As a public broadcast show with a stated intent to inform viewers on foreign affairs, Foreign Exchange should ideally provide as objective an overview as possible. Perhaps this belief is a bit naïve. It is nevertheless stated in reply to those who selectively target the purported media flaws (real and exaggerated) in some other countries.

Dhaliwal started off the Petersen segment by stating that the UN unveiled a plan to give Kosovo independence. In actuality, it was the non-binding suggestion of the George Soros leaning Martti Ahtisaari, whose overly partisan views have partly contributed to his no longer being so involved in the negotiation process. Dhaliwal did not challenge Peterson's belief that independence for Kosovo is a fait accompli. This, despite the fact that there is growing international apprehension about granting independence to Kosovo. In conjunction with this point, John Bolton, Lawrence Eagleburger and Peter Rodman authored a January 31, Washington Times article Warning Light on Kosovo against an independent Kosovo. No one can legitimately accuse those three seasoned foreign policy professionals of having a bias against American interests.

In an out of sight-of mind spirit, the Dhaliwal-Petersen discussion did not mention United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, which contradicts Petersen's slant. As noted in my March 22, 2007 Serbianna article Russia's Sane Position on Kosovo, UNSC 1244: "isn't a directive for Kosovo becoming independent.

- It specifically states that Kosovo is a part of Yugoslavia. Serbia is internationally recognized as the successor state to Yugoslavia. In Communist and post Communist Yugoslavia - Kosovo was part of the Serb republic.

- 1244 calls for a return of refugees, as well as of Serb military and government bodies to Kosovo. This has yet to happen.

- In legalese, the 1244 clause about taking into 'full consideration' the unsigned Rambouillet diktat is not a green light for independence. It simply means that aspects of Rambouillet can perhaps be considered. Prior to the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, the Clinton Administration and Kosovo Albanian nationalists wrote a clause in Rambouillet which would've (if signed) permitted Kosovo to vote on independence after three years from the accord's signing. I specifically recall noted American University law professor Paul Williams bragging about his having written that segment on Geraldo Rivera's MSNBC cable news show. No one questioned Williams' objectivity as a then adviser to the Kosovo Albanian nationalist leaders. Madeleine Albright was quoted as having said that Rambouillet was written in a way that was unacceptable to the Serbs. An obvious pretext for starting the war that was to be.

- The 'final outcome' status for Kosovo is stated towards the end of 1244. It relates to how Kosovo should be governed as a part of Serbia. What other logical way can be otherwise suggested when the very same document recognizes Kosovo as part of Serbia, while stating that refugees, Serb government and military bodies should return to that province?"

****

Dhaliwal asked Petersen why the two sides cannot reach a mutually agreeable accord allowing Kosovo to have great autonomy as a continued part of Serbia. Petersen answered with the now standard anti-Serb view that past actions defaulted Serbia from having any further authority over Kosovo. Dhaliwal provided no follow-up on Petersen's claim. If that is truly the case, then there would be no need for the Serb-Albanian negotiations and UNSC 1244 would be amended to mean something different from its contents. Putting those two points aside, Petersen's grossly hypocritical reasoning of why Serbia lost the right to Kosovo reflects the kind of unchallenged and flawed logic getting uncritically accepted. In my June 26, 2007 Serbianna article Lantos and Engel Challenge Russia's Position on Kosovo, the following is stated: "Iraq and Turkey have not lost Kurdistan for the harsh treatment those two gave the Kurds. Much worse than what the Serbs could ever be legitimately accused of doing to the Albanians; a matter which was not such a one way street. Minus Kosovo, present day Serbia is more democratic and tolerant than what one finds in Turkey, Iraq and Kosovo." (in that article, pardon the misidentification of Democrat Tom Lantos as a Republican)

Petersen downplayed the 2004 Kristallnacht like led violence against Serbs in Kosovo. He claimed that since then, Kosovo has stabilized to a secure status. The on the ground facts tell a different story. A sudden withdrawal of foreign peacekeeping troops is not expected because of the ongoing tense situation.

Petersen portrays the Kosovo Albanians as responsibly patient, while expressing a "too bad" kind of reply to the Serbs. He overlooks the veiled threats made by some Kosovo Albanian leaders about violence escalating if Kosovo does not get independence. Among others, long time Democratic Party foreign policy honcho Richard Holbrooke supports Kosovo's independence to avoid that scenario. Such a stance subscribes to the law of the jungle. Besides encouraging violence as a means of achieving independence, it downplays the likely problems an independent Kosovo faces.

Towards the end of his Foreign Exchange appearance, Petersen expressed support for Serbia's inclusion into the European Union by noting its importance on the European continent. He added that European Union membership is what Serbs desire. Petersen and others thinking like him want a subservient Serbia which sacrifices its interests. This mindset explains why Serbs have become more skeptical about the West. Boris Tadic's recent Serb presidential victory over the Tomislav Nikolic does not change this. Tadic and Nikolic are steadfast in maintaining Kosovo's continued affiliation with Serbia.

At the end of the Dhaliwal-Petersen segment, there was a printed blip displayed about Kosovo's current socioeconomic situation resembling the situation in Ethiopia. Violating the territorial sovereignty of Serbia by granting independence to a socioeconomically challenged and ethnically divisive Kosovo is a precarious advocacy. Not to be overlooked is a Greater Albania movement that potentially affects the borders of Greece, Montenegro, Serbia's Presevo region and Macedonia. As American diplomat Christopher Hill stated in 1999: "We spent the 1990s worrying about a Greater Serbia. That is finished. We are going to spend time well into the next century worrying about a Greater Albania." Some will argue that since 1999, the Greater Albania movement has not gained any noticeable steam. It has not dissipated and should therefore not be ignored.

Foreign Exchange's email address is info@foreignexchange.tv