
Leposaviq and Zveçan) ? The hurried smuggling of the flag, emblem and laws
which derive from the Package of Ahtisaari which began to be approved
without debate starting on Tuesday 19th February. 

The Declaration was an investment in encouraging the ignorance and oblivion
of people for the reality of what is happening on the ground. Politicians
continuously talked about the date and the hour of independence in order not
to talk about the contents and the quality of the independence they were
declaring; they focused the media on the party before, during and after the
declaration in order to silence any discussion about what Serbia might do
with its parallel structures which control one quarter of the territory of
Kosova. The Declaration included the Package of Ahtisaari which will create
a Serb Republic inside Kosova 
(similar to that of Bosnia) and will install the executive and un-democratic
rule of EULEX (again similar to Bosnia). 

The Package of Ahtisaari was accepted by the Negotiation Team and the
Assembly of Kosova a year ago because it was interpreted as the price for
independence which would be accepted by Serbia and Russia, and consequently
the UN Security Council. Now even though the independence declared has not
been accepted by Serbia or Russia (and consequently not by the UN Security
Council), the Government and Assembly of Kosova have promised to implement
the Package of Ahtisaari (which was refused permanently by the never
satisfied Serbia). This is a stab in the back for the people of Kosova. 

The independence described in this declaration does not include an army and
will not guarantee territorial integrity or a seat in the UN. Thus Kosova
remains without the factual ability to defend itself through its own army,
and without legal defence that comes from becoming an international subject,
won through a seat in the UN. Any eventual attack by Serbia against a Kosova
which is not an international subject, according to international law, will
not be considered as aggression. Not being a member of the UN means that
Kosova cannot be a signatory to any of the United Nations Conventions
dealing with political, economic, social, security, ecological, health,
educational and other forms of cooperation necessary for a healthy society. 

The impossibility of being an equal member of this international circle
means that the citizens of Kosova will be constrained in their rights and
possibilities of exploiting this cooperation for continual emancipation and
at the same time they will not have the possibility to contribute in global
developments. A Kosova that is not a UN member will not be able to use this
Organization which is above all nations for its own needs at all. 

In no place does the Declaration mention explicitly our separation from
Serbia. It mentions the ?non-consensual breakup of Yugoslavia?. However it
is known across the world that Serbia was made the direct inheritor of
Yugoslavia in Resolution 1244 after the dissolution of the Union of Serbia
and Montenegro. The Declaration of independence has been trumpeted as an
historic act however it does not mention the history of Kosova. This
declaration absolves Serbia of guilt by not mentioning anywhere Serbia?s
aggression and occupation of Kosova and the century of crimes and genocide
that Serbia has committed against the people of Kosova. 

The Declaration focuses on the obligations and duties of Kosova and not on
its rights or freedoms. It sees Kosova only as a tool of regional and
international interests. Above all, this declaration focuses on the promise
to implement the Package of Ahtisaari. Ahtisaari is mentioned eight times,
whilst independence just three times (including the title). ?Free? is not
mentioned once, ?freedoms? just once, as is ?freely?. This shows that the
Package of Ahtisaari in fact was not the price that politicians had to pay
for independence, but the Declaration of independence was the price that
international diplomatic officials had to pay for the implementation of the
Package of Ahtisaari. Because of the opposition of Serbia and Russia towards
the Package of Ahtisaari, this remained the only way that the EU and the US
could implement it. 

This Declaration of independence is considered as an issue of agreement
between some local politicians with some internationals and not as the
independence of a country of a free people. Only self-determination will
bring true independence for each and all in Kosova, because such an
independence would be the decision of the people. 

The Declaration of the 17th February is one step forward for Kosova in the
aspect of external self-determination. But not for internal
self-determination. In this aspect nothing has changed. Kosova will continue
to be a country governed by an un-democratic mission installed from outside
and not chosen from inside. 

= Lëvizja VETËVENDOSJE! http://www.vetevendosje.org/ 



__._,_.___

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism