Thread: Realpolitik

Originally Posted by trewornan

Hardly a surprise given it's tortuous history - a country made out of disparate bits of territory with different languages and cultures by the British, in order to upset the French (perfectly adequate justification).

The British supported us when Belgium declared independence, as did the French. Belgium was not 'made' by anyone. It was tolerated at first, and then supported when the Netherlands wanted to take it back by force.

But yes, The history of Belgium is not pretty. It is called 'the battle ground of Europe' for a good reason.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Belgium was not 'made' by anyone.

I was referring to the Treaty of London which got it's name for a reason. I grossly simplified it (and the bit about the French was tongue in cheek) but we're both kind of right, nothing about the history of Belgium is simple.

Originally Posted by trewornan

I was referring to the Treaty of London which got it's name for a reason. I grossly simplified it (and the bit about the French was tongue in cheek) but we're both kind of right, nothing about the history of Belgium is simple.

True. Some situations are ver complex.

For example, when our crown prince married, every line in the ceremony was repeated thrice. Once in each language, that way noone would feel offended.
But of course, they also had to change the language that was read first with each part of the ceremony, so that noone would feel offended that the other language was always read first.

And this is just a harmless situation.

Originally Posted by Bruno

True. Some situations are ver complex.

For example, when our crown prince married, every line in the ceremony was repeated thrice. Once in each language, that way noone would feel offended.
But of course, they also had to change the language that was read first with each part of the ceremony, so that noone would feel offended that the other language was always read first.

And this is just a harmless situation.

Forgive me Bruno my friend, but this sounds remarkably petty. Is this really common fare for Belgium?

Originally Posted by JMS

Forgive me Bruno my friend, but this sounds remarkably petty. Is this really common fare for Belgium?

Oh yes. The whole government process can grind to a halt over an issue like this.
For example, the reason the last election process took 190 days was that 2 major parties had elevated a symbolic issue to a deal breaker.
Even the couple of thousands of people who the issue was about said to get on with it, but of course they didn't.

In the end they proposed an interim government to keep the country going, and
meanwhile they would keep on debating about the 'core' (read: symbolic) issues.
If all goes well, The new government will be in office by Easter. I give it a 50/50 chance.

There is real tension between French speaking and Dutch speaking people.
These days it is a bit better, but 20 or 30 years ago you could / would be beaten up for speaking the wrong language at the wrong place.

A couple of years ago did a project at Alcatel Bell Space, and my direct colleague was French speaking. We settled on speaking English because he didn't learn Dutch (it was a Dutch speaking company) and I didn't want to speak French because we were in the middle of Flemmish territory.
If I am in the French speaking part of Belgium I will try to use French wherever possible, but not in Flanders.

Except when talking to foreigners because French is just their language. We are taught to be at least bilangual from the beginning of high school.
I know it can look silly to outsiders, but this kind of thing runs in our blood, and noone ever forgets it. It also has historical causes that go way back. And both sides were at fault one time or the other.

Anyway, it also has a positive side. Our diplomats are world wide reknowned and respected for their mediating skills. Our daily politics are a minefield of volatile topics, so our politicians have to be skilled in understanding all the issues and factions in order to get something done.

For starters, let's get a couple of things straight...
1) The same investigators that found drug cartel graves in Mexico within a couple of weeks, spent more than 6 months in Kosovo and couldn't find any.
2) Serbs didn't carpet-bomb Albanians in Kosovo. NATO carpet-bombed Serbian cities. I lost a great-aunt when the hospital she was being treated in got hit by a Tomahawk and a classmate from elementary when they decided to bomb media outlets "to stop the spread of propaganda."
3) There was no referendum. A regional government decided that it wanted to separate the region from the state it belonged to.

The bottom line is that this is a clear violation of international law. To become independent, there has to be a referendum and negotiations with the country that they currently belong to. I guess they found a new recipe for a state:
1) Move into a region and do a couple of decades of ethnic cleansing until you form a majority of population.
2) Attack the police and the army
3) When the police and the army react to the attacks, create a good media spin and go crying to the big dog.
4) Give the big dog a couple of months to devastate the state that the region of your choice belongs to.
5) Once you have enough foreign soldiers occupying your region, form a regional government.
6) Screw referendums.. They're a waste of time and money. Just declare independence and you'll be recognized by the US and most of western Europe.
7) Wait for foreign aid to start coming in.
International law has provisions for state formation. Those provisions weren't met. Kosovo literally sets a precedent where if you had a Mexican majority in San Antonio and they formed a municipal government, they could declare independence.
From a Canadian perspective, PQ could have unilaterally declared Quebec's independence and they'd have been automatically recognized as a sovereign state by the powers that be.
Isn't it ironic that Russia and China are today's high profile defenders of international laws?

This is a difficult situation. I can really see both sides.

Ilija, I am truly sorry for your loss, but I have to say - NATO did not "carpet" bomb cities. This doesn't change the outcome for your family and I realize that. 'Nuff said.

As a relatively "hawkish" American, this is one area I've always wished we could stay out of and let the EU take a greater lead.

Jordan

I think people are misguided when it comes to the UN. The UN is not an international government, it is a collective of countries that publish formal opinions about the world. It has only the power given to it by its members, and has no way to project that power independently. In other words, the UN is just a bunch of hot air machines and pencil pushers.

The EU is a little different, but not by much. It is an agreement by member countries to come together under a common government, much like the US as was pointed out. As such, they have no authority over non-member nations such as Norway or Iceland. It is tantamount to the US saying that Canada isn't a country- unless we decide to take it over by force, Canada is whatever it wants to be. So, if the EU, UN, or Serbia has a problem with Kosovo, they can use their mighty militaries and tell Kosovo how it's going to be...or shut their bureaucratic pieholes.

The bottom line is that Serbia has too much cultural heritage and natural resources in the region to give it up against any precedents of international law. If other countries would find the decency mind their own business, Serbia could easily send in the armed forces and reestablish law and order in the region within a couple of weeks.
Realistically speaking, NATO likes having military presence in eastern Europe, so the media here would start spewing out recycled fairy-tales about mass graves and Tomahawks would start falling on Serbia again. That's why Serbia won't be taking any military action.

Originally Posted by FiReSTaRT

The bottom line is that Serbia has too much cultural heritage and natural resources in the region to give it up against any precedents of international law. If other countries would find the decency mind their own business, Serbia could easily send in the armed forces and reestablish law and order in the region within a couple of weeks.
Realistically speaking, NATO likes having military presence in eastern Europe, so the media here would start spewing out recycled fairy-tales about mass graves and Tomahawks would start falling on Serbia again. That's why Serbia won't be taking any military action.

Well, one reason that we are of a mind to acknowledge kosovo as a country is that -realistically speaking- it is the only option that does not involve a civil war that might destablize the entire region.