Results so far:
| Yes | 63% | 146 votes | Total: 230 votes | |
| No | 37% | 84 votes |
Worldwide Balkanization and Freedom
The destiny of the majority in Kosovo to become independent and officially recognized as the Republic of Kosovo has recently become fact. It's separation from Serbia is symptomatic of modern unrest and ethnic and religious disagreement world wide. Is it also the harbinger of similar ideological separations to come?
It is unlikely the declaration of independence of the majority Kosovars will fail to inspire visions of independence by other concentrations of ethnic minorities elsewhere in the world . Human nature inevitably guarantees where less powerful states successfully declare independence, they will in fact be admired, and become the champions of subject and scrutiny.
Perhaps even used as blueprints and justification for similar actions sanctioned by the U.N., Kosovo may be offered as legal precedent in international law, and eventually the process could be imitated by other small state-would-be-natio ns.
That likelihood is compounded further with the recognition or tacit approval of larger, more influential, and powerful world nations individually. To date, many member nations of the United Nations have officially recognized the Republic of Kosovo as an independent state. (*1) Equally difficult is the fact that a number of UN nations are in dissension, making that declaration of independence a potentially divisive problem.
In world history, few if any minority territories have wished, asked, or demanded to be dominated by other nationalities or ethnic groups, just as no great religion or ideology has ever pleaded to be allowed to submit to the will of any other. The spirit of freedom is a powerful force, virtually uncontrollable in the aspect that arranged "freedom within", although a balm, does not always heal potential rifts.
In overview, logical examination of economic data suggests that in the global economy as it exists, many small states could theoretically, beneficially , and peacefully remain under political influence, assistance, and economic structures offered by larger, more economically feasible and stable structures -and thrive peacefully. Economics can be, but is not always the only driving or deterrent force. If domestic economic satisfaction was the only concern, economic annexations, political empowerment by persuasion and territorial annexations would be predictable and pleasing to all concerned.
Such is not the case with the curiosity we call human nature. Humanity is unpredictable and not easily pleased. Ancient cultures clash; ideology is often totally incompatible, religious mores are held to be far from agreeable, and racism, varieties both perceived and practiced - become a catalyst and driving, brutal force for change. Perceived historical wrongs are dragged into the limelight of contemporary unrest and the inevitable result is a tendency to fragment rather than create a cohesive bond within any given multicultural society.
Similarly, the mere fact of "legal" annexation of any specific population or territory by colonization, by writ of warfare, by political, religious, historical, cultural, or any imagined similarities, does not by itself guarantee, preclude or eliminate any tendency to separation or rebellion . In fact, it despised and improvised generic "glue" more than likely encourages division and unrest. Arrangement of purported benefit by geopolitical association or detailed planning by third- party agreement , neutral or otherwise, similarly does not work. Imposed unions are nothing less than fires yet to be ignited. Iraq is a fine example of ethnic groups that have no intention of remaining together.
Wishes of independence, ethnic pride, economic self rule, and assertion of self worth of similarly-rooted demographic groups all tend to magnify the fact that Freedom from domination, perceived or otherwise is nothing less than wonderful, desirable and visionary. Practicality does not dominate the issue or offer reason in spite of the fact that it offers some degree of logic and wisdom. The net result, the gravity and significance of that aspect of human nature within any multicultural society is ignored in territorial demographics at the peril of any political association of states that imagines itself a "country".
Is the perception of political vanity, human superiority, economic greed, or the use of punitive and blatant abuse of human rights enough to justify controlling a lesser world state that wishes to be free? People in the Land of the Free would say not. Wars are fought on that premise.
The Albanians of Kosovo are no exception. They expressed the will to be free of Serbian influence. It should not be disregarded in this instance that the majority of Albanians are Kosovars but also Muslim. Wars on ethnic and religious grounds have existed for centuries. Violence and terrorism, the newest tools used by individuals defacing the name of Islam of late as an impotent means of self-expression to coerce societal change appear to be increasing exponentially.
Religi ous grounds aside, the vision of self-rule and national pride or the perception of societal disagreement and populations wronged, exploited or forced from traditional, historically recorded areas -are all seductive concepts and easily influence those who would practice secession or incite nationalism and riots to inflict change. Poor economic performance may be dragged into the mix as justification. It is logical that if a minority population is made to feel victimized, under-represented, treated badly economically, or if there is a perception that a proximal, similar populations can be joined beneficially, the tendency to realize that perceived potential betterment will eventually be agitated until it is materialized.
The "Balkanization" or division of European does seem to be in progress.
The gigantic United Soviet Socialist Republic disintegrated virtually overnight in disagreement. Kurds in Turkey and Iraq wish to create a state called Kurdistan.
Shall we in North America be insulated from the same kind of process? The same type of division in North America is not an impossibility, given the concentrations of ethnic minorities. The best example is multicultural Canada's Province of Quebec, where two referendums on separation have already been held without success.
Quebec has a demographic majority of approximately 6 million francophone's, many of whom have expressed wishes of nationalism. Their wish to "protect the French nature of Quebec" is often expressed in spite of the fact that it appears tribal, myopic and fearful. Other "minorities" in the Canadian population do not appear to have the same attitude.
The blatant disregard for the rights of English-speaking and other minorities in Quebec coupled with inexplicably distasteful "language laws" that preclude the use of the English language in historically English-speaking businesses on the basis of "preservation of the French language and culture" - does not suggest that multiculturalism in Canada is totally successful. The territorial integrity of Quebec itself is also at question, should it decide to leave the Canadian democracy -since many areas of Quebec are in fact occupied by an English-speaking minority, and vast First Nations territories that wish to remain a part of Canada also come to question. The right of self-determination is brought to the fore; the government of Canada has only recently, and very diplomatically and quietly acknowledged the "state " of Kosovo accordingly, as other countries have done.
Similarly, the powerful energy-rich western province of Alberta could theoretically be economically independent; Alberta feels that it has historically been under-represented and overpowered by Ottawa. Without the application of common sense, the "Balkanization" of Canada is not impossible, just as the division of the disquieting province of Quebec itself is not impossible.
South of the Canadian border, the ever-increasing Mexican/Latin demographic composition of the south-western United States undoubtedly has undoubtedly raised eyebrows. California alone, with over 37 million people, more than the population of Canada, and virtually a country by itself, has a "minority" group too. How long before the "minority" becomes the majority? How long before that new majority decides to rejoin Mexico or declare unilateral independence?
Illegal immigrants to the Land of the Free may indeed become a more serious problem of the majority; "walls" are discussed, border security is always an issue, but in some circles, racism, unrest, and the haunting spectre of the American Civil War remains in the American psyche just as the failure of the Vietnam war and the seemingly endless wars in the middle East have been.
The rebel flag of the Confederacy is always in the mind; it is always at the feet of the eternal and exalted presidential faces on Mt. Rushmore. Yes, the maintaining and growing of a nation was painful and ongoing, yet the waning of the same nation is equally possible; can you now imagine the Balkanization of the United States of America? Hopefully, common sense can and will prevail in all of North America.
Perhaps these thoughts alone should be enough to offer commanding and sobering thought where unilateral independence is observed being arbitrarily declared and approved . Can North America make the same mistakes that have been made in Europe? Asia, too, is now trembling. Is the Kosovo reality the inspiration for the new Tibetan unrest and bid for release from China?
The likelihood is high.
If the great, egotistical U.S.S.R. can break up into "lesser" countries, and if, like Kosovo, any country in the world, for that matter, wishes to be free, perhaps they should be peacefully allowed to do likewise as an expression of the maturity of civilization.
To declare independence and freedom demands bravery, wisdom and dedication; but to work and stay united for the benefit of ALL requires far more effort. The real question is whether civilization possesses such wisdom and will put forth that effort.
Until that is a reality, yes, Kosovo will clearly inspire other independence movements.
* 2008 www. Wikipedia.com
Learn more about this author, Raymond Alexander Kukkee.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
The fight for independence in Kosovo is one of the last post-colonial struggles that are currently being fought and I see no reason why it would or indeed should provoke a similar response in any other country.
The first round of bloody conflict took place in South America after the decline of Spanish influence during the Napoleonic wars. The two world wars of the twentieth century saw the political power of all the other European powers diminish in their former colonies to the point where returning executive control back to the indigenous population was inevitable. The handover of power to these countries in many cases led to a period of civil unrest, which is still rumbling on to this day.
With the downfall of the Soviet Empire in the mid eighties the world witnessed the last round of these liberations, Kosovo and Chechnya being the last two conflicts that I am aware of still to be settled.
There are other struggles being fought around the world, East Timor in Indonesia and the fight for Tamil independence in Sri Lanka to name but two. There is also a non violent struggle in Tibet, which is trying to gain its independence from China, which I suspect will run as long as China occupies Tibet.
Once these disputes have been sorted out is the world then destined for an unparalleled bout of peace? As much as I would like to think it possible, it will never happen.
Unfortunately where an imbalance exists, conflict will follow as surely night follows day. Kenya is the latest example of this, where the unsatisfactory election earlier this year was the spark that has aroused a century's old feud between rival Kikuyu and Luo tribes. Kenya is of course just one of many festering sores around the world. The situation in neighbouring Sudan is now spilling over into neighbouring Chad and it will not be long before Zimbabwe finally implodes and ends up in a bloody civil war.
If then the age of post-colonial struggle for independence is almost at an end what will be the catalyst for conflict in the future? I think the answer to that is how the changing climate is having physical effects that have huge political implications.
Water is already a major issue in sub Saharan Africa. In 1972 Lake Chad had a surface area of 16884 km2, now it has shrunk to just 1746 km2, just over one tenth of what it was. As the water levels drop then all the wildlife that relies on the supply of water drop and that means less food for all animals, including humans. The Aral Sea too has seen a 50% reduction in size over the last 50 years; though this is mainly due to water extraction to feed Soviet industrial needs.
It seems quite ironic that when faced with melting ice caps and rising sea levels, one area that is likely to be the centre of conflict is the very lack of water.
As water supplies dry up then it is inevitable that people will move to areas rich in natural resources. There will be an increase in the migration that is already happening. Russia alone sees its population diminish by about 500,000 people a year. In the UK, hundreds of thousands of immigrants have travelled from the new European countries. In the year 2000 the International Organisation for Migration released a report stating that 150 million people worldwide were on the move and living in a foreign country; that's about 3% of the world's population and it is due to get worse. Is it conceivable that there will be a moratorium on migration? Will borders close to non-nationals permanently?
These are all very frightening statistics made all the more disturbing if you factor in what might happen to world food supplies.
This winter, parts of China ground to a halt by heavy falls of snow. The snow has ruined many crops and postponed the planting of others. Last year in the UK the wet summer ruined crops, flooded thousands of homes and contaminated fresh water supplies. These abnormal conditions inevitably cause food prices to rise. The UK is a small country and needs a comparatively small amount of support, but China or India are different matters entirely. Just how would the world react to a failure in a wheat or rice harvest in either of those two countries? Just where would the food come from, and what then would happen to the world economy?
Learn more about this author, Ian Pauley.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.