4 ms·

It's as if creating a new state from a thin air without any consideration for the ethnical minorities that will stay there was a bad idea. The problem here is t

by matusp 3y ago

It's as if creating a new state from a thin air without any consideration for the ethnical minorities that will stay there was a bad idea. The problem here is that US politics in the region was never meant to create peace, it was meant to get influence and push Russia out. The solutions for both Kosovo and Bosnia were pretty obviously leading to failed state territory from the get go and the whole region will be devastated by these decisions in the decades to come.

brnt 3y ago
Especially Bosnia, there was very much no correlation between territory and ethnicity, so the difficulty is built in. I don't know if this was much better in Kosovo, it does seem like that sliver of mostly Serbians are on the wrong side of the border, but since this is, you know, the Balkans, I expect the answer to be more complicated than a simple "America did what was in it's best interest". Pushing Russia out is always a good thing, if stability and human rights are of interest though. It's tons better in either country now than it was before.
JustLurking2022 3y ago
Technically there's also a path where people become less racist so ethnicities matter less. I think that's an area where the average person in the U.S. struggles. For all our issues with race, we are generally fairly integrated, so the thought that national borders need to very closely reflect ethnicities isn't top of mind.
- Gare 3y ago
  Well, you should ask native Americans how they feel about that
- necovek 3y ago
  There is not much of racism in Serbia and Balkans (other than to Romas — but even that's never about their abilities but rather about their incompatible culture — they are "dirty and lazy" for the most part): nationalism is, like everywhere else in the world (including the USA), easy to spark in rural areas, and it's only the question of how much urban, educated population there is that will have the energy to supress the desires of the minority. Serbia proper has not seen much war other than the NATO bombing, and if you look at population statistics from 1991 and 2001 census in Balkan countries, you'll notice that it was mostly Serbian population that ended up displaced: instead of looking at the news narratives, we've got an opportunity to look at outcomes this far removed from the events. USA has systemic, widespread racism, which is harder to get a concentrated effort against since the 0.1% minority inflicting harm with it are spread around a huge area and 300M+ people. In tiny countries like Serbia (7M), Croatia (4M), Bosnia (3M), Kosovo (1.5-2M), an unscrupolous populist like Vučić or Kurti can easily get the entire minority acting together, and 0.1% ready to do damage can do a lot of damage against the other peaceful 99.9% who are slow to react. And once shit hits the fan, it's "us" vs "them", so hard for voice of reason to prevail on either side.

by matusp 3y ago

brnt 3y ago

Especially Bosnia, there was very much no correlation between territory and ethnicity, so the difficulty is built in. I don't know if this was much better in Kosovo, it does seem like that sliver of mostly Serbians are on the wrong side of the border, but since this is, you know, the Balkans, I expect the answer to be more complicated than a simple "America did what was in it's best interest". Pushing Russia out is always a good thing, if stability and human rights are of interest though. It's tons better in either country now than it was before.

JustLurking2022 3y ago

Technically there's also a path where people become less racist so ethnicities matter less. I think that's an area where the average person in the U.S. struggles. For all our issues with race, we are generally fairly integrated, so the thought that national borders need to very closely reflect ethnicities isn't top of mind.

Gare 3y ago
Well, you should ask native Americans how they feel about that
necovek 3y ago
There is not much of racism in Serbia and Balkans (other than to Romas — but even that's never about their abilities but rather about their incompatible culture — they are "dirty and lazy" for the most part): nationalism is, like everywhere else in the world (including the USA), easy to spark in rural areas, and it's only the question of how much urban, educated population there is that will have the energy to supress the desires of the minority. Serbia proper has not seen much war other than the NATO bombing, and if you look at population statistics from 1991 and 2001 census in Balkan countries, you'll notice that it was mostly Serbian population that ended up displaced: instead of looking at the news narratives, we've got an opportunity to look at outcomes this far removed from the events. USA has systemic, widespread racism, which is harder to get a concentrated effort against since the 0.1% minority inflicting harm with it are spread around a huge area and 300M+ people. In tiny countries like Serbia (7M), Croatia (4M), Bosnia (3M), Kosovo (1.5-2M), an unscrupolous populist like Vučić or Kurti can easily get the entire minority acting together, and 0.1% ready to do damage can do a lot of damage against the other peaceful 99.9% who are slow to react. And once shit hits the fan, it's "us" vs "them", so hard for voice of reason to prevail on either side.