Part 2: The Truth Behind Kosovo - Historical Background
By Jason | May 20, 2008
To understand the Kosovo intervention by the U.S. and NATO, we have to understand it within its historical context.
Kosovo has long been a battleground throughout history. In 1389, the Ottoman Empire began sweeping through the region. The Serbs (predominantly Orthodox Christians) offered a spirited resistance against the Ottomans, punctuated by their last stand at the Battle of Kosovo on June 15, 1389. Despite this defeat, the Serbs created a separate autonomous state which lasted for seventy years after the Battle of Kosovo. However, the Ottomans finally brought it under their rule in 1459. With their empire, the Ottoman’s brought a dominant Muslim influence to the region.
Though Kosovo remained under Ottoman control until 1912, it remained a place of conflict where the roots of ethnic and religious conflict strife began to form. Throughout the 1700s, many of the Serbs migrated out of Kosovo to get away from the growing Muslim influence. By 1766, the Ottomans fully enforced the jizya, a tax that all non-Muslims in a conquered state are required to pay. If a non-Muslim lacked the money or refused to pay the jizya, they would be brutally beaten.
As the Serbs emigrated out of Kosovo, many Albanian chiefs converted to Islam, further extending the Muslim influence in Kosovo and serving as the Ottoman’s local enforcement. During this time, Albanians were given privileged status by their Ottoman lords and because of their conversion to Islam, were exempt from paying the jizya. By the beginning of the 20th century, the Albanians represented the dominant ethnic population of Kosovo.
More division was created, when in 1912, the Kingdom of Serbia reconquered Kosovo while the Kingdom of Montenegro conquered Kosovo’s neighbor, Metohija. During this time, Kosovo was officially recognized under Serbian authority while Serbian families began re-settling. This lead to a more balanced demographic between Serbs and Albanians.
But the fighting kept coming. In World War I, from 1915-1916 the Serbs retreated from Kosovo as the Austro-Hungarians and Bulgarians of the Central Powers conquered the region. But in 1918, the Serbs returned and pushed the Central Powers out of Kosovo and re-established their kingdom as the “Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians.”
Under the authority of this kingdom, more splits occurred as the Serbs divided Kosovo into four counties. In 1929, the government transformed into the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, which redivided Kosovo into three territories. However, this only lasted for a short time, for in World War II, the Germans and Italians took control over Kosovo. In 1944 Kosovo was liberated and became a part of the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia. Under Yugoslavia, the Kosovars gained more and more autonomy without being recognized officially as a state. During this time under the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia, the demographic shifted drastically toward the Albanians, eventually reaching 90% of the total population while the Serbs fell to 8%.
In 1981, a movement started for Kosovo to become its own nation. After this point, violence began increasing between Kosovar Serbs, Albanians, and forces of the Yugoslavian government. More Serbs emigrated out of Kosovo to escape the violence when the government failed to protect their protests against Albanian violence.
During this time, violence escalated. In 1989, Yugoslavia began its breakup and Slobodan Milosevic came to power as the President of Serbia. Shortly after, on July 2, 1990, Kosovo convened an unconstitutional parliament and declared independence. However, it was only recognized as an independent nation by the Albanians, therefore, its declaration of independence was hardly anything more than ceremony.
During the 1990s, Western interest in Kosovo grew, especially as it followed the growth of a group of guerrilla fighters named “The Kosovo Liberation Army,” a group of radical Muslim fighters committed to violently achieving Kosovo’s independence. Worried about ethnic violence, the West began to see the Albanian Kosovars as the oppressed victims while the Serbs were the instigators and murderers of genocide.
And thus the battle lines of the forthcoming Kosovo War began to emerge and though possibly unintentional, the stage was being set for the U.S.-led NATO intervention.
Topics: History, Politics | 1 Comment »
Part 1: The Truth Behind Kosovo - Introduction
By Jason | May 18, 2008
“‘What if someone had listened to Winston Churchill and stood up to Adolph Hitler earlier?’ [President Clinton] asked. ‘How many people’s lives might have been saved? And how many American lives might have been saved?’
Accusing Serb troops of terrorizing and murdering civilians in Kosovo, Clinton said: ‘”We have to take a stand now. If we don’t do it now, we will have to do it later.’”1
Recently, the Bosnia region seems to have popped into the news several times. At the beginning of the year, when the United States diplomatically approved Kosovo’s independence, the U.S. embassy in Belgrade was attacked by angry Serbs. More recently, Hillary Clinton vividly remembered her trip to Bosnia back in 1996 when she dodged sniper fire while shaking hands with soldiers and hugging little girls. She probably saved the world while she was at it. 2
However, something else has peaked my interest in that area of late: the U.S.-led NATO intervention in Kosvo at the end of the 20th century.
In 1999, under the bold leadership of Bill Clinton, the United States spearheaded a NATO intervention in an attempt to stop the Serbs’ brutal genocide against the Albanians. At the head of the Serbian murderers was Slobodan Milosevic, a monstrous dictator. The Albanians had to be protected from such violent terror, so the United States decidedly took its stand on the side of Albania’s freedom fighters: the Kosovo Liberation Army. In the name of humanity and our most sacred values, the United States swiftly convinced NATO to intervene in favor of the heroic KLA. The result: Milosevic was quickly toppled and genocide was stopped.
At least, that’s what many people tend to believe.
One day last summer, a friend and mentor gave me a brief rundown on the history of the former Yugoslavia up until Kosovo’s recent declaration of independence. Many things he told me, especially about the Kosovo intervention, were things I never heard before. Needless to say, my interest was stimulated.
Since then, I’ve researched the Kosovo intervention on-and-off, gathering up little bits of information as I went along. Instead of validating preconceived notions, this process of research confirmed more and more the information I had been given by my mentor–information that shocked me and my preconceived notions.
I discovered that analyzing the Kosovo intervention required asking some difficult questions:
Were the Serbs really conducting genocide against the Albanians? Was Milosevic really the monster the West made him out to be? Were the KLA soldiers really “heroic freedom fighters?” Did the NATO intervention really stop genocide?
These questions might seem hard because their answers carry huge implications. With these questions, we receive a sobering reminder: making the right decision in government policy requires hard questions that must be answered honestly. Why? Potentially, thousands of lives are at stake when the hard questions are ignored and the answers are lies.
Over the next several articles, I’m going to ask a hard question and try to answer it as truthfully as possible: what really happened in Kosovo?
- CNN News Article: “Clinton: Serbs must be stopped now,” March 23, 1999 http://www.cnn.com/US/9903/23/u.s.kosovo.04/ [↩]
- CBS Evening News Report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4&feature=related [↩]
Topics: History, Politics | 6 Comments »
Expelled: Intelligence IS Allowed
By Jason | April 20, 2008
April 18 marked the opening day for the long-awaited documentary by Ben Stein called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. I went to see an afternoon showing that day, marking the first first time since I watched a film on its opening day since The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. I was not disappointed then…and I wasn’t disappointed last Friday.
In Expelled, Ben Stein embarks on an investigation into the teachings of evolutionist scientists and their resulting lack of tolerance for scientists who either question evolution or advocated intelligent design/Creationism. The resulting documentary provides factual presentation, logical analysis, and even some good humor. Fundamentally, Stein uncovers the massive campaign of dogmatic anti-intellectualism streaming through evolutionary thinking and, more importantly, the mind-numbing ostracism of intellectuals who question evolution’s claims. Actually, Stein points out that evolution’s thinking heads are so nerve-wracked by counter positions, some intellectuals have been persecuted simply for mentioning intelligent design without refuting it.
As Stein progresses through the documentary, he analyzes some of evolution’s ambiguous claims and receives counter opinions demonstrating how and why evolutionary claims are preposterous. Stein also explores the results of evolutionary thinking in terms of social and personal application, including an extremely sobering look into Hitler’s Germany. At this point in the documentary, Stein goes to Germany and actually walks through concentration camps and gas chambers where Jews were exterminated by the Nazis. Through this section of the documentary, he demonstrates how Nazi Germany’s treatment of the Jews stemmed from Hitler’s understanding of evolution and his goal to create a dominant race.
Though Stein does not mention it in the movie, I immediately thought of the chilling alternate title to Darwin’s famous book, On the Origin of Species. Everyone recognizes Darwin’s book by the aforementioned title, but rarely do we recall its alternate title: The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. (Emphasis mine) Watching Stein’s analysis of Hitler’s racist and evolutionary thinking provided a thoughtful reminder of evolution’s systematic destruction of human life and equality among mankind.
Finally, at the climax of the documentary, Stein has a one-on-one interview with evolution’s standard bearer, Richard Dawkins. No details will be presented here…you have to see the documentary if you want to find out what happens. But I will say: if you’re a Creationist/intelligent design fan, I think you’ll enjoy this part of the documentary.
Ultimately, Stein becomes worried about evolution’s restriction of these counter arguments in the public square. First, he worries because evolution does not seem to be nearly reasonable, so why shouldn’t there be competing ideas that might provide better scientific explanations? Second, Stein worries about social and personal consequences of evolution–racism, no morality, denial of life after death, etc. If evolution was true, then society faces ugly consequences. A theory that results in these personal and social consequences definitely deserves competition from the field.
In the end, Stein’s documentary is top-notch in quality and thought provoking in his presentation. If you were not planning on watching Expelled, I highly encourage you to change your mind.
And remember to bring your intelligence.
Topics: Culture, Entertainment | 3 Comments »
Conquering Death
By Jason | March 22, 2008
“For this purpose, then, the incorporeal and incorruptible and immaterial Word of God entered our world. In one sense, indeed, He was not far from it before, for no part of creation had ever been without Him Who, while ever abiding in union with the Father, yet fills all things that are. But now He entered the world in a new way, stooping to our level in His love and Self-revealing to us. He saw the reasonable race, the race of men that, like Himself, expressed the Father’s Mind, wasting out of existence, and death reigning over all in corruption. He saw that corruption held us all the closer, because it was the penalty for the Transgression; He saw, too, how unthinkable it would be for the law to be repealed before it was fulfilled. He saw how unseemly it was that the very things of which He Himself was the Artificer should be disappearing. He saw how the surpassing wickedness of men was mounting up against them; He saw also their universal liability to death. All this He saw and, pitying our race, moved with compassion for our limitation, unable to endure that death should have the mastery, rather than that His creatures should perish and the work of His Father for us men come to nought, He took to Himself a body, a human body even as our own. Nor did He will merely to become embodied or merely to appear; had that been so, He could have revealed His divine majesty in some other and better way. No, He took our body…”
- The early church leader, Athanasius, in his famous work: On the Incarnation, written to refute the rising Aryan heresy
Almost 2,000 years ago, the most perfect example of sacrificial love was demonstrated by our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. He was God in the body of a man, perfect in his actions, holy in his righteousness. Yet, as the only righteous person to ever walk the face of this earth, he placed himself in the position of a convicted criminal, gruesomely nailed to a cross, lashed with the whip a total of forty times. When a chance of partial relief was offered to him through the mixture of vinegar and wine, he turned it down. This sacrifice needed complete commitment on the part of the perfect Lamb.
As he hung on the cross, one cannot begin to imagine the pain he endured…for our imperfect and selfish selves. Blood streamed from his nailed wrists and feet. His back and sides lay raw and open, gashed with the stripes of the lash. The temples of his head were pierced by the crown of thorns placed on his holy brow.
And yet these physical pains were small trials compared to the spiritual pains that tore Jesus’ heart. Even as his body lay ripped open–a brutal mess of skin, blood, and bone–his spiritual connection with his Father was not only shredded and torn…it was completely destroyed. Mark 15:34 says, “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (KJV) Jesus Christ, in taking on the sins of this world, had to lose his relationship with God, temporarily, in order to fulfill the required sacrifice.
Please dwell on this for a moment.
Jesus was God, perfect, holy, and righteous. Yet, he surrendered himself to not only physical death, but spiritual death as well. Any analogy we try to think of is too imperfect to describe the suffering of this sacrifice. The most shocking thing, however, is that this still represents only a part of the whole picture. Christ suffered these torments for a specific reason. His body was ripped and shredded, his relationship with God was temporarily destroyed; all of this was done with the purpose of rescuing mankind from sin.
Now, when I say “mankind,” I do not mean a well-meaning and reasonable race of beings. Instead, I mean a completely broken human race, one that is completely lost and mired in the shame and oppression of our sinful ways. Even though this is man’s true state, Christ suffered immeasurable tortures just for the very purpose of saving our wicked and ungrateful selves. I think that 2 Corinthians 8:9 and Isaiah 53:5-6 provide us with two of the most beautiful descriptions of this sacrifice. Second Corinthians 8:9 says, “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.” (NAS) Similarly, Isaiah 53:5-6 reads, “But he was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him.” (NAS)
When Jesus lost his spiritual relationship with the Father, it was because he had taken on the sins of the world (as Isaiah reminds us.) Think about it this way: when Christ was on that cross, he took responsibility for Saul’s persecution of the church (before he became Paul). He took responsibility for John Newton’s horrific mistreatment of the slaves he transported from Africa to America. He took responsibility for Nicky Cruz’s egregious abuse of drugs, sex, and violence. He also took responsibility for the sins that you and I commit all the time. Every lie we have told, every lustful thought that has entered our mind, every vengeful action we have ever taken; Jesus has claimed responsibility for all of it through his sacrifice.
Thus, at that moment in time when Jesus was hanging on the cross, Jesus was bearing on his shoulders the sins of the world. That weight, that burden, made Jesus so spiritually ugly that God could no longer look on him.
In short, Jesus suffered complete physical and spiritual death, and all for what? Selfish, angry, hateful, lying, broken, hopeless, emotional, dying creatures like you and me.
This leads me to the most amazing point: we still do not see the full picture of Jesus’ sacrifice! What motivated Jesus to die for such a rebellious world? It was true and pure love. In addition to the verse I talked about earlier (2 Corinthians 8:9), Athanasius reminds us of Jesus’ commitment to saving us from sin. In On the Incarnation, he writes:
“Thus, taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death instead of all, and offered it to the Father. This He did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die, and the law of death thereby be abolished…”
Unimaginable, unthinkable, unbelievable…whatever you want to call it…Christ knowingly accomplished it through his death and resurrection.
This actually leads me to an important point: the Resurrection itself. Christ suffered more than we will ever have to on the cross, he did so for sinful man, and this was done out of the most unselfish, perfect love that has ever manifested itself to us. Yet, even this is nothing had not Christ risen from the dead.
Christ’s sacrifice is extremely important, but it is mutually linked with his resurrection in the plan of salvation. If you ascribe yourself to the Christian faith, one cannot be more important than the other. Athanasius makes it very clear that the sacrifice of Jesus was just one part in a two-part plan when he writes:
“For by the sacrifice of His own body He did two things: He put an end to the law of death which barred our way; and He made a new beginning of life for us, by giving us the hope of resurrection. By man death has gained its power over men; by the Word made Man death has been destroyed and life raised up anew.”
In addition, Paul reminds us of the utmost importance of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:16-22, “For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (KJV)
Here, Paul says Jesus’ suffering and agony on the Christ is nothing without the Resurrection. If our hope is only in Christ and his death, then we are “of all men most miserable.” This does not detract from the significance of Christ’s sacrifice. As we have already seen, its significance is clear and undeniable. However, it is only significant because it was followed three days later by his resurrection.
The resurrection itself completed the work started on the cross. Jesus had to die, but that was, quite simply, a means to the end of defeating death. Jesus suffered the agony of death, but then showed everyone his power and might by rising from the dead. This validated everything about his earthly ministry and validated his claim as God. Only as God could Jesus have risen from the dead, because only God could wield power over death.
On Easter Sunday, we remember Jesus’ resurrection and the plan of salvation God has for mankind. Because of his sacrifice and resurrection, we have hope of eternal salvation and a way out of our sinful nature.
Please remember the significance of this amazing event. Most importantly, remember that it is not just something for us to remember on Easter, or on Sunday, and then talk about the rest of the week. Recognizing the significance of Jesus’ death and resurrection is something that should change the way we live.
Now by this, I do not advocate isolation on a mountain. Christ’s death covered for all of our sins that we commit, and it is no longer necessary to pursue a life of works and sacrifice to achieve salvation.
Yet, at the same time, we never can take the grace of God for granted. Jesus died for our sins, but that does not give us license to continue pursuing our sin. The sign of a true believer is that we continually strive to move past our sins. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 9:24-25, “Know ye not that they which run a race run all, but one recieveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.”
Topics: Theoloy, Apologetics | No Comments »
« Previous Entries