I viewed the prospect of either Obama or McCain gaining the presidency as distasteful, both as a libertarian and as a Serb. Neither is a friend of human freedom, so I won't belabor that point. Unlike most of his fellow Republicans, McCain has consistently supported Clinton's Balkans adventures during the 1990s, from Bosnia to Kosovo. One of his partners in those crimes was Joseph Biden, then Senator from Delaware, now VP-elect.

I could write an entire column about all the things Joseph Biden has said and done pertaining to the Balkans. In fact, I did write a column about him once. At the time, I asserted that Biden's belligerent ranting was less of a sign that “liberal” interventionism was making a comeback and more of a “last roar of an establishment whose time has passed, and while still capable of mischief it cannot fundamentally change the course of events.” But lo and behold, that establishment seems to be back in power, and under the banner of “change” no less!

Let's see now. In addition to cheering the murderous terrorists of the KLA and their “independent state of Kosovo,” Biden also called for a “Japanese-German style occupation” of Serbia. He is also said to have advocated that “all Serbs should be placed in Nazi-style concentration camps” back in 1999, during Senate debate on the NATO attack on then-Yugoslavia, and called the Serbs “…a bunch of illiterates, degenerates, baby killers, butchers and rapists” on CNN's Larry King Live.

Apparently, a Croatian friar has taken credit for guiding Biden to the “truth” about those wicked evil Serbs. Isn't that great, knowing that a foreign cleric can influence an American lawmaker so? Then again, his task wasn't hard. Being a Serbophobe - as opposed to, say, anti-Semite - has never been a career-killer in Washington. Quite the contrary.

Within the postmodern morality in which the American politics operates, there's absolutely nothing wrong with calling the Serbs “degenerates, baby killers, butchers and rapists,” since they are an officially designated villain. The entire narrative of the American Empire rising to “liberate” the world from itself in the aftermath of the Cold War rests on the myth of Serbian Evil.

Biden could not get away with saying things like this about the Jews, or Americans of African origin, or Muslims. But Serbs are fair game. Everybody knows they are evil, right?

It seems that every possible group of people has some sort of agency in Washington, whether they have a grievance now or think they may have a grievance in the future and doesn't hurt to be prepared. The Serbs do not, even though they've been on the receiving end of American “benevolence” longer and harder than the Iraqis or the Afghans. This is why there is little or no response to Serbophobic drivel routinely spewed by politicians and lobbyists (and now the future Grand Vizier). This is why no one in the U.S. mainstream cared about Biden's comments, or how positively Hitlerian they sounded (not to mention having not even a passing acquaintance with the truth).

Now all we need is Dick Holbrooke back in the State Department, and as far as Washington is concerned, it will be 1999 all over again.

He talks about Kosovo’s declaration of independence in February. “There’s no country in the world that would just sit quietly whilst a part of it just unilaterally declares independence. And as far as we see, Kosovo’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence, this is an ethnically motivated attempt as succession from an internationally recognized state, in defiance of the Security Council. And as such, is actually illegal.”

“What we want to do is try to make history in the Balkans, by trying to resolve a dispute of this complexity in a peaceful way.”

He also talks about U.S. support of an independent Kosovo. “What I think the US government failed to understand is that Serbia today is a very different country that the Serbia of the 1990s. We were a dictatorship in the 1990s, but the Serbian people overthrew that dictatorship. I was part of the underground movement that overthrew Slobodan Milosevic in the year 2000.”

“Kosovo UDI provoked the UDI in Georgia. If we don’t put a stop to this kind of conduct, there are many parts of the world that would be in the same danger.”

“Night Talk” airs in the U.S., Europe and Asia on Bloomberg TV at 10PM on weeknights and is simulcast on Bloomberg Radio at 10PM. Bloomberg Radio is broadcast on 1130AM in the New York Metropolitan area and is available on XM and Sirius. The Friday night Show re-airs over the weekend Sat at 8:00-9:00pm, 10:00-11:00pm and Mon 12:00am - 1:00am.

“Night Talk” can also be seen on Bloomberg.com , is podcast at here and also on iTunes under Business News.

Watch it!

©2008 PoliGazette . All Rights Reserved.

At this moment, fewer than 50 countries have recognized Kosovo’s independence. That is significantly less than Kosovo hoped for when it announced its independence earlier this year, but significantly more than countries that have recognize South Ossetia’s and Abkhazia’s independence - only Russia and Nicaragua have recognized the independence of these two Georgian breakaway regions.

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

Bloggers of all stripes have moved passed their initial gut reactions on the freshly minted Democratic ticket and have started to formulate more solid opinions based on fact. That’s what covering politics is all about, isn’t it?

“On the surface, Barack Obama’s choice of Joe Biden as his Vice Presidential running mate strikes me as pretty uninspired,” writes Tim Dunlop from Australia. “It’s hard to imagine that it wins him an extra vote come November, though I think that sometimes the ability of a running mate to do that for any candidate is overstated.”

He continues:

Not that I think Biden is a bad choice per se; in fact, I don’t really think there is anyone better from the list of those whose names cropped up over the last few months. I certainly don’t think Hillary was ever a serious option. He is a fairly personable guy, even if he, rightly, has a reputation for talking to much. He is a regular on US political programs and has developed a solid presence in that medium, a bit of go-to guy for the cable shows looking for an articulate criticism of Bush policy.

Does “articulate critic of Bush policy” translate into “attack dog”? For Sultan Knish and the stories behind the news from Israel, that answer is an emphatic yes. However, there is one caveat.

One interpretation is that Biden is there to launch the dirty attacks on McCain that Obama doesn't want to dirty himself with. This is plausible considering that Obama's dirty campaigns have been fought by lawyers, people who worked for his campaign… But considering that Biden turned a simple question about what law school he went to into an extended rant about how high his IQ is, setting him loose as an attack dog is a plan that's right up there with sending a pyromaniac to light a torch.

I'm sure that Biden will serve as an attack dog, I'm also sure that he'll do most of the damage to his own side, delivering verbal broadsides that roll like grenades back into Obama's tent.

With Obama’s choice, the Jewish blogger DovBear wonders where the hope mantra went:

I don't see how you can talk credibly about change, and youth, and so forth when your running mate is a grizzled, old career Washington insider…

Then there is the experience gap. Does highlighting Biden’s three decades of Senate experience call attention to Obama’s inexperience? Batya from Shiloh Musings in Israel points out filling the VP spot with an experienced poltico appears to be a pattern in American politics when the lead role goes to a newcomer.

• John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson
• Bush and Cheney

Those two quickly came to mind.

I just wonder if anyone really believed that Obama would get the nomination so easily. The man really has no experience, no track record. Sort of frightening.

Then there are Biden's scandals and gaffes: His plagarism, his missed votes in the Senate, the famous foot-in-mouth disease. “So to recap,” opinesNorth Coast Voices in Australia. “Joe Biden is your typical candidate.”


He massages his personal history by ‘borrowing' the words and personal anecdotes of another, where possible avoids mentioning the real extent of his income, rewrites political history, turns up in the Senate when he wants to and generally tries to throw his weight around.

In other words - a 26-year political job horse who now relies on a wing and a prayer to get by in the U.S. Congress.
Definitely not the statesman with sound judgment praised by Obama in Springfield - more like the usual pitcher of warm spit.

A choice which offers little hope of change to the rest of the world.

But let’s leave Biden the man, or Biden the politician on the stump for a moment, and investigate where Biden has made his name: foreign policy. In this category we have a passel of posts that could easily be titled: Joe, what have you done for me lately?

From Erkan’s Field Diary, Biden may well bring an anti-Turkey stance to the White House.

An anti-Turkish vice president according to Hürriyet. He is known to defend Armenian, Greek, Cyprus lobby theses. But Foreign Policy experts state that Turkey is already changing is foreign policy attitudes and there won't much new tension btw Turkey and US….

Biden is also a “prime Serb hater and Albanian Muslim lobbyist” for sponsoring the 1999 resolution for the U.S. to bomb Serbia and, later, recognizing the Kosovo State, according to this 2007 post from Byzantine Blog that was recently reprinted in the German blog Allah’s Willing Executioners.

Iraq Pundit worries about Biden’s and Obama’s “total disregard for the Iraqi people.”

All along, Biden has made it clear that he sees Iraqis as nothing more than savages bent on killing one another. His solution is to divide the country to stop the beasts from murdering the other beasts. He can argue all he wants that President Bush and John McCain are not nearly as smart as Biden is, but at least they will not abandon the Iraqis.

A “100% Palestinian” blogger writing in Sabbah Blog, claims that Israel must be happy with Obama’s pick.

The guy (Obama) is ignorant and naive when it comes to cases such as Israeli occupation of Palestine. And now he picks a guy who proudly says “I’m a Zionist. You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist!” So, what are you expecting from Obama if he’s in office? (not that the other puppet is better).

Joe Biden chairs the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, a post that Obama hopes will compensate for his own lack of experience in the global realm. Obama “safe choice” will also help him win the most important part of all USA elections, AIPAC support - the Zionist Lobby.

One good piece of news coming out of the choice of Biden: He is big fan of the Amtrak train line, Dove’s Eye View informs us. For those who have tried to ride the rails in the U.S., that is not a bad thing at all.

Recently, a prime Serb-hater and Albanian Muslim lobbyist, Senator Joseph Biden of the obsessively anti-Serb Council on Foreign Relations, was given ample space by equally Serbophobic Financial Times to do some more pro-Muslim lobbying, while underlining his unwavering support for further destruction of Serbian state.

A man on the record for stating that “all Serbs should be placed in Nazi-style concentration camps” during Senatorial deliberations in 1999 over NATO aggression on Serbia, and that United States ought to conduct a fascist, “Japanese-German style occupation” of Serbia, Biden, considered the most “verbose, preening, self-aggrandizing pol,” is among the world famous plagiarists, and often characterized as a rambling gas bag, terminally enslaved by his own prejudice, ego and vanity:

“…The man loves his voice so much, you’d expect him to be following it around in a grey Buick, in defiance of a restraining order, as it walks home from school. He seems to think his teeth are some kind of hypnotic punctuation marks which can momentarily disorient the listener and absolve him from any of Western civilization’s usual imperatives to stop talking. Listening to him speechify is like playing an intellectual game of whack-a-mole where every now and then the fuzzy head of a good point pops up from the tundra but before you can pin it down, he starts talking about how he went to the store and saw a squirrel on the way and it was brown which brings to mind Brown V. Board of Ed which most people don’t understand because [TEETH FLASH] he taught Brown in his law school course and [TEETH FLASH] Mr. Chairman I’m going to get right to it and besides these aren’t the droids you’re looking for…”

Among Serbs, however, Joe Biden is best known as the man who sponsored the March 23, 1999 Senate resolution authorizing Clinton to bomb Serbia and will remain permanently ingrained in our collective memory for characterizing Serbian nation as “…a bunch of illiterates, degenerates, baby killers, butchers and rapists” — a hateful outburst and a fascist tirade on CNN’s Larry King Live that was left without a comment, reprimand or any semblance of apology, to date.

Neither “Extremist” Nor “Conspiracy”
At least one of the “illiterate degenerates” responded to Biden’s latest Serb-bashing exercise — Serbian Ambassador to the U.S, His Excellency Dr. Ivan Vujacic:

Sir, Senator Joe Biden (“Opponents of a new Kosovo must be stopped,” January 3) proposes recognizing independence without sovereignty (because it is not ready) for Kosovo, currently a province of Serbia, under United Nations administration.

He believes this “could yield a victory for Muslim democracy” and provide a “much-needed example of a successful US-Muslim partnership.” The impediments to this outcome are “extremists” in Belgrade and Moscow who will “conspire” to prevent Kosovo’s independence.

For anyone following the situation, it is difficult to agree that extremists are in power in Serbia. Since the democratic revolution that overthrew Slobodan Milosevic, Serbia has been radically transformed economically, politically and has had major achievements in the strengthening of human and minority rights.

It has had several elections that have produced governments that are committed to European and Atlantic integration. It has offered the highest possible autonomy for Kosovo within Serbia in the negotiations on its future status. Surely, this is not extremism.

The truth of the matter is that Kosovo has a dismal record regarding basic security, the rule of law and respect for property and human rights for non-Albanians. Democracy should be universal and not ethnic, nor based on religion. Should the threat of violence be rewarded by a quick move to independence or is Kosovo just a propaganda tool for the Muslim world as Senator Biden seems to suggest?

Serbia expects that the principles of international law and the UN Charter should be adhered to. It does not believe that a democratic nation should be dismembered. It has stated so publicly. Surely, this is not conspiracy.

Why is Joe Biden So Generous With Serbian Territories?
The second response, by another “extremist” opposed to the amputation of Serbia’s historical and sovereign territory, has not been published by the “non-extremist,” “democratic” Financial Times yet, but we believe the fairness in media they say they are guided by will prevail and the letter by Stella L. Jatras will also be published… eventually, in the fullness of time, at the appropriate juncture, etc. etc:

In referencing “Opponents of new Kosovo must be stopped,” of 2 January, why is Senator Joseph Biden so generous with sovereign land that belongs to the Serbian people considering the disturbing and chaotic situation that is taking place in Kosovo today. Although the Albanians are now the majority in Kosovo after having achieved this status by crossing illegally from Albania into Christian Kosovo, they are the minority in Serbia. Today, Serbian culture, language and religion are being eradicated by Kosovo Albanian mobs under the very noses of KFOR. Are our troops in Kosovo there to protect the Osama bin Laden mosque that now stands on Serbian soil? Is this acceptable to the Senator?

We “opponents of a new Kosovo” oppose the further desecration and destruction of 13th and 14th century churches and regret the more than 150 places of worship that have already been destroyed. We oppose ceding Serbia’s Jerusalem to war criminals such as Agim Ceku, who was the chief of staff of the Kosovo Liberation Army (once declared a terrorist organization by the State Department), who masterminded two of the grisliest episodes of brutality in the war in former Yugoslavia, and who has now achieved, in spite of his war criminal activities, the title of Prime Minister.

At the urging of President Clinton, in violation of International Law, the NATO Charter and without the approval of the U.S. Congress, NATO, for 78 unmerciful days, bombed tiny Yugoslavia that did not have weapons of mass destruction, never attacked us nor were they ever a threat to us. The truth of the matter is that NATO’s bombing was based on atrocities that were committed by Bosnian Muslim forces and blamed on Serbs. Furthermore, the territorial integrity of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia includes sovereignty over Kosovo which was guaranteed in the Rambouillet Agreement. Are we to violate this agreement as well?

While our government was supporting the Bosnian Muslim government of Alija Itzebegovic, his government in Vienna issued a passport to Osama bin Laden in 1992 thus allowing the most sought after criminal in the world to visit Bosnia and Kosovo. A 1997 Senate Republican Policy Committee Report titled, “Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base,” writes of Iran’s connection to Bosnia and Kosovo.

The Wall Street Journal of 1 November 2001 wrote, “For the past 10 years, the most senior leaders of al Qaeda have visited the Balkans, including bin Laden himself on three occasions between 1994 and 1996. The Egyptian surgeon turned terrorist leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri has operated terrorist training camps, weapons of mass destruction factories and money-laundering and drug-trading networks throughout Albanian, Kosovo, [FYRO] Macedonia Bulgaria, Turkey and Bosnia. This has gone on for a decade.”

Former UNPROFOR Commander, Canadian Maj. General Lewis MacKenzie wrote, “The Kosovo-Albanians have played us like a Stradivarius. We have subsidized and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an ethnically pure and independent Kosovo. We have never blamed them for being the perpetrators of the violence in the early ‘90s and we continue to portray them as the designated victim today in spite of evidence to the contrary. When they achieve independence with the help of our tax dollars combined with those of bin Laden and al-Qaeda, just consider the message of encouragement this sends to other terrorist-supported independence movements around the world.”

After 9/11, President Bush said that we would do whatever it takes to defeat the Muslim terrorists, yet we denied the Serbs the right to defend themselves against the same terrorists that we are fighting today.

And mark you, if the Kosovo Albanians do not achieve their independence fast enough to suit them, their guns will be turned on those who were sent to keep the peace.

Furthermore, I would like to ask Senator Biden and those who advocate granting independence to Kosovo, which would guarantee the complete annihilation of Serbian presence in their holy land, “Other than be our ally in two world wars, what have the Serbian people ever done to you that you should show such animosity towards them? And why would you, Senator Biden, and your ilk want to create another terrorist state in the heart of Europe?”

Why?

Consequences of Biden’s Pro-Muslim Lobbying in the Balkans
And, in order to refresh Senator’s memory of the kind of “humanitarianism” and “democracy” CFR’s, Biden’s, Holbrooke’s, Albright’s, Clinton’s and Blair’s (among others) politicking has brought to the Balkans, he should take a moment of his precious Muslim-lobbying time to view Sky News’ Investigative report on al-Qaeda presence in the Balkans.

提起这个题目我又要提起一段往事——后来每每回想起来就让我有些黯然神伤的往事。1997年台海危机一触即发，台海周边形势紧张。当时我们在华盛顿做了一个日本和台海问题的研讨会，会议主发言人是来自日本防卫厅的主掌美日情报交换的某君。这位日本情报官在谈到周边各国对当前局势的看法的时候，使用了排列句子。说到美国可能出现的情况，他的排列是：白宫如何看待危局，国会如何做决定（出兵要国会批准），美国的民意又会如何演变（因为美国民意会最终决定总统如何介入台海危机以及介入多深）；他说到日本的各界的反应是这样的：日本首相会如何、日本执政党和国会又如何，右派势力会否抬头，以及日本民众的民意走向会如何影响事态发展，影响有多大；在他谈到台湾时，排列也是类似的：总统李登辉的意思、军方的忧虑以及台湾2千多万民众的态度如何决定台湾的政策……

最后他说到了中国大陆也是这样排列的：中国政府的看法（他又把它分成了温和派和强硬派），中国军方的一些看法，中国地方政府（诸侯的态度）——文章到此结束。

日本情报官对于可能进一步恶化的台海危机，提出了当时牵涉其中的各国可能持有的态度和采取的措施，基于公开资料和日本情报部门的研判，还是有一定说服力的。可是他的报告刚刚做完，美国前驻北京大使馆武官文某就提出了一个问题：你的报告在谈到各国各方势力的态度时，都提到了政府和民众的互动，比较全面。但是，我也注意到，在你提到中国各方面的反应和可能对最终政策的影响时，你唯独没有论及中国民众和中国的民意。12亿人的意见难道不重要？

事情过去很久了，而且我也在一些场合提到了这个例子对我的影响，可是，今天还是想起来了，并先记录下来。也许现在的中国有所不同了？但愿如此。但那天那个日本情报官为自己论文的辩护是这样说的，中国的民意应该是和官方一致的，至少是被控制的，他们自己的发不出来，就是发出来也不会影响政府的决定。而且，在没有任何独立的途径得到中国民意相关数据时，我还是认为不能写进论文里，不严肃。

12亿民众的民意竟然是无法预测的，是被政府控制的，是不严肃的，对于我这位12亿人中的一员，我的心情可想而知。

1997年后互联网迅速崛起，成为西方了解中国大陆民意的重要工具，然而，如果从学术的角度，那些数据还是有些问题的，而且最主要的是，互联网反应出的大陆民意就是准确的？没有被控制和删减吗？

[snip]

Yang spends the next several paragraphs shifting the topic onto the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, considering the truth of the matter, the anger in China regardless of one, and proceeds with the assumption that the bombing might have been mistaken, as claimed at the time:

“误炸”使馆事件出来后，中方反应之大，出乎意外，中美关系一下子降到底点，甚至比1996年台海危机时还要恶劣。“误炸”大使馆的一个最大结果就是中国民众的爱国激情被炸了出来，这激情如此之烈，以致让人无法分清是爱国主义还是民族主义了。两年前那位日本情报官已经回到日本情报部门任职，我想这使他一定很吃惊，他会不会说：哇塞，中国民众的声音终于发出来了？

但发出来了是发出来了，问题却在于，这种声音有多少可以进入他的研究报告之中？或者他又会在现在的情报研究中如何评价中国民众的爱国热情呢？他会提醒日本和美国政府不要掉以轻心？研究周边问题的情报分析对于这种爱国和民族主义当然不会错过，但中国这种爱国主义和民族主义的大混合是否是政府处理对外关系的一种重要依据？或者只是政府掌控的一种用来达到自己对外对内政策的一种手段和策略？——相信这是美日情报机关最为关心的事情了。

这也是我今天要说的最主要意思，虽然和轰炸大使馆离得有点远。大家不妨思考几个问题：中国民间痉挛似的爱国激情和时不时冒出来的民族主义对我们国家的对外政策是否有影响？是否影响中国和世界各国特别是西方、日本等国家的关系？是否影响我们的国际贸易？是否影响到中国的经济发展，影响了中国融入世界？那么再思考一下，每一次的爱国热情过后，给中国带来了什么变化？

对于我来说，这尤其重要，因为我也爱国，也激情，但无论怎么激情的爱国，我的目标是要中国能够继续经济发展，社会稳定，而且政治不断进行与时俱进改革。而这也是我对一些爱国热情和民族主义非常之担心的，认为任何人不管你高调还是低调爱国，不过你说自己是爱国主义，还是民族主义，如果你的爱国不能够提高人民生活水平，让中国人的人权得到保障，生活安定，政治清明，如果你的爱国不符合人类日益接受的普世价值，你的爱国就是误国，你也就无异于爱国贼。爱国也就是爱民。

这就是每一次看到爱国又起的时候，我最担心的，会不会把国际关系全部搞坏了？会不会破坏我们的经济发展了？会不会，说到这里我是很欣赏“韬光养晦”的策略的 ——你还别说，经过这一段时间的观察和调查，我得出了也许让很多反对冲动爱国的人士不那么喜欢听的结论：中国民众无论是反日抵制日货，还是到抗议美国轰炸大使馆，再到把爱国大游行搞到国外去，保护圣火等等，所有的这些激情大爱国，都没有影响中国政府和外国政府正常交往，没有影响多边经贸关系。

从这一方面说，我对中央政府的清醒头脑大加赞赏。他们显然比爱国的群众更“理智”，你砸大使馆可以，但中美关系特别是和美国人做生意一如既往；你到街上喊两声抵制日货或者砸两部日本汽车可以，但在政府的主导下，一部日本小车被砸倒，千千万万辆日本小车站了起来；你说抵制法货可以，但如果真激情到家乐福门口去折腾，公安会伺候你；你把美国怎么骂都不为过，但中美贸易一日千里，人员交往日新月异……最主要的是，几乎所有的爱国热情都是被政府的某种言行及时划上了一个句号：就在海外留学生爱国爱得要死要活的时候，中央发话了：干好你自己的事就是爱国。就在抵制日货呼声没有停下来时，领导人说了，记住历史，忘记仇恨；就在愤青们都想把CNN吃掉的时候，却发现地政救灾中，CNN是最重要一家被中央政府允许进入灾区的媒体！而且就在部分民众包括那个余秋雨高叫海外反华势力的时候，政府只字不提不说，而且还和这些外国政府打得火热……

一次狼来了，西方人很紧张，两次狼来了，西方政府冷静了一些，等你一而再再而三地折腾以反西方某个国家和个人为主的爱国主义时，西方人终于笑了。他们笑什么？他们笑我们那种奇怪的爱国主义，看上去毫无内容的爱国主义，让他们折腾吧，他们的政府不会怎么样，他们照样和我们做生意，他们照样和我们来往，一切照旧。于是，我们看到了，当中国在西方主要国家的中国留学生挥舞五星红旗宣示爱国的时候，人家冷眼旁观，西方主流媒体甚至于不屑于报道，人家根本不把你当回事。人家知道，你在怎么折腾，你不敢不和他们做生意，不敢宣布自己把门关起来，当然那些留学生更不敢收起皮箱，打道回府，那人家还有什么好担心的，好怕的？

那么现在让我们涉入最深层的问题，既然中国民众的爱国热情不但对中国政府对外决策不起影响，而且弄得外国人也麻木了，人家不但不怕，而且觉得好玩，那么这种爱国激情为什么还像肌肉痉挛一样，过一段时间就来那么一次，而且每次到来的时候，还往往让你感觉到有人在煽风点火？真得一点作用没有？目的何在？

不抵制外国产品，也不会缩减经贸交往，连国际交往也没有减少，而且我们的爱国主义几乎没有几次能够真正成功迫使西方政府对我们政府让步的，很多时候反而造成西方政府对我们发难。那么这种爱国主义到底有什么作用？

[Snip]

可见，中国的民族主义和爱国主义以及激烈的反对西方的运动，并没有阻止中国政府和西方国家的进一步交往，特别是没有影响中国和西方在经贸、科教甚至社会方方面面的交往，唯一影响的是中国老百姓对西方的认识，对西方以人权、民主和自由为主体的价值观的了解！

现在，让我回到这篇文章的假设和我的推论，美国误炸大使馆，可是却搞出了那么激烈的抗美爱国事件，中国人民被激怒了，于是去抗议去游行去示威，去砸大使馆，就在大家快要激动到忍不住要去“援越抗美”的时候，中央接受了美国提出的赔款要求，误炸事件被确认下来，爱国游行倏然收场。

可是，“误炸”大使馆事件却成为一个深深影响中国人的标志性事件。就在几天前，我和一位比较喜欢的80后聊天，他说到自己的思想变化时，说，我以前也会同意你的观点，但1999年美国轰炸我大使馆，让我突然清醒过来，改变了我对美国的看法，对中国的看法。

我真是太震惊：你不会告诉我轰炸大使馆事件竟然能够改变了你的价值观？那真是太神奇了！！如果这个轰炸是误炸呢？难道你没有发现问题，你的价值观到底是被什么改变的？！轰炸使馆事件是把你震醒了？还是轰炸大使馆事件后发生的那些爱国游行事件把你弄糊涂了？！

有人说，你说了半天，还是基于这次轰炸是“误炸”，可如果不是误炸呢？好，那么就让我告诉你，如果我们的假设是对的，那是误炸的话，那么你如何解释这次误炸竟然阴错阳差地改变了一代人对美国（及其价值观）的看法？用你自己的脑袋想一想吧。

现在我再告诉你：我并不认为轰炸大使馆是误炸，“误炸”只是这篇文章的假设。但即使不是误炸，我也因那件事竟然改变了一些人对世界和自己的看法，而且开始塑造一代年轻人的世界观感到无比震惊。

而且，当你和我一起开始认定那次轰炸不是“误炸”的时候，在你对世界的观点改变之前，你最好和我一起问这样一个问题：以美国为首的北约为什么胆敢轰炸我大使馆？

提起这个题目我又要提起一段往事——后来每每回想起来就让我有些黯然神伤的往事。1997年台海危机一触即发，台海周边形势紧张。当时我们在华盛顿做了一个日本和台海问题的研讨会，会议主发言人是来自日本防卫厅的主掌美日情报交换的某君。这位日本情报官在谈到周边各国对当前局势的看法的时候，使用了排列句子。说到美国可能出现的情况，他的排列是：白宫如何看待危局，国会如何做决定（出兵要国会批准），美国的民意又会如何演变（因为美国民意会最终决定总统如何介入台海危机以及介入多深）；他说到日本的各界的反应是这样的：日本首相会如何、日本执政党和国会又如何，右派势力会否抬头，以及日本民众的民意走向会如何影响事态发展，影响有多大；在他谈到台湾时，排列也是类似的：总统李登辉的意思、军方的忧虑以及台湾2千多万民众的态度如何决定台湾的政策……

最后他说到了中国大陆也是这样排列的：中国政府的看法（他又把它分成了温和派和强硬派），中国军方的一些看法，中国地方政府（诸侯的态度）——文章到此结束。

日本情报官对于可能进一步恶化的台海危机，提出了当时牵涉其中的各国可能持有的态度和采取的措施，基于公开资料和日本情报部门的研判，还是有一定说服力的。可是他的报告刚刚做完，美国前驻北京大使馆武官文某就提出了一个问题：你的报告在谈到各国各方势力的态度时，都提到了政府和民众的互动，比较全面。但是，我也注意到，在你提到中国各方面的反应和可能对最终政策的影响时，你唯独没有论及中国民众和中国的民意。12亿人的意见难道不重要？

事情过去很久了，而且我也在一些场合提到了这个例子对我的影响，可是，今天还是想起来了，并先记录下来。也许现在的中国有所不同了？但愿如此。但那天那个日本情报官为自己论文的辩护是这样说的，中国的民意应该是和官方一致的，至少是被控制的，他们自己的发不出来，就是发出来也不会影响政府的决定。而且，在没有任何独立的途径得到中国民意相关数据时，我还是认为不能写进论文里，不严肃。

12亿民众的民意竟然是无法预测的，是被政府控制的，是不严肃的，对于我这位12亿人中的一员，我的心情可想而知。

1997年后互联网迅速崛起，成为西方了解中国大陆民意的重要工具，然而，如果从学术的角度，那些数据还是有些问题的，而且最主要的是，互联网反应出的大陆民意就是准确的？没有被控制和删减吗？

[snip]

Yang spends the next several paragraphs shifting the topic onto the US bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, considering the truth of the matter, the anger in China regardless of one, and proceeds with the assumption that the bombing might have been mistaken, as claimed at the time:

“误炸”使馆事件出来后，中方反应之大，出乎意外，中美关系一下子降到底点，甚至比1996年台海危机时还要恶劣。“误炸”大使馆的一个最大结果就是中国民众的爱国激情被炸了出来，这激情如此之烈，以致让人无法分清是爱国主义还是民族主义了。两年前那位日本情报官已经回到日本情报部门任职，我想这使他一定很吃惊，他会不会说：哇塞，中国民众的声音终于发出来了？

但发出来了是发出来了，问题却在于，这种声音有多少可以进入他的研究报告之中？或者他又会在现在的情报研究中如何评价中国民众的爱国热情呢？他会提醒日本和美国政府不要掉以轻心？研究周边问题的情报分析对于这种爱国和民族主义当然不会错过，但中国这种爱国主义和民族主义的大混合是否是政府处理对外关系的一种重要依据？或者只是政府掌控的一种用来达到自己对外对内政策的一种手段和策略？——相信这是美日情报机关最为关心的事情了。

这也是我今天要说的最主要意思，虽然和轰炸大使馆离得有点远。大家不妨思考几个问题：中国民间痉挛似的爱国激情和时不时冒出来的民族主义对我们国家的对外政策是否有影响？是否影响中国和世界各国特别是西方、日本等国家的关系？是否影响我们的国际贸易？是否影响到中国的经济发展，影响了中国融入世界？那么再思考一下，每一次的爱国热情过后，给中国带来了什么变化？

对于我来说，这尤其重要，因为我也爱国，也激情，但无论怎么激情的爱国，我的目标是要中国能够继续经济发展，社会稳定，而且政治不断进行与时俱进改革。而这也是我对一些爱国热情和民族主义非常之担心的，认为任何人不管你高调还是低调爱国，不过你说自己是爱国主义，还是民族主义，如果你的爱国不能够提高人民生活水平，让中国人的人权得到保障，生活安定，政治清明，如果你的爱国不符合人类日益接受的普世价值，你的爱国就是误国，你也就无异于爱国贼。爱国也就是爱民。

这就是每一次看到爱国又起的时候，我最担心的，会不会把国际关系全部搞坏了？会不会破坏我们的经济发展了？会不会，说到这里我是很欣赏“韬光养晦”的策略的 ——你还别说，经过这一段时间的观察和调查，我得出了也许让很多反对冲动爱国的人士不那么喜欢听的结论：中国民众无论是反日抵制日货，还是到抗议美国轰炸大使馆，再到把爱国大游行搞到国外去，保护圣火等等，所有的这些激情大爱国，都没有影响中国政府和外国政府正常交往，没有影响多边经贸关系。

从这一方面说，我对中央政府的清醒头脑大加赞赏。他们显然比爱国的群众更“理智”，你砸大使馆可以，但中美关系特别是和美国人做生意一如既往；你到街上喊两声抵制日货或者砸两部日本汽车可以，但在政府的主导下，一部日本小车被砸倒，千千万万辆日本小车站了起来；你说抵制法货可以，但如果真激情到家乐福门口去折腾，公安会伺候你；你把美国怎么骂都不为过，但中美贸易一日千里，人员交往日新月异……最主要的是，几乎所有的爱国热情都是被政府的某种言行及时划上了一个句号：就在海外留学生爱国爱得要死要活的时候，中央发话了：干好你自己的事就是爱国。就在抵制日货呼声没有停下来时，领导人说了，记住历史，忘记仇恨；就在愤青们都想把CNN吃掉的时候，却发现地政救灾中，CNN是最重要一家被中央政府允许进入灾区的媒体！而且就在部分民众包括那个余秋雨高叫海外反华势力的时候，政府只字不提不说，而且还和这些外国政府打得火热……

一次狼来了，西方人很紧张，两次狼来了，西方政府冷静了一些，等你一而再再而三地折腾以反西方某个国家和个人为主的爱国主义时，西方人终于笑了。他们笑什么？他们笑我们那种奇怪的爱国主义，看上去毫无内容的爱国主义，让他们折腾吧，他们的政府不会怎么样，他们照样和我们做生意，他们照样和我们来往，一切照旧。于是，我们看到了，当中国在西方主要国家的中国留学生挥舞五星红旗宣示爱国的时候，人家冷眼旁观，西方主流媒体甚至于不屑于报道，人家根本不把你当回事。人家知道，你在怎么折腾，你不敢不和他们做生意，不敢宣布自己把门关起来，当然那些留学生更不敢收起皮箱，打道回府，那人家还有什么好担心的，好怕的？

那么现在让我们涉入最深层的问题，既然中国民众的爱国热情不但对中国政府对外决策不起影响，而且弄得外国人也麻木了，人家不但不怕，而且觉得好玩，那么这种爱国激情为什么还像肌肉痉挛一样，过一段时间就来那么一次，而且每次到来的时候，还往往让你感觉到有人在煽风点火？真得一点作用没有？目的何在？

不抵制外国产品，也不会缩减经贸交往，连国际交往也没有减少，而且我们的爱国主义几乎没有几次能够真正成功迫使西方政府对我们政府让步的，很多时候反而造成西方政府对我们发难。那么这种爱国主义到底有什么作用？

[Snip]

可见，中国的民族主义和爱国主义以及激烈的反对西方的运动，并没有阻止中国政府和西方国家的进一步交往，特别是没有影响中国和西方在经贸、科教甚至社会方方面面的交往，唯一影响的是中国老百姓对西方的认识，对西方以人权、民主和自由为主体的价值观的了解！

现在，让我回到这篇文章的假设和我的推论，美国误炸大使馆，可是却搞出了那么激烈的抗美爱国事件，中国人民被激怒了，于是去抗议去游行去示威，去砸大使馆，就在大家快要激动到忍不住要去“援越抗美”的时候，中央接受了美国提出的赔款要求，误炸事件被确认下来，爱国游行倏然收场。

可是，“误炸”大使馆事件却成为一个深深影响中国人的标志性事件。就在几天前，我和一位比较喜欢的80后聊天，他说到自己的思想变化时，说，我以前也会同意你的观点，但1999年美国轰炸我大使馆，让我突然清醒过来，改变了我对美国的看法，对中国的看法。

我真是太震惊：你不会告诉我轰炸大使馆事件竟然能够改变了你的价值观？那真是太神奇了！！如果这个轰炸是误炸呢？难道你没有发现问题，你的价值观到底是被什么改变的？！轰炸使馆事件是把你震醒了？还是轰炸大使馆事件后发生的那些爱国游行事件把你弄糊涂了？！

有人说，你说了半天，还是基于这次轰炸是“误炸”，可如果不是误炸呢？好，那么就让我告诉你，如果我们的假设是对的，那是误炸的话，那么你如何解释这次误炸竟然阴错阳差地改变了一代人对美国（及其价值观）的看法？用你自己的脑袋想一想吧。

现在我再告诉你：我并不认为轰炸大使馆是误炸，“误炸”只是这篇文章的假设。但即使不是误炸，我也因那件事竟然改变了一些人对世界和自己的看法，而且开始塑造一代年轻人的世界观感到无比震惊。

而且，当你和我一起开始认定那次轰炸不是“误炸”的时候，在你对世界的观点改变之前，你最好和我一起问这样一个问题：以美国为首的北约为什么胆敢轰炸我大使馆？

A long-time advocate of humanitarian intervention, he was in favor of removing Saddam Hussein from power in 2003. He also applauded the U.S. intervention in Serbia.

But asked this week whether the U.S. could repair the damage it has suffered to its reputation during the Bush presidency, Kouchner replied, “It will never be as it was before.”

“I think the magic is over,” he said.

Abu-Graib, Gitmo, torture, refusal to act on global warming, disregard of the UN while telling others to abide by its resolutions, bullying of allies, and so on. It’s hard for me to argue with Kouchner.

[Many Americans seem to agree]

h/t to Poilu.

Bill Clinton bears a very large share of responsibility for the problems faced by the Balkans and Caucasus today. These are, in particular, a dismembered, non-functioning Bosnia; an anti-Western, disruptive Serbia; and a dismembered Georgia. The problem was not that Clinton was a particularly reactionary president in world affairs, but that he simply was not very interested in them, something that resulted in a failure of leadership. The mess in Bosnia is above all the fault of the former British Conservative government of John Major and the former French Socialist regime of the late Francois Mitterand; they were the champions of appeasement and the architects, along with Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic and Croatia’s Franjo Tudjman, of Bosnia’s dismemberment. Clinton could and should have insisted upon a change in Western policy vis-a-vis Bosnia upon becoming president. Instead, he chose to defer to his pro-Belgrade European allies, Britain and France, not wishing to fall out with them over something trivial like genocide in the heart of Europe. This was not only a moral failing, but a betrayal of US interests; the disastrous Anglo-French policy and Clinton’s vacillating support for it greatly damaged both transatlantic relations and the Balkans. There are times when Europe needs American leadership; Bosnia was one of them.

After the initialling of the Dayton Peace Accords in November 1995, Clinton continued to neglect Bosnia, allowing the indicted war-criminals Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic to escape arrest - primarily because he did not want to risk American casualties in arrest operations. Nor does Clinton deserve particular credit over Kosova; it is highly questionable whether the US would have acted to prevent the genocide there in 1999 had not Major and Mitterand been replaced in the meantime by Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac. NATO’s liberation of Kosova should have been followed up by the prompt recognition of its independence, while the Russians were in no position to cause such trouble for us as they are today. We could have ’punished’ the Serbia of Milosevic with Kosova’s independence, instead of the Serbia of today, led as it is by the relatively pro-Western President Boris Tadic. But that problem, too, was allowed to fester; its resolution today is proving much more difficult than it need have been.

Over Russia and the Caucasus, too, Clinton, like George Bush Snr before him, showed a disastrous failure of leadership. With Russian politics in a state of flux, with the pro-Western Boris Yeltsin in power in Moscow and financially dependent on the West, a golden opportunity existed to push Russian policy in the Caucasus in a less imperialistic direction. The Western powers should have acted decisively to halt the dismemberment of Georgia in the early 1990s and prevent the break-away regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from falling under Russia’s exclusive control. We should have recognised the independence of Chechnya, preempting Yeltsin’s violent assault on the country in 1994. But as is so often the case, the dovish policy is the one most likely to lead to confrontation in the long-run - think of Neville Chamberlain and Munich. Our failure to engage in the Caucasus, and Blair’s shameful support for Vladimir Putin over Chechnya in 1999, have been richly rewarded: Georgia, an aspiring NATO member, faces perpetual dismemberment, while an aggressive, ungrateful Putin has reentered the Balkans with a vengeance with the deliberate aim of derailing the region’s Euro-Atlantic integration. Chechnya proved to be the poison of Russian democracy and Russian-Western friendship; a Russian president willing and able to use weapons of mass destruction against his Chechen citizens is unlikely to respect democratic freedoms in Russia proper, and an undemocratic, authoritarian Russian regime is more likely to be hostile to the West.

In fairness, Russia is not solely responsible for the mess in the Caucasus; Georgia’s brutally chauvinistic former president Zviad Gamsakhurdia was one of the architects of his country’s dismemberment, as was the Chechen leader Dzhokhar Dudayev, who supported the Abkhazians. The people of Abkhazia and South Ossetia had legitimate grievances against Gamsakhurdia’s regime and its successors in Tbilisi. These are all issues that a more forward-looking US policy could have helped to resolve, but did not.

I fear, therefore, the consequences for South East Europe of a US president who is dovish, uninterested in or unserious about foreign policy. Hillary Clinton has always worked hand-in-glove with Bill in the political sphere, and should share responsibility with him for his disastrous Bosnia policy. Indeed, the story is that her influence made it worse; that she read Robert Kaplan’s truly dreadful book ‘Balkan Ghosts’ and passed it on to her husband; this book, filled as it was with crude stereotypes about the Balkans (along the lines of ‘ancient ethnic hatreds’), encouraged the perception of the Bosnian war as an expression of intractable ethnic conflict in which no moral issues were at stake, militating against any intention Bill might have had to resist Serbian aggression. Be that as it may, Hillary was more frank in welcoming Kosovo’s independence than Obama, who appears to see Balkan politics largely through the prism of his need to win the goodwill of the Serbian and Greek lobbies in the US. Hence his letter to the Serbian Unity Congress, in which he stated: ‘I support and shall help in every possible way development of the dialog between all sides in Kosova because I believe that peace and stability can be reached only by solutions acceptable for all sides’ - not far from an endorsement of the Serbo-Russian position on Kosova, which insists on a Serbian veto on any settlement. Hence also Obama’s endorsement of the Greek-nationalist position on Macedonia. These acts may be motivated by simple electoral opportunism, but they do not bode well for a principled and forward-looking US policy toward the Balkans should Obama become president. In flirting with the US’s Serbian and Greek lobbies, Obama is flirting with groups that encompass ultra-right-wing, Christian-fundamentalist, Muslim-hating bigots.

There are several reasons to believe that McCain would follow a more serious and principled policy toward South East Europe than either Clinton or Obama. He is aware of the importance of what he calls a ‘progressive Turkey’ as a strategic partner of the US and a beacon of Muslim democracy, and of the mutual inter-relatedness of democracy and stability in Turkey and Iraq. Turkey is both the most important Balkan country in world affairs and a state that borders on Iraq; the Balkans and the Middle East are adjacent, interlocking regions; McCain’s commitment to staying the course in Iraq is therefore most likely to promote stability in the Balkans.

McCain was correct to oppose Congressional recognition of the Armenian Genocide (here I break ranks with Norman Geras). The Ottoman Empire in 1915 was undoubtedly guilty of genocide against the Armenians, and Turkey should recognise this genocide. But it is not for an outside power like the US to single out this historic crime as uniquely totemic and worthy of recognition, particularly given that the US Congress has taken no parallel steps to recognise the genocidal crimes carried out by Russia and the Balkan Christian states against Ottoman and Caucasian Muslims during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Why should the US recognise the Ottoman genocide of one million Armenians, but not the Balkan Christian genocide of over six-hundred thousand Ottoman Muslims in 1912-13, when the latter crime was an immediate catalyst of the former ? The Turks would be entirely justified in taking offence at such double standards, and McCain is entirely correct that the US should be developing its relationship with Ankara, not creating new barriers to it - though he is also far from uncritical in his support for Turkey.

McCain was an early supporter of Kosova’s independence. He stood by the oppressed Kosova Albanians before it became fashionable in Washington to do so, and continued to do so despite the support given by many right-wing Republicans - largely for anti-Clinton and anti-Islamic reasons - to the anti-Albanian policies of Milosevic and subsequent Serb-nationalist politicians. A Republican president who is ready to put a combination of US strategic interests and morality above petty sectarian domestic feuds and religious hatred is more likely to act in South East Europe’s best interests.

Finally, McCain led a delegation of US senators to Tbilisi in August 2006, to express unconditional support for Georgia’s territorial integrity and to challenge the presence of Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, suggesting they be replaced by a UN or OSCE force. Although Moscow likes to draw a false parallel between Kosova and South Ossetia, in reality, secessionist South Ossetia is more like the Serb-controlled enclave in northern Kosova - an expression of the imperialism of a larger neighbour that seeks to punish a former colony for seeking independence by dismembering it. Georgia is not Russia’s backyard, and any policy that treats it as being so will only bolster the anti-Western Russian neo-empire that has arisen under Putin to become a dangerous enemy of the West. McCain is entirely correct in his belief that in defending Georgia, the West will be defending itself. His suggestion that Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia be replaced by a UN force should be welcomed by all multilateralist opponents of unilateral intervention by great powers in the internal affairs of other countries. But don’t hold your breath.

Updates: They burned the American Flag and I think the building will be on fire soon

It is not strange that anti-riots forces and fire fighters are walking so slowly to get there , It is obvious that it is a pre-arranged riots .

I guess now most of the EU Embassies members either left Serbia or they are going to make sure that all their embassies are now under huge security measures

Watch it from the CNN,they are covering it very good

Israel:

From Israel, Aussie Dave finds the parallel ridiculous to say the least. He writes:

“Kosovo is not better than us. We deserve independence even before Kosovo, and we ask for the backing of the United States and the European Union for our independence.”

- Yasser Abed Rabbo, aide to PA leader Mahmoud Abbas

The sad thing is, he probably believes it.

I honestly can’t think of one reason why the so-called palestinians deserve independence. As I have argued time and time again, even if you acknowledged they were a distinct nation entitled to self-determination in the historical homeland of the Jews, they have forfeited any right to independence through their morally reprehensible behavior.

Yael, takes another stance, saying:

This little new country, like our own, is going to have rough going. I wish them the best and hope that they, as we have, will survive. I hope that both Kosovo and our own country in the future will have peace with our neighbours, even if it is a cold and not at all friendly peace, but a peace and cessation of violence nonetheless. Congratulations Kosovo. Welcome to the world of nations. Welcome, too, to the reality of that world that is not necessarily something to celebrate. I hope that you and your nation not only survive but find peace and prosperity sooner than our little nation which, after 60 years, is prospering but still attacked from nearly all sides. I do indeed wish you luck new little country and I think that you will need it.

Qatar:

Abdulrahman Warsame, who based in Qatar, also hopes the best for the people of Kosovo - but for different reasons. He explains:

The long wait is over. It's a great moment, how often do you see a new country born, and what if it's a predominantly Muslim country in the heart of Europe?

EU and US recognition is expected to come tomorrow, together with many Muslim countries. Russia and Serbia have made it clear that, though unable to stop Kosovo from becoming independent, they'll make it painful for the kosovars.

Looking at the bright side, ‘Aqoul comments on Qatar's Al Jazeera coverage, saying:

A brief note, the coverage today of the Kosovo declaration / celebrations on Al Jazeerah and on Al Jazeerah was quite interesting: the actual Sat broadcasts focused quite a lot on the Kosovo-American flag pairing and US … conditional support I suppose. Interesting imagery to be dominating the screen. The US could stand for this sort of positive imagery more often. One does not often get imagery on the Sats of hidjab wearing ladies leaning out of cars waving American flags wildly.

Saudi Arabia:

An even brighter outlook comes from Dotsson, from Saudi Arabia, who is really excited about Kosovo's declaration because of matters close to the heart. He announces:

I don't know much about Kosovo except that it recently declared independence from Serbia and a bunch of hot women came out on the streets to celebrate.

But not everyone is celebrating. Russia is upset because it regards the move as an infringement on Serbia’s territorial integrity. But **** Russia and Serbia and anyone else that has problem with Kosovo declaring independence. I don’t remember Russia protesting when Slobodan Milosevic was busy slaughtering ethnic Albanians.

In short, Dotsson supports an independent Kosovo and any cause where there are hot women on the streets. AND SO SHOULD YOU!

Egypt:

Zeinobia, from Egypt, wonders about where her country stands from the announcement. She writes:

Kosovo declared its independence and became a country the world is divided whether to recognize as independent state or not , even Europe is divided , I do not know on which team my country Egypt will be , but I think it will join the American team in the end and leave the Russian team , not because we are with the people of the Kosovo as a Muslim but because we are in the Same team of the American administration I am afraid.

And