Bob McDaniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're right - this post certainly doesn't belong here. ...
Well I've read a lot of somewhat off-topic material on this list, so I
think it's reasonable to ask for a little tolerance for mine. I did
ask: "In this time of crisis, I hope you will forgive me for posting
here", and I still hope you will.
> ... And, frankly, I now
> wonder about the credibility of your work in global modeling. Simple-minded?!
Well I have taken a risk by writing about something outside my field
of expertise, and if I've committed some well-known fallacy or silly
mistake, then you may well think badly of me, perhaps doubting I even
have a field of expertise.
That's a risk I chose to take, and I don't regret it. Nobody else
seems to have any new ideas about the Kosovo situation, and I just
can't sit by and let things get worse without at least trying to think
up something that might work.
> > Briefly, what I'm suggesting is that a very different ultimatum should
> > be given to the Serbs: Stop Killing or We Recognize Kosovo as
> > Independent.
> >
> Seems to me that's pretty close to the present deal: We recognize the right of
> Kosovo to be an autonomous region, the Kosovars agree and now the Serbs must
> stop killing - or else!
I was not talking about recognizing the right of Kosovo to be an
autonomous region, I was talking about full diplomatic recognition of
Kosovo as an independent country -- that's why I wrote about an
exchange of ambassadors and a seat on the UN. That is something
Mr. Milosevic does not want to happen. To prevent it, I think he
would be willing to call off the army and sign the agreement.
Yes, perhaps air-strikes on Serbia would accomplish the same thing,
but they would also probably kill people, which would increase the
amount of hatred in a region already saturated with it. What I
propose is non-violent, and I think that's important.
International diplomacy is really not my field, but from what I know of
it there are often subtle distinctions which make a world of difference.
What you called "simple-minded" is something I think of as "subtle".
> > It is a matter of principle: Nations do NOT shell their own country --
>
> A matter of principle? Whose principle? Civil war is hardly uncommon.
It is a principle I am proposing. If it could become accepted, then
this form of ultimatum could be used to make civil war uncommon.
Perhaps it would help if I quote here part of a message sent in
response to a partisan of Serbia, who also objected to this point and
mentioned several counterexamples.
> > > It is a matter of principle: Nations do NOT shell their own country --
>
> I insist, they don't -- this is a matter of principle with me. Shelling
> is indiscriminate and kills innocent civilians -- no country would ever
> do that. Your apparent counter-examples notwithstanding.
>
> > As A matter of fact they do, in Indonesia
> > nearly 200,000 have been killed in recent times
>
> I take this as either the criminal act of disobediant soldiers, OR as
> evidence that the place shelled is actually a foreign country. Indonesian
> brutality in East Timor, for example, proves what the East Timorese
> have been saying all along -- they are not part of Indonesia.
>
> > The Turks have killed 35,000 this year within their borders,
>
> Kurds, mostly. Yes. Again, it's either disobediant soldiers (unlikely,
> but a possible face-saving interpretation for the Turkish government), OR
> it is proof of what the Kurds have been saying all along, that they do
> not belong to Turkey.
>
> > the Chinese have killed thousands in Tibet (proclaimed chinese territory)
>
> Ditto, ditto, ditto -- yes, Tibet is not part of China, and the deaths
> of thousands proves that, but we should also give the Chinese government
> a face-saving way to back out of Tibet, if we can think of one.
I think people sometimes have to come up with new principles to cover
situtations like this, and I'm quite happy to advocate this one.
Indeed, I think there is a moral imperative to come up with new ideas
and new principles in a crisis like this. I'm sorry if posting my
message to this list has cost me some good will, but I just had to
do it -- I had to at least make the attempt to interest people in a
non-violent solution.
Like all of us, I have my blind spots, and I may well have wasted your
time on a silly idea, I just don't know. If so, I'm sorry. I honestly
thought it worth posting. I still think it was -- but what about the
rest of you, the other people on this list? I welcome your comments,
even the one's that sting a bit.
dpw
Douglas P. Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.island.net/~dpwilson/index.html
http://www.SocialTechnology.org/index.html
