Chavez rejects independence of Kosovo, blames US

[bemildred]

Source: Europe News

Caracas - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez rejected the independence of Kosovo on Thursday, calling it 'an extremely dangerous precedent' and accusing the United States of spearheading the move.

'We do not recognize the independence of Kosovo, we do not recognize it, we protest against it. I do not know how there can be countries that accept that,' Chavez said. 'That is part of the pressure from the United States. I do not know how there can be European countries that accept that.'

Protesters in Belgrade attacked the embassies of the US and other countries that had recognized Kosovo during demonstrations on Thursday.

Chavez said he wondered whether Italy would accept the independence of its own southern region of Veneto, or whether France, Britain or any Latin American country would deal similarly with a separatist movement.

Read more: http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1392358.php/Chavez_rejects_independence_of_Kosovo_blames_US

[provis99]

1. wonder if the US would settle with California rejoining Mexico?

How would the US have responded if Britain and France had recogized the Confederate States during the Civil War? It looks like the only rule that applies to international relations is massive hypocrisy.

[bemildred]

2. It does seem like they have opened a can of worms here. nt

[Bacchus39]

9. well, I don't recall much world opposition to the break up of the Soviet Union

the story itself was huge but the resulting global political recognition doesn't seem to be in much dispute.

I would support an independent Puerto Rico but I don't think I would an independent Kentucky. Taiwan operates as an independent nation yet no-one dares recognize it. Northern Ireland, Basque Spain, Quebec the list goes on. Call it hypocrisy but there is no one size fits all approach in global politics.

[Recursion]

30. England essentially did, and we invaded Canada in retaliation

Though England also fitted out a set of vessels that could neither be called entirely men-of-war or privateers (frankly even as a southerner I think the Alabama was probably by the laws of war a pirate).

[JVS]

41. think Dakota

http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=15646&IBLOCK_ID=35

[OKthatsIT]

76. US is to blame, but Chavez is no angel

Chavez indirectly works for the same people as Bush. WHO? The JESUITS.

Of course, it would take years of research to understand that. And 'Time', we dont have.

[pbca]

3. Chavez is completely Correct

The US recognition of Kosovo demonstrates the same ignorance of international politics that landed the US in Iraq

According to the UN Charter and all of the international law on the subject, Kosovo voting isn't enough - Serbia would have to ok it first.

There are simply too many places in the world where a regional majority - but national minority, might vote for independence. - Various areas of Spain, India, Russia, China, France, - never mind South America, the Middle East and Africa (and we won't even mention Scotland or N.Ireland).

The lid is on that kettle for a reason.

[Hosnon]

4. That's quite a statement, especially the categorical part about

international law.

I respectfully ask for some sources.

[pbca]

5. Are you serious?

Assuming that you are...Territorial sovereignty is, and always has been, the basis for most International Alliances (Human rights were an afterthought, much later) - this includes NATO, the United Nations, the European Union and I don't know how many more going back to, at the very least, the Treaty of Westphalia (1648)

Beyond that I'd suggest you start by reading the UN Charter itself

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

and you might also be interested in this

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/phaed1.htm

[Hosnon]

14. Perhaps you can be a bit more specific.

You claim that "(a)ccording to the UN Charter and all of the international law on the subject, Kosovo voting isn't enough - Serbia would have to ok it first".

Directing me to the U.N. Charter is not very helpful. As you made the original claim and as you also claim that the U.N. Charter supports that original claim, this conversation will progress much more efficiently if you point out the provision. And while that provision may very well exist, I am much more skeptical of your claim that all international law supports your original claim (i.e., that Serbia would have to ok it first).

Finally, your linked article does not seem to address your original claim in any substantial way. To what was it directed?

Thanks.

[Xithras]

16. Yes, you're right. Technically Kosovo's independence is an illegal act.

Article Two of the UN charter prohibits members from militarily interfering with the territorial integrity of a nation, and also prohibits it from interfering in the internal matters of a nation...and establishing the legality of the division of a nations internal territories certainly qualifies.

There's an analogous situation in Iraq today. If the Kurds were to declare their independence and split of the northern half of Iraq, it would be illegal for us to prevent the remainder of the nation from attempting to keep itself together. If we were to use our military occupation of that nation as leverage to permanently split Iraq into parts, over the objections of its own legal and elected government, we would be violating international law and committing a war crime.

Like it or not, whether you feel for the Kosovars or not, the reality is that Serbia is an occupied country, and this action was only possible because international military forces within Serbia are using the threat of force to keep the legitimate and elected Serbian government (one, I might add, no longer controlled by the forces present during the last war) from attempting to enforce it's territorial sovereignty.

It's an illegal act, but I expect that it will be opposed about as much as our own illegal acts in Iraq are today.

[Hosnon]

17. Kosovo is not a signatory to the U.N. Charter. The actions of the U.S.

may be in breach but the legality of Kosovo's actions is less clear.

[Xithras]

19. It could easily be argued that the Kosovar government itself isn't legitimate.

Remember that the government of Kosovo was set up by the occupying powers following the NATO invasion. The current group of leaders are elected, but so is the government in Iraq. Many people argue CORRECTLY here on DU that the Iraqi government is not legitimate simply because it operates under rules imposed by the U.S. The fact that its leaders are elected isn't relevant because the elections, and the government model itself, are illegitimate impositions of an occupying force. That makes the governments declaration of independence an equally illegitimate claim.

The big legal problem here is that the CURRENT Kosovo government was created by the UN (via UNMIK, an occupying force) under the auspices of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. Security Council Resolution 1244 also proclaimed that Kosovo was an integral part of Serbia and that foreign administration would be temporary. The Kosovo government that declared independence only has legitimacy if you accept the primacy of 1244, but that same act makes their action illegal. If you reject the legitimacy of 1244 and the claim it gives Serbia to Kosovo, you are also rejecting the legitimacy of the very government that is now trying to declare itself a new nation.

I personally do think that an independent Kosovo is a good idea, but the method of independence chosen was clearly illegal. NATO's actions were illegal, the actions of the US in recognizing the nation were illegal, and the actions of the Kosovo interim government in declaring independence were illegal.

[Hosnon]

20. Thank you...very insightful.

I don't know too much about the particular circumstances surrounding Kosovo. But I am skeptical of the claim that the U.N. Charter and the entirety of international law do not recognize as legitimate the independence of one nation from another without both nations' consent (using the term "nation" liberally as whether both nations exist is the issue at hand).

[Bacchus39]

21. yeah, but who is going to determine the legality of the government if not Kosovars?

likewise with Iraq.

[Xithras]

24. The same could be said for any territory.

The concept of nations would disintegrate if that were applied, which is why the UN Charter and other treaties make this illegal. This has been asked already, but if the majority of people in Southern California wanted independence, should we give it to them? What if the south wanted to take another stab at that whole Confederacy idea? There's lots of Texans who want to return to independence, and a real movement for it in Hawaii...should we let them go too?

Now here's the real kicker. What if those areas declared independence, the U.S. said no, but the rest of the world said YES?!?!

There are three legitimate ways for a nation to gain its independence. One, two populations vote on it and decide to go their separate ways. This is how Czechoslovakia became Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Two, an area can declare its intentions toward independence and try to negotiate a treaty with its parent country recognizing that it is a seperate country. Iceland, Canada, and a few other countries have come into existence this way. Finally, they can fight it out. This is the most common way.

When an area declares its independence, the parent country doesn't recognize it, and third party nations interfere to keep the parent nation from acting against independence, you end up with situations like Taiwan and South Vietnam...political conflicts that either fester on forever or explode into war.

Kosovo will never be a truly independent nation until Serbia accedes to it. Why not? Because Serbia considers it a part of their country that is simply in rebellion. Serbia won't fight right now because they don't want to take on NATO again, but what do you think will happen when the UN leaves? The answer is that they CAN'T leave...a permanent international presence will now be required to keep the region out of war. We just turned Serbia/Kosovo into a political duplicate of North and South Korea.

[Bacchus39]

27. there are currently countries having historical claims on their former territories

I've already mentioned Guyana and Venezuela, and Belize and Guatemala. To my knowledge this hasn't prevented either of those countries, Belize and Guyana, from being recognized internationally as independent nations. I would cite these two examples as contradicting your claim that a country can't be a truly independent nation until the parent country recognizes it.

you forgot to consider the passage of time in matters of global politics.

now was Kosovo being opportunistic in declaring independence while NATO and UN troops are present? of course!!

and I did already say something about an indpendent PUerto Rico, Taiwan, Kentucky, Quebec, Northern Ireland (back to Ireland). Independence and recognition of such do not follow neat little guidelines written in manuals. Each situation is in fact different and the political climate surrounding the claims makes all the difference. someone already called it hypocrisy but that's the way it works UN guidelines or not.

[Sweet Pea]

50. "We just turned Serbia/Kosovo into a political duplicate of North and South Korea."?

Really. Are you aware of the political, social, economic and humanitarian chasm that separates North and South Korea? Is that was is in place here between Serbia and Kosovo? Is that the current political climate between these two "nations"? I suppose you *could* make a case that when a "parent" country tries to eradicate a good portion of a formerly autonomous province's population that yes, some significant differences exist between the two, but akin to the Korea's? Please.

[Recursion]

26. I have the rare misfortune of having *been* there

And in Bosnia.

Independence in Kosovo and partition in Bosnia and Herzegovina have existed in everything but name for 10 years. Serbian (and Albanian, for that matter) irredentism aside, this ship sailed years ago.

[originalpckelly]

33. We'd be the United Colonies right now if the UN existed back in the day.

Just a thought.

[JackRiddler]

55. Asia would be populated by white settlers by now if the atom bomb existed in the 1500s.

Just an equally relevant thought.

[Freddie Stubbs]

51. Chavez is a big fan of Simón Bolívar

Did Bolívar get Spain's ok for Venezuela's independence?

[redqueen]

62. That's a joke, right?

[Mik T]

82. Ahh- But Venezuela was not a region inside Spain was it?

It shared no geographical boundaries with Spain at all in fact.

[sofa king]

78. Heh. Or for that matter, South Florida, Boston, or El Paso.

I've never been able to see what sort of game is being played in the Balkans.

Part of it seems to be some old Cold War fair-ups designed to minimize Russian influence by peeling minorities away from the Serbs.

Part of it seems to be some Great Game fair-ups designed to minimize Islamic influence by peeling them away from the Serbs and leaving them geographically isolated and insignificant.

And part of it seems to be a genuine effort to peel minorities away from the Serbs so the Serbs will quit murdering them.

But if we did that last part everywhere, well, Oklahoma wouldn't be part of the United States.

[ohio2007]

"The lid is on that kettle for a reason. " ? supression is freedom ?

I think that is the gist of your post


op/ed article excerpt about recent elections ;

"Far from rejecting democracy because it is supposed to be 'alien', or using it as a means of creating totalitarian Islamist systems, a majority of Muslims have repeatedly shown that they like elections, and would love to join the global mainstream of democratisation. < Obama > is right to emphasise the importance of holding free and fair elections in all Muslim majority countries," he said.


"Tyrant rulers fear free and fair elections,
snip
http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/303b19022816233b/id/330115/cs/1/

Yes, pure propaganda. I bet Hugo is still pissed the people voted against his president for life plan ( only for himself of course ) but he still rules by decree.....

[ohio2007]

83. delete double post

[Bacchus39]

6. I bet Latin America would accept an independent Puerto Rico, Cuba advocates it

openly as a smear againt the US. Venezuela claims Guayana, Guatemala claims Belize, Kosovo isn't the only place on earth where sovereignty versus self determination is an issue.

[ronnie624]

45. The KLA, from the very beginning, has been a proxy army for the CIA.

Those countries you mentioned are well acquainted with that sort of "sovereignty" and "self determination". I don't think they would support it as eagerly as you say.

[AlphaCentauri]

60. Puerto Rico status is not that a state

http://welcome.topuertorico.org/government.shtml

[ohio2007]

84. The people of PR won't vote against leaving the welfare roles of the US

Just as they will not pass a statehood ammendment that comes up everynow and then...They have the status quo working for them. Haiti isn't much of a regional role model to follow afterall

[Mike Daniels]

7. The US couldn't hold a coalition together in Iraq

How does Chavez explain how all of the sudden the US has the leadership potential to get at least 49 other countries, many who have serious issues with the US, to fall in line with accepting Kosovo's claim for independence?

Answer, he can't but the US makes an easy scapegoat so therefore it's all our fault.

[EFerrari]

8. Apples and oranges. The "coalition" involved expense and death.

Lining up behind Kosovo involves neither.

[Bacchus39]

10. yeah but it doesn't imply a US plot either as Chavez claims

n/t

[Mike Daniels]

11. I'd say that recent events prove otherwise

Such as the burning of various embassies.

A significant portion of the countries that have recognized or plan to recognize Kosovo have Muslim populations. Why would a Muslim dominated country just blindly follow the US in this matter given the recent feelings in the Muslim world.

Answer, there's a shared connection between Kosovo and a number of the supporting countries. I'd think this is more a motivating factor than any "spearheading" by the US.

Again, Chavez is just seeing an easy way to score points with no hard evidence to back up his deluded claim.

Interestingly enough, the populace only appears to have attacked the embassies of countries that they know are safe to attack . Attack the embassy of an Muslim dominated country and you'll have a shit-storm that you'll regret setting off.

[EFerrari]

15. Is NATO out of Kosovo? n/t

[Recursion]

29. NATO wasn't "in" Kosovo that much

Our main mission in the region was in BH, which got handed over to the UN rather murkily. The UN is still essentially running a proconsulship there. Basically, the idea seems to be keep enough bluehelmets between the warring parties that they won't attack anymore. It's held for a decade now but nobody has yet addressed the real political future of the south slavs.

If this move precipitates that discussion, maybe it's for the best.

[EFerrari]

31. Operation Joint Guard / NATO. I found it but can't find out if

the mission has ended. And, you may be right.

[Recursion]

32. I was in Joint Guard and Joint Forge

I believe (don't quote me on this) JG is still technically going with a few hundred pairs of boots on the ground, and did not get handed over to the UN like Joint Forge did. But that whole thing was, as I said above, pretty murky and behind-the-scenes.

[reorg]

77. 16000 NATO troops in Kosovo

"NATO currently has approximately 15 900 KFOR troops deployed in Kosovo to help maintain security and stability for all citizens, irrespective of their ethnic origin."
http://www.nato.int/issues/kosovo/index.html

"Following Kosovo’s declaration of independence yesterday, NATO reaffirms that KFOR shall remain in Kosovo on the basis of UNSCR 1244, as agreed by Foreign Ministers in December 2007, ..."
http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2008/p08-025e.html

What is funny is that UNSCR 1244 "reaffirms" "the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2, ..." LOL.

[Recursion]

81. That's the "murkiness" I mentioned

Thanks for the info; there was a huge drawdown when Joint Forge started but I guess they had a "surge" of sorts.

What is funny is that UNSCR 1244 "reaffirms" "the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia"

That's what kills me about the Bosnia and Herzegovina mission. The stated purpose is to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the FRJ, but the actual work being does is occupying a de facto partitioned country.

[High Plains]

64. Your last paragraph is ridiculous.

I believe the Turkish embassy was attacked, too.

Do you have the least shred of evidence to support your claim about attacking embassies of Muslim countries leading to a shit-storm? If so, please elucidate.

[JackRiddler]

56. Yes, he can explain it...

The U.S. and Germany (very important) decided it would be so in 1998. They brought along UK and France and then railroaded the rest of NATO into bombing the fuck out of Serbia (and Kosovo for that matter) the next year, establishing an independent entity by force that's now being accepted as a done deal by 49 countries since it's no longer reversible and they're all "realist" and would like to do business. It's only rocket science.

[Pavulon]

12. What do Tandja Mamadou, and Rafael Correa think?

oh yeah, who cares what they think. Red shirts and citgo may get you a soap box, but not so much on content..

[Bacchus39]

13. you know if Chavez blessed this the disciples would fall in line

n/t

[Mike Daniels]

18. For all the talk of the cult of Obama, the cult of Chavez is greater

Whatever the all knowing Chavez says, must be so.

I'd like to see Chavez tell the Muslim based countries that recognized Kosovo that they're just stooges of the US or have committed illegal acts.

Won't happen because Chavez knows he'd have a bullseye on his cranium until he was 6 feet.

[EFerrari]

34. Like he doesn't now? n/t

[redqueen]

63. No kidding...

:crazy:

[High Plains]

65. Where do you come up with this crap?

[JackRiddler]

70. Not as his "disciple" but a supporter, if he "blessed it" ...

I would ask what had gone wrong with him. When he condemns it, he's remaining consistent in his opposition to the U.S.-centered global imperialism.

[ConcernedCanuk]

22. Never mind what Hugo says, the USA is saying it's ok for part of a country to "be independent", no?

.
.
.

So there ya go, California, Vermont, Northeastern States.

BREAK AWAY!

And the USA will "recognize" your "sovereignty"

I'm sad to see that Canada is on the list to recognize Kosovo in this process -

But it ain't REALLY Canada

It's Stephen Harper

And we know where his lips are . .

[Megahurtz]

23. You tell 'em Chavez!

Woooooooo-hoooooooo!!!!!

[Recursion]

25. OK, Hugo, I've gone to bat for you before...

...but remind me why the fuck you care about Kosovars one way or the other, and why you want to enable an irredentist Greater Serbia?

[Bacchus39]

28. never misses an opportunity to bash the US, that's why

and I agree opposition is completely meaningless.

[EFerrari]

35. I suspect that at bottom this is about Bolivia and the so called

"separatist" movement there that we are funding.

This is the deal as far as I can figure it out: Bolivia has a white oligarchy and a Native American majority who weren't allowed to walk on sidewalks until the 1920s or 30s. There was also an effort to build up the white minority by recruiting whites from South Africa to settle there with the offer of land.

Now that the country is being democratized, the rich white minority who lives in the area where there is natural gas wants to keep the proceeds from the sale of that gas and has launched a separatist movement. Bush is backing them, if you can believe that, and he is doing it with our tax money.

The Peace Corps has busted State to the media because their volunteers were asked to spy for us. A relative of our Ambassador was stopped at the airport because they were smuggling ammunition. And programs like USAID are funding the PR for the "separatists".

Maybe that is what this is about.

/grammar

[Recursion]

36. That shit is still going on?

I'm glad I'm too busy studying to keep up with all of BFEE's shenanigans nowadays :(

[EFerrari]

37. It's ramping up, actually. A great reason to go back to school

all by itself. :)

[Bacchus39]

38. I suspect you are delusional. the world doesn't revolve around Chavez and his buddies

even if your world does.

there are other areas of the world whose politics is not tied to US-Latin American affairs. hello????

here is a link to another thread with a list of countries who have recognized Kosovo. I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that Boliva, or Chavez, had anything to do with it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3191662&mesg_id=3191755

Countries that have recognized
or Announced the recognition of Republic of Kosova
Recognized by 22 out of 192 United Nations members


Costa Rica
United States
France
United Kingdom
Afghanistan
Albania
Turkey
Australia
Senegal
Norway
Malaysia
Germany
Latvia
Denmark
Luxembourg
Estonia
Italy
Belgium
Finland
Lithuania
Austria
Slovenia

Countries that will recognize Kosovo
28 out of the remaining 170 United Nation members are ready to recognize Republic of Kosovo

Bulgaria
Canada
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia
Czech Republic
Fiji
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Israel
Japan
Kuwait
Macedonia
Malta
Mauritania
Monaco
Montenegro
Morocco
Netherlands
Pakistan
Poland
Portugal
Saudi Arabia
Sweden
Switzerland
Tonga
Tunisia
Tuvalu

[EFerrari]

39. I really don't know if you simply can't read or if you can't reason.

Chavez always is first talking to Venezuela, then to Latin America and lastly, to anyone else. The separatist issue resonates as Bolivia to his audience.

That doesn't translate to "all politics are tied to Latin America".

[Bacchus39]

40. Chavez is talking to get anyone's attention

and no-one cares if he opposes an independent Kosovo.

if he is so concerned about a separatist movement he should quit supporting the FARC in Colombia.

a much more pertinent yet still speculative argument would be the fact that Venezuela still claims Guyana, or at least a huge portion of it. and lets not forget that he idiotically claimed it was a US plot despite the ever increasing number of countries who are recognizing Kosovo. what do you think that was about?

[EFerrari]

43. You seem to care quite a bit. Enough to insult him and me

in the middle of your misinformed raving which I leave you to.

[Bacchus39]

44. no-one cares what he says about Kosovo

its meaningless. that doesn't mean I can't point that out or ridicule him for claiming, yet another, imaginary conspiracy contrived by the US.

[Peace Patriot]

52. "Imaginary conspiracy"?

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

Three months ago! The architect of the slaughter of 1.2 million Iraqis to get their oil urges economic warfare against Venezuela and other countries (unnamed, but no doubt the other leftist democracies with a lot of oil--Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina), and recommends that we get rid of any remaining "check and balances" in our own government (i.e., Congress, the State Dept.), so that the U.S. can "act swiftly" in support of "friends and allies" in South America (i.e., fascist thugs planning coups).

And we thought Rumsfeld was "retired"!

Combined with Exxon-Mobil's recent move to freeze $12 billion of Venezuela's assets, over a dispute about Venezuela's 60% share of its own oil (a deal that Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP, Conoco and even Chevron are agreeing to), and "tip of the iceberg" Bush/CIA capers, like the recent one out of Miami (the "suitcase full of money" that was intended to "divide and conquer" Venezuela-Argentina), and the millions of our tax dollars in USAID-NED and other funds that the Bush Junta has been pouring into rightwing groups in Venezuela, Bolivia and other countries, not to mention the BILLIONS in military aid to Bush-friendly Colombia (where union leaders are chainsawed and their body parts thrown into mass graves, and the rightwing paramilitaries, with very close ties to the Uribe government, hatched a plot to assassinate Chavez--a plot so serious that Uribe was obliged to meet with Chavez and APOLOGIZE for it), I'd say there is good reason to think that there is a Bush Junta PLAN to topple the Chavez government--the leader in regional cooperation and solidarity--in order to regain global corporate predator control of the Andes oil fields.

And not to mention PAST actions of the Bush Junta--supporting the violent rightwing military coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002, supporting the oil professionals' strike that attempted to cripple the country's economy, and funding the rightwing recall election against Chavez (which Chavez won, hands down).

Conspiracy? Naw. Ain't no conspiracy when the Rumsfeld & co.'s evil intentions are so visible to anyone with eyes to see. It is YOU who use the word "conspiracy." By use of this word, you are trying to portray Hugo Chavez as paranoid, when, in truth, he has every reason to fear the intentions of the Bush cabal, which has time and again tried to topple his ELECTED government.

[Bacchus39]

59. and your obsession with Rumsfeld and Chavez relates to Kosovo how?

n/t

[Peace Patriot]

75. You called this Kosovo ref by Chavez "yet another imaginary conspiracy." I was responding

to that statement of yours. Are there conspiracies against Chavez? Yes. Many. Most of them hatched by, or funded/supported by, the Bush Junta--many provably so, some by reasonable inference from the known facts, and a few (like the rightwing paramilitary assassination plot that Uribe was obliged to apologize to Chavez for) where a direct connection to the Bush Junta is not known, but who knows what they are up to with all their secret, unaccountable budgets? Bushites are well known for dirty tricks and foul play, and crimes like torturing prisoners and slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent people. What wouldn't they get up to when lots of oil is at stake, and the opportunity to destroy a democratic leftist government?

What other "imaginary conspiracies" by Chavez were you referring to?

-----------

My "obsession" with Rumsfeld and Chavez:

You'd have to be a complete idiot not to be concerned with "retired" Donald Rumsfeld--the architect of the horrors in Iraq--turning his evil eye on Chavez and Venezuela. That's like saying I'm "obsessed" with enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, or "obsessed" with ending an unjust and heinous war. The word "obsessed" is not appropriate when you are talking about someone's legitimate fear of powerful evildoers who have committed great evils committing more evil, especially when the evildoer--in this case, Donald Rumsfeld--lays out his plans to do so.

You use easy phrases--"imaginary conspiracies" re Chavez, against whom real conspiracies have occurred, and "obsessed with" Rumsfeld and Chavez, for my concern about yet another oil war, when Rumsfeld himself indicates his obsession with South America--and these easy phrases let you slip and slide around the facts. So defend your phrase: "imaginary conspiracies." What other "imaginary conspiracies"--besides Kosovo--are you referring to, when you accuse Chavez of "claiming, yet another, imaginary conspiracy contrived by the US"?

[ronnie624]

79. Usually, I can't make heads or tails of his drivel.

Surely, the 'no drive-by posts' rule was instituted with such posters in mind. Casting an insult can be very tempting at times.

[Judi Lynn]

46. Seperatist Santa Cruz has been a hotbed of the worst possible racism for decades. Here's a look at

recent turmoil there, with the _Bush-supported Santa Cruz racists attacking the Native Bolivians:

On January 8, a march on the main plaza turned into a fight between local police and protesters, and part of the municipal council building was burnt. With a people dozen injured, the social movements began to march each day, demanding the resignation of Manfred Reyes Villa. On January 11, violence erupted when Manfred supporters, many of whom wore white shirts to identify themselves, and a group called Youth for Democracy broke through the police lines and began indiscriminately beating any indigenous person they could find. The “white shirts” then attempted to take the main plaza, but those in the plaza fought back. A long and violent battle that lasted well into the night resulted in two dead (one campesino and one member of Youth for Democracy) and more than 200 injured. The city was in shock as images in the media of the white elite fighting the brown-skinned working class graphically illustrated the clear class and race divisions within Bolivia.
(snip)

This is also the area where the water was privatized by _Bush's father's beloved Bechtel until they drove it out again.

The push towards autonomy in the Media Luna states is steeped in racism. These states hold vast natural resources that the Morales government has just nationalised and most of Bolivia’s economic wealth. The divisions between class and race were no clearer than in Cochabamba on the afternoon of January 11. The white-shirted Manfred supporters were mostly white, middle- and upper-class people, whereas the social movements represent the working class, peasants and poor.

The history of Bolivia is a history of exploitation. From the Spanish Invasion and the use of slave labour in the mines in Potosi 400 years ago, to the neoliberal policies of previous governments, indigenous people have been exploited and excluded from wealth and power for over 500 years. The election of Morales in December 2005 was a turning point in the history of Bolivia, yet many of the elites (a lot of who gained their wealth through government corruption) cannot except that their “right to rule” is over. The Media Luna block are fomenting divisions between departments, with their political speeches, their open racism towards Morales and their unwillingness to share the wealth with the rest of the country.
(snip)

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/695/36109

Here's a reminder of a favorite son of the rabid racist Santa Cruz area. This sketch of Hugo Banzer was published before his last stand as a President which ended in 1997, when he had to retire due to cancer:

COLONEL HUGO BANZER
President of Bolivia
In 1970, in Bolivia, when then-President Juan Jose Torres nationalized Gulf Oil properties and tin mines owned by US interests, and tried to establish friendly relations with Cuba and the Soviet Union, he was playing with fire. The coup to overthrow Torres, led by US-trained officer and Gulf Oil beneficiary Hugo Banzer, had direct support from Washington. When Banzer's forces had a breakdown in radio communications, US Air Force radio was placed at their disposal. Once in power, Banzer began a reign of terror. Schools were shut down as hotbeds of political subversive activity. Within two years, 2,000 people were arrested and tortured without trial. As in Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil, the native Indians were ordered off their land and deprived of tribal identity. Tens-of-thousands of white South Africans were enticed to immigrate with promises of the land stolen from the Indians, with a goal of creating a white Bolivia. When Catholic clergy tried to aid the Indians, the regime, with CIA help, launched terrorist attacks against them, and this "Banzer Plan" became a model for similar anti-Catholic actions throughout Latin America.
(snip)

http://thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html

[Judi Lynn]

42. Here's the quote from the article where that information appeared, for one instance:

a country where Indians were banned from walking on the sidewalk until 1952...

News > May 2, 2007
Gone, But Not Forgotten
Why Bolivians want the United States to extradite their exiled ex-president
By Wes Enzinna
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3136/gone_but_not_forgotten/

There was a revolution in Bolivia, a huge one, and I'll have to start looking for information on that, but that's why 1952 appears to be the date BIG things happened. I'd consider allowing fellow citizens the right to walk on the same sidewalk to be somewhat late in coming, wouldn't you? Jesus.

Since the racists don't have the decency to be ashamed of themselves, there are plenty of us to be ashamed of them for them, instead. Monsters! They're still hard at work, trying to seize control of the country back, too. I hope they all go down in flames.

[eridani]

49. Bingo

Otherwise, why would he give a rat's posterior?

[Peace Patriot]

53. Thank you, SFexpat2000! That IS what this is about--Bolivia!

The Bush Junta has been working on various plans to destroy democracy in the Andes region, in order to regain control of the Andes oil fields and other resources in countries that have rejected U.S./Corporate domination and have elected leftist (majorityist) governments, by overwhelming numbers, namely Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina. Venezuela and Ecuador are members of OPEC, and control huge oil reserves. Bolivia has oil as well, but is mostly rich in gas reserves. And there was a big oil find in Argentina recently. These governments and their leaders are closely allied, and have common goals of social justice and national and regional independence. When the Bush Junta has been able to tear itself away from torturing and slaughtering Iraqis to get their oil, they have devoted as much time and money (ours!) as they can to undermining these governments, with destabilization and "divide and conquer" tactics that have not worked. And, now that they have been denied the Iranian oil fields, and have dynamited the U.S. economy to make themselves and their buds ungodly rich, and are about to lose power here (hopefully), they are desperate for domination of any other oil fields they can get their hands on, using the power of the U.S. government while they still have it.

Their long term destabilization plan in Bolivia is the one most likely to bear Rumsfeldian fruit--blood, gore, chaos--sooner than others. The rightwing landowners in the rural provinces--where the gas and oil are--have started a movement to split their provinces off from the central government of Evo Morales, the first indigenous president of Bolivia, in order to deny the benefits of the country's resources to the vast poor, indigenous population in the urban areas (driven off their small, food-bearing plots, into urban shantytowns, by...the rich landowners!). The Bush Junta, of course, supports this rightwing plot--a) because they believe that the rich should get richer at the expense of the poor; b) hate democracy; c) hate Evo Morales, a strong Chavez ally; d) want to create another rightwing enclave for fascist plotting in the region (in addition to Colombia)--and a launching pad for U.S. military interventions; and e) possibly to draw Chavez into a hot war in defense of Bolivia and the Morales government, or at the least to create sufficient chaos in the region for opportunistic oil grabs.

See
"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html


I have long believed--and have been crying the alarm here at DU for some time--that Bolivia would likely be Rumsfeld's first target. He doesn't mention it, but it makes sense in many ways. Bolivia is weaker than Venezuela, and Rumsfeld & co. like to pick on the weak. Evo Morales was elected without a legislative majority. He is very popular himself, but his grass roots supporters chose to pour all their resources into electing HIM (and not changing the rightwing legislature), in the hope that he could lead a constitutional re-write movement to re-align power in the country away from the entrenched rightwing elite, toward democracy and majority rule. It has been a difficult struggle. The rightwing has fomented "brownshirt"-type riots at the constitutional assemblies. And there is a sharper divide in Bolivia, between the indigenous (the vast majority) and the fascist white elite, than in any other country. Morales--through he looks so sweet--has a spine of steel. He is a former union leader, and a man of enormous courage and vision--but the inherent problems in reforming Bolivia are very great. They are where Venezuela was in, say, 2002 to 2004--still vulnerable to destabilization and rightwing coup attempts.

The Bolivarian governments--Venezuela, Ecuador, Argentina and Bolivia--and their leftist allies (Brazil, Uruguay, Nicaragua, and to some extent Chile)--are all well aware of Bush Junta plotting in South America, and even rightwing governments in Latin America in general (such as Mexico) frown on some of the crap the Bushites have tried to pull. (I was astonished to read of the rightwing president of Mexico publicly lecturing Bush on the SOVEREIGNTY of Latin American countries, and mentioning VENEZUELA as an example, when Bush visited Mexico in March 2006.) In any case, the Bushites have had to proceed carefully, of late--because every time they pull something (like the "suitcase full of money caper" against Venezuela and Argentina), they TIGHTEN the South American alliances against them.

Supporting a separatist movement of the rich rural landowners in Bolivia is just the sort of dirty rotten sneaky shit they are up to. These rightwing landowners have armed militias (who kill uppity peasant farmers) and could well declare their "independence" in an armed revolt, and if Morales moves against them militarily--to hold the country together (rather like Abe Lincoln, actually--and with a similar racial issue)--I can see them appealing to the U.S. for intervention, just as Rumsfeld lays out in his Washington Post op-ed (the U.S. moving "swiftly" in support of "friends and allies" in South America). At the least, they would create chaos and division, and tumult at the UN and the OAS. At the most, they could gain a fascist/corporate protectorate in the heart of the Andes region. Also, if Rumsfeld can't get U.S. military intervention, he always has Blackwater mercenaries (active in Colombia), as well as other rightwing paramilitaries trained in Colombia (--and a possible staging area in Paraguay--the rumored Bush Cartel land purchase).

One more thing, Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, has promised to evict the U.S. military from its base in Ecuador this year. I don't know what the date of that will be. It might be important--and we should find out--because it could be an element of Rumsfeld's strategy (to act before that U.S. spy/intervention base is gone). Exxon-Mobil's recent act of war against Venezuela--trying to freeze $12 billion of Venezuela's assets, over a dispute about Venezuela's share of its own oil--makes me think that the Rumsfeld plan is IN MOTION. They obviously have SOMETHING in mind, with regard to weakening/destabilizing Venezuela, but it may be an initial gambit to weaken Venezuela in regard to a Bush Junta move against Bolivia.

And all of this is very likely what is on Hugo Chavez's mind, when he speaks about Kosovo. His close ally, Bolivia, is threatened with a very similar U.S./Bushite policy.

[davidinalameda]

87. Rumsfeldian fruit?

where do you all get this crap?

:rofl:

[harun]

61. I have got to bat for him too, but not this time, Kosovo should be independant(n/t)

[pegleg]

47. Given what Kosovars had to endure under the Serbs -

I would have to tell Chevez to f---off. What a clown.

[Peace Patriot]

58. 'Clown," "scumbag," "buffoon," "dictator," "tyrant"--why don't you use all

the Bushite epithets?

I've noticed that "clown" is a recent favorite--probably because there is zero evidence that Chavez is "dictator."

-----------------

Anti-Chavez ranters tend to slip and slide around in their justifications of hatred and war much like Bushites. When it became evident that the Bushites had lied about WMDS in Iraq, they soon switched from "Iraq has WMDs" to Iraq had "WMD program-related activities" as their justification for the war. Similarly, when it became evident to even the densest wingers that Hugo Chavez is actually elected, that Venezuelan elections are among the most transparent on earth, that Chavez enjoys huge popularity in Venezuela (70% approval rating), and is highly regarded by other South American leaders (Lula da Silva in Brazil, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Nester Kirchner and Cristina Fernandez in Argentina, Tamare Vasquez in Uruguay, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and others), the anti-Chavistas switched from "Chavez is a dictator" to "Chavez wants to BECOME a dictator." Just you wait, any day now, this guy who has been repeatedly elected by the Venezuela people, and has been their president for ten years, is going to START acting like a "tyrant."

They can't produce one iota of evidence that Chavez is, or wants to be, a "tyrant"--just as the Bushites couldn't produce one iota of evidence that Saddam still had WMDs when they invaded the country and slaughtered over a million of its innocent citizens to get their oil. But both anti-Chavistas and Bushites think that just repeating, and repeating, and repeating their simple-minded, psyops lies will make people believe them--or will fuzz peoples' minds until they pull off their big heists--and when people don't believe them, after considering actual evidence, they switch tracks to "WMD related program activities", or Chavez may not be a "dictator" now, but just wait--he INTENDS to be.

Or this word "clown." Very slippy-slidey. If he's not a "dictator," he must be a "clown" or a "buffoon."

Interesting that the U.S. Embassy hosted a party for the rightwing military coupsters in Venezuela, on the night of their coup attempt, featuring theatrical entertainment that portrayed the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, whom they had just kidnapped, as a gorilla. Some of the other fun things they did: they suspended the Constitution, the courts, the national assembly and all civil rights, and declared martial law. They shot Chavez supporters in the street, and then played doctored footage of their crime on RCTV, to make it appear that Chavez supporters were shooting rightwing protesters. (See the Irish filmmakers' documentary, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.")

Clown, buffoon, gorilla. Dictator, tyrant. Hugo Chavez is none of these things. He is the rightful, legitimate, elected and highly popular president of Venezuela, who has done tremendous good for his people and for the region. Bushites don't like leaders who use oil profits to help the poor, and who pull small countries together in strong alliances against global corporate predators. They ridicule, they belittle, they demonize, they plot against, and they try to topple and kill such leaders in Latin America. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Negroponte, Bolton and other Bushites have a long history of doing this. And when you call a South American leader whom they hate, and are intent on toppling, a "clown," you are contributing to their evil schemes.

How is Chavez "a clown" for being concerned about an international matter? He is the legitimate, elected leader of his country. One of his DUTIES is foreign policy. He has been elected to have an opinion about Kosovo, to vote on the matter in international bodies, to decide on Venezuela's position about recognizing Kosovo, and to formulate policy that benefits--and that prevents harm--to his country and his region. He legitimately determines Venezuelan policy at the UN, at the OAS, at OPEC, and in many other forums. And he very legitimately and with good cause suspects U.S./Bush motives on this and on many other issues. He would be stupid not to. In that case, he MIGHT be called a "clown"--if he DIDN'T consider and discuss U.S./Bush motives. A president who DOESN'T see to his country's interests might well be called a clown, a buffoon, a puppet, a stupid, incompetent mime--a codpiece, an "all hat, no cattle" front man for Saudi Arabia and Exxon-Mobile. Bush, for instance. Bush is a clown. Chavez is not. Bush is a front man, clown suit and all. Chavez is a genuine leader.

[pegleg]

69. He is an hispanic Bush

Instead of building bridges, he's blowing them up.

[EFerrari]

80. I hope you keep posting this baloney

because this is how we populate our ignore lists!

[pegleg]

86. You seem to have a difficult time dealing with opinions contrary

to your own. I am quite serious when I compare the two men. They both bloviate profusely, attempt to censor or eliminate competition, and have huge personal egos.

[eridani]

48. If Kosovo ought to be independent of Serbia--

--shouldn't the Krajina be independent of Croatia? Oops, too late. US mercenaries already helped Croatia successfully finish its ethnic cleansing.

[fascisthunter]

54. Once Again, Chavez is Right. Did America Accept the South's Secession?

Nope!

[freedomnorth]

57. Or Republic of Lakotah for that matter? nt.

[Downtown Hound]

67. Did the North commit ethnic cleansing against the South

prior to the war? No. Actually it was the South that was keeping a whole population in slavery. It seems they were willing to destroy the country rather than go and and tend to their own fields. I'd be a hell of a lot more sympathetic to the Southern cause if they actually were fighting against oppression instead of just wanting to sit on their asses all day while others did their work for them with no pay and squalid living conditions.

If you had lived through an ethnic cleansing, I seriously doubt you'd ever want to live under the people who did it again. And you shouldn't have to. Neither should they.

[Downtown Hound]

66. A country that commits ethnic cleansing against it's own people

has no right to govern it. I actually like Chavez most of the time but he can go fuck himself here. If the rest of the United States ever did to California what Serbia did to Kosovo I'd be hiding in the bushes with my sniper rifle until California was never a part of the United States again.The Kosovars have every right to their independence.

[JackRiddler]

71. The ethnic cleansing campaign was started by the Kosovar separatist groups in the 1980s...

and it was directed against Serbs in the province.

For this reason, the State Department officially accurately listed the KLA-UCK as a terrorist group until 1998, when the CIA took them over (leveraging out their prior sponsors, the German BND).

Sorry about the inconvenient history.

[Downtown Hound]

73. Yeah, and what that little group of Albanians managed to

accomplish was nothing compared to what the Serbs did. Really, if you have a country filled with groups that hate each other to the point where they repeatedly try and wipe each other out, wouldn't it just be best to break it up and have each of them go their separate ways? All sides in that war adopted ethnic cleansing as a tactic. None of them were even remotely as successful as the Serbs were. Sorry, but at some point after so much violence has happened, you can't just shake hands and make up. It's time for the Kosovars to go their own way, and for Serbia to grow up and realize that they fucked themselves here and have only themselves to blame for the fact that no one wants to live under them any more.

[JackRiddler]

74. "That little group of Albanians..."

became the group dominant within the majority population in Kosovo. And the Serbs in the province lived in terror of them in the 1980s, as reported in the New York Times and other U.S. corporate media until 1991 or so. Then the saw changed in favor of a Yugoslavian break-up and the Serbs could be depicted only as the new Nazis of the world. (This came after the IMF forced an indebted Yugoslavia to accept a plan under which the federal government stopped financing the states at all -- something that might cause secession movements here, too.) The day may come in this country when people will argue exactly as you do. It's not the way forward in the world.

[Downtown Hound]

88. I guess the way forward in the world is to simply ignore what

happened according to you. Let's ignore every people's desire for their right to self-rule. You are not the decider of is the way forward in the world. As far as Kosovo goes, the only people who should be deciding for them are the Kosovars themselves, and they have chosen independence. I support their right to choose that. We ourselves once wanted Independence, and we never even went through an ethnic cleansing. I'm sure there were plenty of people back then just like you arguing that it was not the way forward in the world. Fortunately, they were ignored. Hopefully, people like you will be ignored this time too.

The way forward in the world is to start listening to the desires of the people. And if people want to go their own way if something is currently not working out, then they should have the right to do that. Until we start listening to their voices, we're going to see a lot more warfare.

How easy it must be for you to sit in the comfort of your own dwelling and quote old newspaper articles and keep score on who did what here and who did what there and decide what is the way forward for another country when you've never had any of your family members slaughtered by an enemy that somebody far away has decided you should still live under.

[ohio2007]

68. So.. I wonder.... If bushco was against Kosovo independence....Would Chavez be for

a free Kosovo ?
interesting

How many at DU may< now flip flop /B> and decide Kosovo independence is bad for ( X reason here ) ;)

[EFerrari]

72. If you knew anything about Chavez, Kosovo or DU

you wouldn't need to ask. :)

[ohio2007]

85. LOL

kinda like knee jerk "flavor of the month club" ?

lol