American and European foreign policy in the Balkans, suffering from a terminal form of historical amnesia, is bankrupt. The results of those bankrupt policies are visibly on display today as Kosovor Albanians declare themselves independent and a second Muslim state is now established on the European continent. The stage is now set for the a regime led by elements of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and beholden to the interests of Islamic fundamentalists and narcotraffikers, to create the dream of a Greater Albania. All made possible by the United States and its European allies. The war against Milosevic, justified in part by humanitarian considerations, brought about an alliance with Albanian extremists who are now trying to do in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) what they did to Serb authority in Kosovo. If these armed groups of Albanian extremists are allowed to run rampant, they could be even more destabilizing and damaging to regional security and U.S. interests than the original sin itself.
History matters a great deal in the Balkans. The conflicts in the Balkans mirror the well-defined, historic and ethnic fault lines of a region where killings and mass murder have occurred in previous decades, and even centuries. For example, during the war in Croatia from 1991-1992, the areas where some of the most vicious fighting and killing occurred just happened to parallel regions of the country where Serbs had been slaughtered en masse during WWII under conditions which by current day definitions would have to be called genocide. The Serb population of Croatia at that time scarcely needed propaganda from Belgrade to feel very uncomfortable, isolated and afraid in a brand-new Tudjman-led Croatia.
In Bosnia, for all the horrors of that war, the conflict cannot be understood properly and accurately if it is dismissed simply as a war of Serbian aggresion. Once again, the prospect of living in an independent Bosnia -- four decades earlier, the site of horrific killing grounds of Serbs and others -- left large segments of especially the rural Serb population feeling very isolated and very fearful. Despite a post-WWII tradition of multi-culturalism and intermarriage, in rural areas especially where Serbs predominated, there was a deep-seeded fear of domination by Muslims and a collective memory of WWII killings and slaughters. In Kosovo, Albanian nationalists have driven 90 per cent of the province's non-Albanian population from there homes. The Kosovo Liberation Army now has a base from which to foment other insurgencies which it has done in Macedonia and Serbia proper. The goal of the KLA is to create a Greater Albania. That goal is no longer a pipe dream.
Ethnic cleansing has certainly taken place. Almost as soon as NATO assumed control of Kosovo in June 1999, the KLA began a systematic campaign to rid the province of non-Albanians. Not only was the Serbian minority a target, but some seventy thousand Roma (the so-called Gypsies) were driven out, as were thousands of Montinegrins, Bulgarians, Jews, and Macedonians. By the spring of 2000, more than 250,000 non-Albanians out of a prewar population of 350,000 were refugees in neighboring countries.2 Six months later, the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe estimated that 90 percent of Kosovo’s non-Albanian people had been forced to leave their homes. Joshua Trevino in his post at Brussels Journal lists the list of Kosovar accomplishments under UN supervision:
"In the aftermath of the Serb surrender in June 1999,
the victorious KLA seized the opportunity to drive approximately
200,000 non-Albanians — overwhelmingly Serbs, but also Roma — out of
the province. Human Rights Watch reported
that this flight was motivated largely by concrete threats and the
occasional local massacre, with a reported total of one thousand Serb
men, women and children murdered.
* In February 2001, an IED planted by Albanians destroyed a bus carrying Serbs to family gravesites at the Gračanica monastery.
* In August 2003, Serb boys swimming were machine-gunned from a riverbank.
* In March 2004, a deliberate anti-Serb pogrom claimed dozens of lives, and further ghettoized the remaining Serbs in their northern enclaves.
* Perhaps most distressing from a cultural standpoint
is the deliberate and systemic destruction of Serbian Orthodox Church
parishes, properties, monasteries, and art throughout Kosovo since
1999. Students of the 20th century will recall the Nazi efforts to
comprehensively erase Jewish culture from the Continent, which included
the demolition of synagogues and the use of Jewish headstones as
paving: since then, only the Kosovo Albanian program to exterminate
Serbian culture in Kosovo compares in European history. In the summer
following the Serbian defeat, the KLA demolished the Church of the Holy Virgin at Musutiste and St Mark’s of Korisa Monastery.
Sadly, they did not stop there. In lieu of the long list of churches
and cultural sites destroyed by the Kosovar Albanians since 1999, is it
enough to note the documentation here, here, here, here, and here."
Albanian governments have alway faced a choice between friendly relations with their neighbors or the protection of a powerful patron in order to pursue the dream of a "Greater" Albania. Albanian leaders have always opted for the second option. Ottoman Turkey, Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Maoist China and now the United States have all played a key role in helping Albania achieve its objectives in the region. In each case, their patron was cast aside when they were no longer useful.
Under the Ottomans, Muslim Albanians served the Sultan as governors, soldiers, brutal policemen, efficient tax collectors and oppressive landowners. Unfortunately for Albanians they found themselves on the losing side during the Balkan Wars. Esat Bey Toptani, the Albanain General of Sutlan Hammid's forces in Kosovo and Western Macedonia ended up losing both provinces for the Empire.Luckily, the European powers redrew borders in 1913 such a way that they ensured that no Balkan state would come close to reflecting its ethnic boundaries, thus creating a state of perpetual conflict. The overarching goal was to keep these fledgling states weak, requiring alliances with European patrons.In the case of Albania, that patron was Italy. Unfortunately, Italy, separated from Albania only by the Adriatic Sea, was in a unique position to not only help satisfy the grievances of the Muslim Albanian elites but also to occupy the country and use it as a staging area for the conquest of Greece. The invasion of Albania was met with only token resistance by the Albanian Army in 1939. Mussolini expected the Albanians to provide manpower and they did not disappoint.
Arthur Sulzberger of the New York Times, describes the scenes at Greek-Albanian borders:
"To inquire into Albania’s fate I went up to the border north of Janina [sic] where everyone was discussing what they would do to the “macaronades” (macaroni eaters). . . . I managed to cross into Albania through a frontier post called Perati. There I found pathetically seedy Albanian troops still wearing hand-me-down Italian uniforms once furnished at cut-rate to King Zog by a munificent Rome. They had ripped Zog’s “Z” emblem from their caps; that was the only difference, and they appeared not more ferocious on Mussolini’s behalf than they had proven in the name of their former ruler. The Italian officers with whom I spoke were disconsolate. “Those Greeks,” said a captain from Bari. “They are so provocative. They keep pointing guns at us and making derogatory remarks.”
Fascism was a flourishing ideology in Albania since 1927 and it quickly came to the forefront during the Italian occupation. No Albanian could dream that the Rome-Berlin Axis was capable of being defeated. The new Albanian government sent the crown of Skenderberg to be handed to Victor Emanuel who would be proclaimed King of Italy and Albania and Emperor of Ethiopia. Within days of the transfer of the crown a new map made its appearance. The map of Greater Albania or Shqiperia Ethnik, which now adorns the patches of the KLA and is the logo of the Albanian American Civic League. It incorporated Kosovo, parts of Greece, western Macedonia, part of Montenegro, and Serbia.
On 3 May 1941, six days after Nazi forces entered Athens, the Albanian government dispatched another “special delegation” to Rome. It formally presented to the Italian foreign ministry “Albania’s minimal demands” for adjustments of borders vis-à-vis Yugoslavia and Greece. Concerning Greece,
besides Chameria where approximately twenty thousand Muslim Albanians lived, Verlaçi demanded the incorporation into Albania the Greek cities of Ioannina and Preveza in Epirus, “together with their regions as well as certain other Greek regions, primarily in Western Macedonia.
In 1943, when Mussolini was overthrown by Marshal Pietro Badoglio in September 1943, Albania switched its primary allegiance and dutifully offered men and services to the Nazis. In Kosovo, the Albanians
formed the SS Skenderbeg division, while in Albania proper the nationalist movement, Ball Kombëtar, joined the Nazis in their butchery of innocent civilians. The governments in Tirana ruled over Greater Albania with the same finesse that the Nazis ruled Greeks and Slavs. For Albanian leaders, the acquisition of Kosovo was more important than who their friends happened to be. Even Albania’s leading intellectual and most highly regarded statesman, Mehdi Bey Frashëri, was impressed by Germany’s territorial “generosity” and agreed to act as "regent," under the watchful eye of Hermann Nuebacher, Hitler’s Balkan envoy. Frashëri, like others, believed that only Nazi Germany guaranteed the permanent union of Kosovo with Albania, and he was not about to reject help for ideological reasons. Frashëri was guided by the same principles as those espoused by another prominent Albanian intellectual, Omer Nishani. Nishani was a card-carrying member of the Albanian Fascist Party had written previously:
"Today is a historic day for Albania. On this day, a year ago, the Constituent Assembly in Tirana unanimously decided to deliver the Crown of Skenderbeg to the king and Emperor of Italy, Victor Immanuel III. From that day on, Albania has linked her destiny to that of Fascist Italy and the Albanian people have placed themselves under a genuine monarch, in whose hands the Crown of Skenderbeg will retain its historic value. . . . On this occasion I should also like to point out several things about the fascist regime. It is most suitable for our backward country. The national identity and independence can be preserved through good organization and discipline as the fascist doctrine preaches. We have a need to organize and discipline ourselves according to the dogma of Albanian fascism, which will strengthen our nationality under the Roman Empire. Only in this way will we achieve our heart’s desire of expanding Albania to its ethnic borders."
Post–World War II historical accounts perpetuate the myth that Albania was an innocent victim of fascism and ignore its participation in a war against its neighbors. British intelligence agents dispatched to the Balkans at the start of the Greek-Italian war disputed claims of popular Albanian resistance against the Italian invaders. On the contrary, between 1939 and 1943 communists and nationalists alike were riding on the same bandwagon and vociferously spouted Greater Albania slogans. “The Korce (communist) group,” wrote Reginald Hibbert, a key British supporter of the Albanians, “began to agitate against the Greeks” (not against the Italians) and seemed pleased that the invasion ended Zog’s rule, something they had failed to achieve themselves, even with the Comintern’s help. The nationalists, on the other hand, were happy with their role as Mussolini’s loyal allies.
Between April 1939 and October 1940, the Italian general staff organized fourteen Albanian regiments (sixty-two-thousand troops) to be used against Greece and Yugoslavia. These units operated as integral parts of the army of the empire and, by and large, followed the international law governing war. But the Albanian government also asked and was allowed to create parallel irregular units, which would operate beyond the constraints of international law. Their mission was to create “facts on the ground” by terrorizing Greeks in northern and southern Epirus and expelling Serbs from their ancestral homes in Kosovo. Military documents captured by the Greek forces in the Italian garrison of Korcë (document no. 122, 29 June 1939) give the details of an understanding the Albanian and Italian governments shared concerning the importance of independent action by the irregulars. Though the Albanian government insisted that the fourteen regiments would “fight under national colors,” the irregular units needed neither “national colors” nor uniforms; only weapons, which the Italians supplied in abundance. However, there was a direct linkage between regulars and irregulars and a tacit division of labor. The former were partners in the creation of a new European order, while the latter would do the dirty business of ethnically cleansing Kosovo of Serbs and Epirus of Greeks. By war’s end, the irregulars and Ball Kombëtar forces had reduced the Serbian population of Kosovo by three hundred thousand. For the first time in its long history, Albanians became the majority in the province. As in today’s Kosovo, all atrocities against Greeks and Serbs were conveniently attributed to irregulars over whom the central command supposedly had no control. As far as communist resistance is concerned, the record is clear: it started in earnest after the battle of Stalingrad and intensified when Julian Amery (chief of British intelligence in Albania) showed up with sufficient quantities of gold coins to make it happen. Communist resistance was hardly in evidence when Greeks and Serbs were fighting fascism.
In 1999, the KLA also waited for an assignment during NATO’s air war against a sovereign state. Having ruled out ground forces for Kosovo, NATO was looking for a local substitute and found it in the KLA. No questions asked. The mounting evidence that the KLA was a motley collection of nationalist fanatics, unrepentant communists, and common criminals was simply brushed aside. Typical of this willful blindness was a statement by Senator Joseph Lieberman in the midst of the Balkan war. Lieberman asserted that “the United States of America and Kosovo Liberation Army stand for the same human values and principles.” He added that “fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values.” Armed with such illusions, the NATO powers not only blundered into Kosovo, they greatly strengthened the faction in the Balkans with the most aggressively expansionist agenda. NATO’s intervention set the stage for the later crisis in Macedonia; indeed, it made that crisis virtually inevitable.
When the campaign was over, the KLA’s commander, General Agim Geku,
negotiated the conversion of the KLA into a “legitimate police force”
under Albanian “national colors” but shirked all responsibility for
the actions of “irregular units.” While NATO seems saddled with the
role of managing a protectorate on behalf of the United Nations, the
Albanian irregulars have succeeded in making Kosovo Europe’s most
monoethnic piece of real estate. Now with the help of CNN and
Washington based public relations firms, all terrorist actions by
Kosovars are explained as “understandable acts of revenge” attributable
to “uncontrollable elements,” while Serb reaction to brutalities
against innocent civilians are branded “genocide.” Detaching
Kosovo
from Serbia’s control was the first stage in that campaign—foolishly
aided and abetted by NATO. Destabilizing FYROM so that the
fragmentation of that country becomes likely is the next phase.
In 2001, the Albanian Ntional Liberation Army (NLNA) , an offshoot of the KLA, initiated a short conflict fagainst the FYROM government, mostly in the north and west of the country. This war ended with the intervention of a NATO ceasefire monitoring force. In the Ohrid Agreement, the government agreed to devolve greater political power and cultural recognition to the Albanian minority. The Albanian side agreed to surrender separatist demands and to fully recognize all Macedonian institutions. In addition, according to this accord, the NLA were to disarm and hand over their weapons to a NATO force. Once the agreement was signed, NATO sent in thirty-five-hundred troopsto begin a thirty-day mission to disarm NLA forces. The farcical nature of that mission was highlighted when NATO officials insisted that the rebels had only an estimated thirty-three-hundred weapons. Macedonian primeminister Ljubco Georgievski was incredulous: “We used to seize that quantity in a single raid. . . . I think it is laughable to speak of thirty-three-hundred pieces six months after the outbreak of the crisis.” Nevertheless, NATO pronounced the disarmament mission a success after collecting just over thirty-three-hundred weapons.The episode was reminiscent of NATO’s earlier confident pronouncements that the KLA had turned in its weapons as agreed, only to have those statements rendered absurd when NATO units later discovered large caches of arms and ammunition. Furthermore, the minority Albanian population have an effective veto power over any piece of legislation. The Albanians, estimated at between 25 percent and 35 percent of Macedonia’s population, thus will have power in the parliament equal to that of the Slavic majority. Other countries, such as Cyprus and Lebanon, that have tried similar systems found them to be unworkable, a veritable blueprint for legislative gridlock.
Some provisions of the agreement have the effect of facilitating the NLA’s secessionist agenda. Albanian was to become a second official language in communities where ethnic Albanians make up more than 20 percent of the population. The peace agreement also required state-funded higher education in the Albanian language in such communities. And in perhaps the most controversial provision, not only were substantial numbers of ethnic Albanians to be added to the national police force, but only Albanian police were to be assigned to work in communities with majority Albanian populations. The latter requirement makes major portions of northern and western Macedonia into Albanian-governed enclaves. The worst aspect of the settlement forced on the FYROM government by the Western powers is that it gives the NLA a sizable de facto safe haven. Ethnic Albanian forces now effectively control approximately one-sixth of the country’s territory. Government forces and police are not allowed to go there, and the Skopje government does not exercise even nominal control.
When policy makers operate in a historical vacuum, mythology and
history acquire equal value, as the current Western approach to the
Balkans affirms. Not so paradoxically, nationalists and communists alike
have made claims and counterclaims that have distorted the nature of
Balkan events to the point that yesterday’s brutal communists are
treated as victims and those who lost millions fighting on democracy’s
side, Serbs and Greeks, are treated as enemies. Claims and myths
recorded in the Communist era
historiography form the basis of
Western analyses and assert the following: (a) Albania ceased to exist
as a sovereign state in 1939 and, therefore, played no role in
implementing Rome’s (and its own) grand schemes in the Balkans; (b)
from the onset of the war, the majority of the Albanian people resisted
the occupation; (c) only the quisling government of Tirana with a few
collaborators were criminally involved in acts of brutality against
neighboring states; and (d) the communists commenced resistance soon
after the invasions and,
therefore, they could not have been held responsible for what transpired between 1939 and 1944.
Unfortunately, the dye has been cast, for better or for worst. policies based on myth will now reap what they have sown. Contrary to expectations of a multi-culturally tolerant, economically developing, neighbor friendly Balkan region where peace is about to break out we will be saddled with an expansionist Muslim state that is well on its way to being a lynch pin of organized crime and Islamic fundamentalism on Europe's doorstep with surrounded by angry and vengeful competitors. Hardly the island of stability and loyal ally US planners had hoped for.
Sources:
Balkan Wars by Andre Gerolymatos
Kosovo and Macedonia: The West Enhances the Threat by Ted Galen Carpenter
Pages From Albanian History by Nikolaos Stavrou
"Not only was the Serbian minority a target, but some seventy thousand Roma (the so-called Gypsies) were driven out, as were thousands of Montinegrins, Bulgarians, Jews, and Macedonians."
I did not know that Greeks from Macedonia lived in Kosovo. Are you right about this?
Apart from that a superb article.
Posted by: Hermes | 17 February 2008 at 10:33 PM
Greek Macedonia does not entail the entire region known historically as Macedonia. I think we can all agree on this. If a country wants to give itself a name in order to lay claim to territory owned by another country we should rightfully oppose it. If some of the inhabitants of FYROM want to call themselves Macedonians or Bulgarians or Albanians or Slavo-Macedonians. So what.
Greeks have more pressing issues to contend with, as I have tried to point out, than what they should call the residents of the entity to the north.
Posted by: Stavros | 17 February 2008 at 11:14 PM
Your position is unfortunate but not unexpected. Slowly everyone chips away until there is only emptiness and shopping malls. Pax Americana.
Posted by: Hermes | 18 February 2008 at 07:55 AM
Did you guys see the results of the Presidential election in Cyprus? What are your thoughts and comments about it?
I find it unfortunate that the Cypriots have turned their back on Papadopoulos and endorse the other pro-unification candidates. Reading through much of the international press, Cypriots "have voted for change". Is this really the case?
Posted by: kossyphidios | 18 February 2008 at 10:21 AM
kossyphidios,
This is the best analysis I've read:
http://hellenicantidote.blogspot.com/2008/02/papadopoulos-loses-prepare-for.html
Posted by: Stavros | 18 February 2008 at 04:32 PM
Stavros,
Congrats on a lucid, well researched, and cogently presented post that should be read by all who are concerned with the creation of this "kosova" narco-traffickers' entity. In Greece, politicians, as always, are busy with more "important" things. They seem oblivious to a huge Albanian presence inside our borders and the persistent intelligence speaking of various suspect moves on the part of organized Albanian criminals and "Great Albania" agents. Unfortunately, there is no rigorous pursuit of such leads, neither do we make clear to Tirana that any threat originating in Albanian soil will be dealt with accordingly. Instead, we occupy ourselves with promoting "friendship" and "cooperation" and consistently ignoring challenges like the one emerging from the "Tsamerians" who are busy preparing the next case for claiming Greek territory as their own. "Kosova" should be a red flag for this country. Instead, Karamanlis and Bakoyannis are quietly debating when (not if) Greece will recognize the organized crime rump.
Posted by: Theophilos | 19 February 2008 at 01:02 AM
Panagiotis Kondylis rightly pointed out in his Theory of War that the population of a greater Albania will be close to 6m whilst the Greek population was 10m. This was in the 1990’s. The relative difference would have narrowed since then due to high Albanian birthrates. He also pointed out that the relative difference between Greece and Turkey following the Asia minor campaign was 6m and 13m respectively. Today, it is 11m and 70m. It is no surprise that Hellenism has had to take a backward step every time it has come into confrontation with the Turks since the difference in populations widened so much. Even worse for Greece, a meaningful proportion of Albanians are living in Greece. Greece is in mighty danger in the long term. The Russians have just recorded for 2007 their highest birthrate since 1991 and expect the birth rate to increase by 25% over the next 5 years. What is the answer for Greece? Dare I say less liberalism. Less trying to ape the West.
Posted by: Hermes | 19 February 2008 at 01:54 AM
Some beautiful footage here...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2008/feb/18/serbia.violence
Posted by: Hermes | 19 February 2008 at 02:11 AM
Theo,
The breadth of naivete among Americans regarding the consequences of what the US government has done is really appalling. The distorted myths propagated by the mainstream media have created a perception of Serbs that is inaccurate and worse, those distortions are responsible for keeping inept policies hidden from public view. What we need more than ever in our country is an informed citizenry capable of curbing their government's foreign policy excesses. Unfortunately, those citizens do not exist thanks to our educational system.
On the one hand we fight Al Qaeda in Iraq, rightly so I believe, then turn around and create a haven for them on Europe's front doorstep. How misguided and shortsighted.
As for the Greek government, it seems to be part of the problem not part of the solution.Their response can only be described as "muted."
Hermes,
It's all about the demography. Greek women are perpetrating a silent genocide thanks to the thousands of abortions performed there. The silence is deafening. Who is speaking out about this problem?
I'm confused. How does the Russian birth rate impact Greeks? The Russians will not save Greece, only the Greeks can do that.
Posted by: Stavros | 19 February 2008 at 10:21 PM
Stavros, Greece should look to how Russia (and even Australia which is recording highest birthrates since the early 1970's) is beginning to turn around their birthrate and demographic problems.
Posted by: Hermes | 20 February 2008 at 02:32 AM
Hermes,
One good year does not make a trend. The abortion rate is still one of the highest in the world. The problem is complex. The following article written in 2006, gives some of the reasons why Russian women of child bearing ages don't raise larger families:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0519/p01s04-woeu.html
Governments cannot make women have more babies, only societal norms and attitudes do that.
Posted by: Stavros | 20 February 2008 at 01:25 PM
Stavros, there has been an upward trend for several years.
Posted by: Hermes | 20 February 2008 at 05:14 PM
The OECD believes that governments can make women have more babies or, more accurately, women already want to have more babies, and will do so if the proper policies are in place:
"Research for 16 OECD countries over a twenty-year period shows that birth rates are high in OECD countries where cash transfers to families are high, replacement wages during parental leave are high, female employment rates are high and more women are working part-time. Conversely, birth rates are low where unemployment is high, the ratio of the female-to-male wages is high and periods of parental leave are long – as longer periods of detachment from the labour market increase the difficulties of re-entering the labour market, especially for the women who are better educated and in better-paid jobs. An analysis based on cross-section data also suggests that birth rates are higher in OECD countries with a higher enrolment in formal childcare."
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/57/39970765.pdf
Difficult to escape the conclusion that women do not want to be alone at home with their children. A return to communal living in nice little units of 150 people would probably make us all happier.
Posted by: adifferentvoice | 20 February 2008 at 05:45 PM
Notice how the statistics do not conform to the unsubstantiated rubbish spouted by the American Evangelical lunatics and the Brussels Journal that higher Church attendance will lift birthrates? It is great when the cool hand of deliberation sheds light on muddled thinking.
Posted by: Hermes | 20 February 2008 at 06:58 PM
Dostoyevsky penned the famous warning that “if God does not exist, then everything is permissible." Including killing your unwanted or inconvenient babies. Not only does Greece have the highest abortion rate in Europe with approximately a quarter of a million Greeks killed every year, 40,000 of those abortions were performed on girls under the age of 16. 150,000 Greeks couples cannot conceive due to complications from a previous abortion.
Children are needy, expensive, and dependent. People who are committed to personal autonomy will invariably see children as an imposition, not a blessing. I imagine that Sweden, fulfills all the criteria the OECD study recommends. It's fertility rate (1.6) is still way below that required to maintain its population.
What's missing?
Posted by: Stavros | 20 February 2008 at 09:54 PM
"People who are committed to personal autonomy will invariably see children as an imposition, not a blessing."
Yes, but. Ever tried bringing up children on your own, day after day, on a meagre income of state benefits? Despite some pretty draconian statutory financial penalties imposed on men who try to avoid their obligations to their children here, it is still women who carry the burden of bringing up children. It is a very, very heavy burden even though I see my children as the greatest blessing I've been fortunate enough to receive. I'm sure that the financial burden on responsible men to provide for their families is extremely onerous too, but having children has changed my life more than it has changed my husband's.
Most women can choose not to become pregnant, thanks to contraception over which they have control.
Yet most women want nothing more than to have at least one child at some point in their lives: things may be changing, but I do not have a single childless friend who would not have preferred to have been a mother. At the same time, women need to feel secure if they are to have children especially several children AND they have to live in a world where - to a greater or lesser extent - success is defined by how much you earn, how much you have, where you go on holiday, what car you drive and men are driven to succeed in their careers before they turn to their responsibilities as fathers (testosterone, competition with other men). The availability of divorce cuts both ways. On the one hand women do not have to stay in abusive or even unsatisfactory relationships: on the other hand the spectre of abandonment is ever present.
To raise birth rates you may either have to intoduce expensive government support which even Sweden can barely afford and which still only mitigates a downward trend, or ban contraception, abortion and divorce. Take away women's choice so they become "breeders" rather than autonomous beings - which would seem to any woman to be a backward step that she will resist.
I agree that a meaningful religious faith makes one think differently about those three things - contraception, abortion and divorce. But it seems to me that the current crisis is one that both men and women need to address. Men need to think more about what women want and less about what other men are doing. If you want women to have more than two children on average, they need to have more help - from husbands and from families for about twenty years.
I can see why, from a man's perspective, many of the "freedoms" women have gained are very much not a good thing. I often wonder why states bother educating women and what hopes I should encourage in my daughters.
http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/563/Can_governments_influence_population_growth_.html
http://www.oecdobserver.org/images//631.photo.jpg
Posted by: adifferentvoice | 21 February 2008 at 01:27 AM
I believe states should ban abortions after a certain number of times. They should also make divorce more difficult. If this means women are less autonomous then so be it. Psychologically, they are not capable of the same autonomy as men. Women should consider the last 50 years an aberation.
Posted by: Hermes | 21 February 2008 at 03:09 AM
Margaret,
First, well done on your responses at DG (not that you need any pats on the head from me).
Reading your comments here I don't disagree with any of them. You are spot on in describing the dilemmas that women face. I am not trying to simplify a complex matter by trying to frame it by saying its all about one issue: abortion. That said, I feel strongly that aborting children as a form of birth control is ludicrous as well as morally abhorent.
I think legalized abortion does speak volumes about a society's ability to do what's morally right. When that moral compass is lacking societies create human beings who are unable to think about anyone other than themselves. Such societies are doomed to extinction.
The number of children a couple decides to have is based on a number of factors and government can only influence some of those factors. I believe that attitudes to child bearing and rearing are influenced much more by the society at large than by what the government tells us we should be doing. Is there an emphasis on family, is the role of mother and father accorded respect, is there an inordinate emphasis on careers, appearance and individual happiness, is there a respect for the sanctity of life, is there a belief in the future. These elements are infinitely more important and they are not legislated by government.
For many countries, the issue of demographics is a matter of survival. If we have no stake in the country or what it represents then we need not worry about the future. If we don't care about living under sharia for example, then birthrates don't matter at all. Once you become a minority in your own country, then anyone can take over and impose their particular brand of society on your own. Greeks and Serbs have the unenviable legacy of having lived in dhimmitude. Islamic "multi-culturalism" is not what it's cracked up to be:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=AF8E3199-D40F-4187-A5BC-13BAC1521097
Hermes,
Autonomy is neither a good thing for women nor for men. The ideal is men and women achieving a mutually beneficial relationship in which they work together for the common good of their children and each other. Try as we may, men cannot be mothers and women cannot be fathers. Both sexes bring different things to the table. As for me I absolutely refuse to wash dishes.....unless I'm wearing an apron.
Posted by: Stavros | 22 February 2008 at 01:38 PM
I am a sucker for pats on the back, but am less keen on pats on the head :).
I've read your link. You are more frightened by the possibility of Islamic fundamentalism taking over the world than I am. Perhaps I should be more worried (because if it was actually a likelihood, I would be very worried indeed). Or perhaps I've just got other things to worry about that take up all my capacity to worry. Like whether Russia is going to bomb us if the EU agree a common position in relation to Kosovo. I'm beginning to hope that Greece might make a joint position impossible...
Posted by: adifferentvoice | 23 February 2008 at 08:25 AM
The muslims of Kosovo are not the same as the muslims of Arab countries. Their movitations appear to be quite different. I do not forsee a problem for Greece from Kosovo or Macedonia, but rather from internal pressure from the Turkish muslims already in place in Northern Greece. This should be the fear of modern Greeks, not Kosovo.
Posted by: Anubis | 23 February 2008 at 08:25 AM
Margaret,
I would've said: "you go girl" but I think that would have been a faux paux, too :)
I simply take the Islamic fundamentalists at their own word and actions.
As for bombing others, I believe we are the one's who resorted to that tactic in the Balkans. I am not a Putin fan in the slightest, however, on this issue Russia happens to be on the right side of history.
Anubis,
Muslims, irregardless of where they live can be divided into two groups: moderates and extremists. The moderates in Kosovo were pushed aside long ago by the KLA whose links to Arab terrorists is well documented.
I will post additional links to give you a better appreciation of the emerging problem since we cannot rely on the mainstream media to do so.
Posted by: Stavros | 23 February 2008 at 10:48 AM
So, Stravros, what DO you think should have happened (to Kosovo)?
["Go girl" would have been OK, but you need a French lesson or two ... besides I now feel sorry for Anonymous and Martin. It feels a bit like "happy slapping" blog-style, and I don't like it.]
And, seriously, I really don't want to be bombed (and two wrongs hardly ever make a right - back to Martin again). It's all about who's got the biggest gun in his sock, isn't it? Realism writ large.
Posted by: adifferentvoice | 23 February 2008 at 11:14 AM
I thought you might like to read this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/21/kosovo
I don't expect you to agree with his conclusion, but Timothy Garton Ash is one of my favourite commentators and someone who tries to see both sides. I think that comes through.
Posted by: Margaret/adifferentvoice | 23 February 2008 at 11:39 AM
M,
I guess I should leave the French phrases to those that speak the language. What is the correct spelling?
As you know these debates can take on a personal aspect. If a commenter makes offensive remarks then he should be surprised when others follow suit. Maybe if he was a little less strident you and others would not react the way you did.
There is a dictum in medicine that says: "First do no harm." Perhaps the US and EU should have applied it in this case. I think we made two huge mistakes: allowing the moderates among the Kosovars to be pushed aside and making negotiations impossible by considering independence as an option. Some sort of autonomy within Serbia would have been ideal. Now we have opened up a Pandora's box which will have ramifications elsewhere throughout Europe.
Yes, it is who has the biggest gun in his sock, that's why the Albanians have allied themselves with the US to achieve their goals.
I read the article you linked to and you're right I disagree with its premise: that independence is a solution. Ash is very pragmatic though his pragmatism seems to be very one sided. Despite what I or you think, things are moving quickly to a head. The die is cast. We will have to live with the decisions made by our respective countries. Unfortunately, in this case I fear we have done much more harm than good.
Posted by: Stavros | 23 February 2008 at 12:25 PM
Well, one question still hold. Why the great powers had to divide the albanians in 6 different states. They even gave to that tiny montenegro an albanian city. This is why albanians saw the Italians as a good thing for them. To reunite the lands.
Posted by: Nald | 08 March 2008 at 06:30 AM