|
October 10,
2003
ERP KIM Newsletter
10-10-03
KOSOVO ALBANIANS STILL
RELUCTANT BEFORE VIENNA TALKS
CONTENTS:
 UN
REPORT SAYS SECURITY WORSENING IN KOSOVO
The
security situation in Kosovo has worsened in the past few months,
according to a new report to the UN Security Council on Wednesday.
KOSOVO
ASSEMBLY DEALS BLOW TO BELGRADE -PRISTINA TALKS
Kosovo lawmakers on Thursday failed to
give their backing to a proposed meeting with Serbian officials next week,
dealing a blow to the United Nations' plans for historic dialogue.
ILLEGAL
PRIVATIZATION IN KOSOVO STOPS
The Serbian Ministry of Economy and
Privatisation today hailed the decision of UNMIK administration to halt
illegal privatisation of socially-owned companies in the province. This
came as the results of the Serbian government's warnings in the previous
two years sent to heads of the world's relevant institutions, including
the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation and the
International Monetary Fund.
IS
KOSOVO READY FOR FINAL STATUS, by Damjan de Krnjevic-Miskovic
PERPETRATORS OF GORAZDEVAC MASSACRE STILL NOT ARRESTED - DAY 57...
According to
all available infomation investigation of this case as well as other major
ethnically motivated attacks against Kosovo Serbs are in a deadlock
More News Available on our:
KOSOVO DAILY NEWS LIST (KDN)
KDN Archive
This newsletter is available on our
ERP KIM Web-site:
/erpkiminfo.html
UN
REPORT SAYS SECURITY WORSENING IN KOSOVO
The
security situation in Kosovo has worsened in the past few months,
according to a new report to the UN Security Council on Wednesday.
TOP
AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE
Wednesday, 08-Oct-2003 10:10AM
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 8 (AFP) - The security situation in Kosovo has
worsened in the past few months, according to a new report to the UN
Security Council on Wednesday.
The report comes ahead of the next week's talks between Serbian and ethnic
Albanian delegations in Vienna, the first such discussions since the end
of the war in 1999.
The report said that the southern Serbian province was stable but "less
secure" since the middle of the year due to "a large number of shootings
and grenade/bomb attacks."
It also cited a high level of organised crime, including groups it said
"oppose the strengthening of any state institutions dealing with law and
order. "
Next week's talks will not touch on Kosovo's eventual status, the
province's most politically and emotionally sensitive issue.
Although Kosovo remains part of Serbia, its ethnic Albanian majority has
been calling for independence. The United Nations has been effectively
running Kosovo since the war's end.
On Thursday, Kosovo's multi-ethnic assembly postponed a vote on its
possible delegation for the talks, rebuffing a request from Prime Minister
Bajram Rexhepi to approve the meeting.
The talks, set to begin October 14, will focus on transport, energy,
missing people and the return of those displaced by the conflict, when
Serb forces clashed with ethnic Albanian separatist guerrillas.
More than 22,000 international peacekeepers are currently in the province.
TOP
KOSOVO ASSEMBLY DEALS BLOW TO PRISTINA-BELGRADE TALKS
Kosovo lawmakers
on Thursday failed to give their backing to a proposed meeting with
Serbian officials next week, dealing a blow to the United Nations' plans
for historic dialogue.
TOP
AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE
Thursday, 09-Oct-2003 5:00AM
PRISTINA, Serbia-Montenegro, Oct 9 (AFP) - Kosovo lawmakers on Thursday
failed to give their backing to a proposed meeting with Serbian officials
next week, dealing a blow to the United Nations' plans for historic
dialogue.
The 120-member parliament was expected to debate the pros and cons of the
October 14 talks scheduled for Vienna, but MPs voted not to include the
issue on the agenda of Thursday's session.
It was not immediately clear whether this meant the Kosovo delegation
would attend the talks, which would be the first high-level meeting of its
kind since the 1998-99 war in the southern Serbian province.
The head of the UN mission in Kosovo, former Finnish prime minister Harri
Holkeri, was due to hold a press conference later Thursday.
Holkeri plans to lead the Kosovo delegation as the most powerful official
in the province under Security Council Resolution 1244, which established
Kosovo as a UN protectorate at the end of the war.
Kosovo Prime Minister Bajram Rexhepi, who asked the assembly to approve
the proposed meeting, has said he would not attend without parliamentary
backing.
In a debate last week the assembly demanded that the UN administration,
which takes most decisions in the province, first transfer more authority
to fledgling local institutions.
Ethnic Albanian politicians have also said they need more time to prepare
for the talks, which are to focus on technical issues such as transport,
energy and missing people.
But analysts have said the proposed dialogue is a political hot-potato for
ethnic Albanians, with no party willing to be seen as cooperating with
Belgrade or compromising on their ultimate goal of independence.
Kosovo is still technically a province of Serbia and its final status is
not on the agenda for the planned dialogue.
UN officials have said the Vienna meeting would be largely symbolic with
concrete progress expected as subsequent meetings in Belgrade or Pristina.
TOP
ILLEGAL
PRIVATIZATION IN KOSOVO STOPS
The Serbian
Ministry of Economy and Privatisation today hailed the decision of UNMIK
administration to halt illegal privatisation of socially-owned companies
in the province. This came as the results of the Serbian government's
warnings in the previous two years sent to heads of the world's relevant
institutions, including the United Nations, the World Bank, the World
Trade Organisation and the International Monetary Fund.
TOP
http://www.serbia.sr.gov.yu/news/2003-10/08/331356.html
SERBIAN GOVERNMENT
Belgrade, Oct 8, 2003 - The Serbian Ministry of Economy and Privatisation
today hailed the decision of UNMIK administration to halt illegal
privatisation of socially-owned companies in the province. This came as
the results of the Serbian government's warnings in the previous two years
sent to heads of the world's relevant institutions, including the United
Nations, the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation and the
International Monetary Fund.
The statement issued from the Ministry of Economy and Privatisation
further reads that this decision is the only rightful one as the
privatisation process in Kosovo-Metohija was against the basic principle
of market economy, that is, inalienable right of property.
In many talks with UNMIK authorities, the Serbian government and this
ministry suggested that the privatisation model applied in Serbia be also
applied in Kosovo-Metohija as this model was described as transparent and
the best one in the Eastern Europe.
The Ministry is still open for cooperation with the international
community so that the best model for privatisation in the province is be
found.
TOP
IS KOSOVO
READY FOR FINAL STATUS?
And so we understand,
over 140 cultural sites have been destroyed or vandalized since the spring
of 1999. And we cannot take the risk that more, including the most
precious ones, will not suffer the same fate if responsibility for their
security is transferred from NATO soldiers to Albanians, to the KPC,
instead of to Serb forces. It would be like allowing the PLO to safeguard
the Wailing Wall.
TOP
Damjan
de Krnjevic-Miskovic
Remarks as Written to be to the Western Policy Center's conference
Serbia Transformed? Western Integration and Trans-Atlantic Security,
St. Regis Hotel, Washington, DC
7 October 2003
I am neither a believer in a league of all the
nations of Islam, nor even in a league of Turkish peoples. Each of us here
has the right to hold his ideas, but the government must be stable with a
fixed policy, grounded in facts, and with one view and one alone-to
safeguard the life and independence of the nation and within its
frontiers. Neither sentiment nor illusion must influence our policy. Away
with dreams and shadows! They have cost us dear in the past.
-Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, as quoted in Hugh Poulton, Top Hat, Grey Wolf and
Crescent (NYU Press, 1997), p. 93
Your Royal Highnesses, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, the remarks to
follow will consider whether UNMIK's Kosovo is ready for final status.
Belgrade's position is that it is not, and I will begin from there not
because I am a Serb but because I find the arguments persuasive. And of
course this is the position of the Bush Administration, happily. The White
House recognizes that continuing American support for doing things slowly
in the Balkans means that the West will only have to do them once. In the
example of the Djindjic assassination, to recall a recent ugly event in
the history of Europe, we see what happens when the West pressures those
who are most like them in parts of the world unlike theirs to act quickly
without granting much in return. Indeed, the absence of war should not
provoke the international community into declaring Kosovo a
nation-building success: the pull of Potemkin's sleigh of hand remains
strong for those who think that getting out is the answer to stability.
But this is going too far too quickly. Let me begin anew, with my
understanding of Belgrade's position. And let us be mindful of the broader
strategic context, which is to say, of the current state of U.S.-Serbian
relations.
As America agonizes about securing a permanent peace in Iraq, and the
naysayers begin to talk about quagmire and Vietnam redux, a quick look at
this remarkable success story in the Balkans can bring some perspective to
those who equate democracy's understandable birth pangs with long-term
democratic failure.
Serbia today is an emerging democracy with a bright future. Since the fall
of Milosevic, it has reformed its military and security sector, privatized
its economy, established the rule of law, and strongly cooperated with the
Hague war crimes tribunal. All in all, Serbia is well on its way to full
integration with the key institutions of the West, despite the corruption
scandals that seem to grow each day.
Washington's warm reception of Prime Minister Zoran Zivkovic and Foreign
Minister Goran Svilanovic in late July confirms further the Bush
Administration's recognition that a strong, prosperous Serbia is the
lynchpin of America's security strategy in the Balkans. The recent
announcement that Serbia will send at least 1000 soldiers to the Khadahar
region of Afghanistan in support of the U.S.-led War on Terror is not only
truly welcome news, but another indication that relations between the two
countries are getting much better.
As the Wall Street Journal editorialized yesterday, "Who'd have thought
that the Serbs would turn out to be better friends of America than the
French?" And the Journal quoted a U.S. embassy official in Belgrade
describing current U.S.-Serbia relations as "the best certainly since
1991, maybe even since WWII." And just four years ago Serbia was America's
enemy in war. The Washington-Belgrade relationship has never been set on
firmer ground, because both sides have begun to trust each other's
intentions.
The importance of this new relationship for both sides should not be
underestimated. The burgeoning America-Serbia friendship is allowing
Belgrade to consolidate its democratic victory over the past and maintain
its freedom. And in Serbia, America now has an example of a people to
which it has helped deliver responsible liberty even without the presence
of vital interests in the calculus of U.S. policymaking.
Much of the Administration has recognized that to give Serbia's new birth
of freedom a real opportunity to succeed, a change of tactics by Western
powers is in order. The way to affect Serbia's political culture is though
rewards and benefits, not penalties and threats. Those who would use
sticks rather than carrots mistake today's Serbia for the Serbia of
yesterday, mistake the Serbia yearning to join the core-institutions of
the West such as the EU and NATO for the Serbia that fought a war against
both. Even some traditional opponents of full normalization in the Defense
Department are running out of arguments, and things look very good indeed.
Today, America has become the single largest foreign investor in Serbia
and Montenegro.
And this brings us to Kosovo. First, and I don't want to spend much time
on this, we have the Vienna talks, which are to begin in a few weeks.
Kosovo's new SRSG [Special Representative of the Secretary General], the
former prime minister of Finland, Harri Holkeri, has repeatedly indicated
that the Belgrade-Pristina talks are not negotiations, or
pre-negotiations, on the question of final status, but are rather talks
that are to cover practical issues such as energy, security, traffic,
telecommunications and missing persons. Also, I have been told, Belgrade
will have much to say concerning the question of property rights and the
question of the state's debt. But nothing to do with a change in the legal
status of the entity, which remains an integral part of Serbia.
The document that reaffirms Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo-Metohija is UN
Security Council Resolution 1244, the same document that establishes the
only legal mechanism to change this fact of sovereignty. UNMIK has made it
as clear as possible that final status will not be considered until the
benchmarks have been met. Thus, it is in the interest of Pristina to
accept as a matter of law Belgrade's factual claims, for recognition is
the only way to alter that which is recognized: Pristina must recognize
that it is bound to Belgrade before it can present an argument for why it
should become unbound. I don't think one could say that Kosovo is ready
for final status until that happens.
In late August, the Serbian parliament unanimously adopted a Declaration
on Kosovo-Metohija. The document declares that no debate on Kosovo's final
status may be launched until the provisions of Resolution 1244 are
implemented. This is the doctrine of "standards before status."
And these "standards" are recognizable to all in this room as necessary
for success in the international arena, and reinforce the language and
intent of Resolution 1244. These provisions or standards include the
founding of effective, representative and functioning institutions of
government authority, the promotion of civil society structures and human
rights (including women's rights), and institutional transparency and
accountability. The standards call for the rule of law and judicial
impartiality. They insist on the unrestricted freedom of movement for all
residents of Kosovo and on securing the conditions for the safe and
sustainable return of refugees. They affirm the necessity of establishing
the institutional and legal basis for the respect of property rights, a
market economy and a regulatory framework for investment. They insist on
the necessity of a dialogue with Belgrade on common issues and the
transformation of the Kosovo Protection Corps (to which many former
KLA-types gravitated after the war) into little more than a multiethnic
civil emergency response unit.
Failure to abide by the "standards before status" approach is tantamount
to refusing to respect the will of the international community and may
even constitute a material breach of Resolution 1244 by precisely those
whom it is supposed to benefit the most, Kosovo's Albanians.
And even now, a few days before the commencement of the Vienna talks,
Pristina is stalling. The parliament delays granting authority to senior
Albanian officials to attend the talks. They and others besides quibble
about procedure and obfuscate every step along the way, giving the
distinct impression they don't want to talk to Belgrade, perhaps because
the streets of Kosovo and the KLA thugs that rule them still see this as
betrayal. This is childish nonsense and it has got to stop.
And there's another, prudential reason for not violating 1244. Initiating
talks on final status before the standards are met guarantees that any
progress in the direction of an education to responsible liberty will
cease. As Janet Bogue, then the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
South Central Europe, put it in her testimony before the House
International Relations Committee in late May, the "benchmarks will not be
achieved in the midst of a discussion of final status. That subject brings
to a halt discussion of anything else."
To return to the Covic declaration. It insists, additionally, that the
Kumanovo Military-Technical Agreement and the Joint Document on
cooperation between Serbia and Montenegro and UNMIK must also be honored.
Among other things, this would put Serbian forces in positions where they
can guard against the credible threat of vandalism or terrorism against
religious and cultural shrines, and also calls on UNESCO to establish
protective zones around Serbian monasteries and churches.
The Declaration argues that decentralisation must occur in line with
Council of Europe recommendations. If Albanians don't see the prudence in
this, then how can they expect Serbs to entertain the proposition that
Albanians should rule themselves?
On this last point, and on others besides, you really have universal
agreement across the Serbian political spectrum. Miroljub Labus, a former
vice-president and now head of G17PLUS, Serbia's second-strongest
political party, has called for decentralization in Kosovo as the only way
to protect the rights of the Serbian minority, noting that UNMIK has
failed to provide "a satisfactory level of security." [Vienna Standard, 30
Sept 03]
The Declaration also emphasizes Serbia's obligation to cooperate with the
Hague Tribunal in prosecuting all those suspected of war crimes in Kosovo.
All who committed ethnically-motivated crimes, whether before, during or
after the bombing, should be punished. One cannot build for the future by
protecting those who bloodied the past. And it is Belgrade's position that
Pristina has not done its part.
The parliamentary Declaration establishes a clear timeline, one that is
firmly in line with 1244. Only once the standards have been met, that is,
only once 1244 is fully implemented, will Covic's Coordination Center be
given authority to contribute to the drafting of a platform for
substantial autonomy for the province within Serbia and the federal state.
Now, substantial autonomy is not independence, of course. But the legal
and political burden falls on Pristina to convince Belgrade and the
international community that an independent Kosovo can be a viable state.
So far, I see little evidence to support such a contention. In its
parliamentary Declaration and elsewhere, Belgrade, on the other hand,
argues that the most effective mechanism for resolving the problem of
Kosovo is full European and Euro-Atlantic integration, along with the
continuing implementation of Resolution 1244.
So, we have a document from Belgrade which says that the time for final
status negotiations is not yet ripe, and it employs UNMIK's own criteria.
And I am pleased that statesmen from across America's political spectrum
are saying the same thing. Examples here are helpful.
Richard Holbrooke, on Sunday, said in Pristina that there could be no talk
of progress in the province while there was no security for the Serb
community.
President Clinton, on 19 September, said, also in Pristina, on the
occasion of him receiving a doctorate honori causa from the university
there: "I want to see you move towards self-government, economic
prosperity, a civilized and lawful society, [and] religious and ethnic
freedom", adding that it was Kosovo's Albanians who were in the "driver's
seat" and so success or failure was their responsibility, their choice.
But take note of the language: "I want to see you" achieve this and that,
which suggests that we are not there yet. Kosovo has not achieved "a
civilized and lawful society, [and] religious and ethnic freedom", as he
says. And according to the UNMIK criteria and the Covic document, this
means that final status time is not yet upon us, and, I would add, that it
is not coming anytime soon.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in a recent op-ed (WP, 25 Sept),
inferred strongly that the experiment in nation-building in Kosovo has so
far been a failure, or, as he put it, the exercise in nation-building in
Kosovo has had "unintended adverse side effects."
This bipartisan turn away from the morality of intentions to the morality
of results is welcome news to those who have followed the direction of
Washington's past policies in the Balkans, for it makes it more likely
that American power will be put at the service of securing stability and
prosperity, not righting the apparent wrongs of history.
And let's put Rumsfeld's statement together with the State Department's
reaction to the strange offer by Ibrahim Rugova, the president of Kosovo,
this February (and repeated last week by Nexhat Daci, the parliament's
speaker), to send KPC-Kosovo Protection Corps-troops, many of them former
KLA terrorists, on peacekeeping missions. As I put it in a Washington Post
piece in late March, "yesterday's KLA troops have become today's
[policemen,] underworld bosses and political leaders." Assistant Secretary
of State for European Affairs Elizabeth Jones reportedly replied to
Rugova's offer thusly: that "the best thing he [Rugova] could do to
contribute to the campaign against terrorism was to build a stable
democratic Kosovo" [NYT, 6 Oct 03].
Finally, in the context of expressing Kosovo Albanian solidarity with the
goal of regime change in Iraq, Bajram Rexhepi, Kosovo's prime minister,
wrote in the Washington Post prior to the Iraq War that "wherever men are
denied freedom, there is a threat to peace." That may be, but peace is
impossible without justice for all. And justice-the rule of law and the
principles of equality and individual rights-is far from the harsh
realities we see on the streets of Kosovo. And we're a long way from
stability, with ethnic-based violence-these are called hate crimes over on
this side of the Atlantic-that is to say, violence against Serbs by
Albanians, a huge issue. Crimes are almost never resolved, despite the
presence of eye-witnesses. Recent barbaric shootings, from the murder of
children near Pec to the torture and execution of a family in Obilic, do
not send the right signal to Serb IDPs.
I am not saying that the Albanians don't see that their record on issues
of fundamental importance to the international community needs to improve.
They get it, one could argue. For example, the joint declaration of 2 July
(signed by men such as Daci, Haradinaj, Rexhepi, Rugova and Thaqi) that
called for the victims of the reverse ethnic cleansing to leave behind the
past and return to Kosovo-Metohija, is a step in the right direction,
despite the fact that it was written by the U.S. Mission.
At least these men recognized, in speech if not yet in deed, that
something was profoundly wrong with Kosovo, and that a fruitful future
necessitates constructively taking the political initiative. But without
the Albanian street understanding the necessity of holding their leaders
to account, political responsibility will remain an alien concept. As
such, symbolism will continue to rule in the political arena, and Serbs
will not return to their lands in sufficient numbers to constitute a
critical mass.
Certainly, the position of Kosovo's Serbs improves with every organized
return-a policy the State Department is pushing so much that it has
increased the amount of assistance it will provide to the various return
programs which work toward that end. State and UNMIK have outlined
specific programs of return that focus on areas where secure returns are
feasible.
The idea is to legitimize ethnic difference in the eyes of the locals,
with so far negligible success: of the approximately 200,000 Serbs who
have been ethnically cleansed from Kosovo since NATO took over from
Serbian security troops, only about 1000 have returned this year. Pristina
used to be populated by at least 40,000 Serbs. Despite a tripling, a
quadrupling of its total population since the war, less than 200 Serbs
remain.
That said, the U.S. Mission in Pristina along with UNMIK and the other
Western institutions present in Kosovo are attempting to establish a
fertile climate for return, emphasizing, rightly, that so-called
"spontaneous returns" will not be effective. Over time, as the Albanians
realize that their sometimes violent resistance to right the wrongs of
ethnic cleansing is futile and counterproductive, the hope is that the
process will become irreversible. But the road ahead will be tough, for
the Albanians have little tradition of tolerance. That is why the end of
the year interviews with Rugova quote him as being against the return of
Serbs, noting that such a return would provoke instability in the
province. Apparently, some of Kosovo's citizens are more equal than
others.
Let me now turn in the final few minutes of my remarks to Belgrade's views
on final status. The Covic Declaration does not consider as legitimate the
possibility of an independent Kosovo. On the other hand, we have heard
proposals in the past from Belgrade-from Djindjic before he was murdered,
for example-that would grant independence to the Kosovo Albanians in
exchange for the retention of extraterritorial sovereignty over Serbian
holy places in the entity as well as over majority-Serb areas (which may
have included mutually-beneficial population transfers).
And so we understand, over 140 cultural sites have been destroyed or
vandalized since the spring of 1999. And we cannot take the risk that
more, including the most precious ones, will not suffer the same fate if
responsibility for their security is transferred from NATO soldiers to
Albanians, to the KPC, instead of to Serb forces. It would be like
allowing the PLO to safeguard the Wailing Wall.
Just to be clear: it is not in Serbia's interest to retain sovereignty
over Kosovo as its present borders define it. And it is also not in the
interest of Kosovo's Albanian majority to continue to hassle the Serbs.
Either grant them the equality, justice and liberty they deserve, or
accept that the administrative borders will change. But the international
community will not grant independence to an entity that legitimizes ethnic
cleansing.
So when one looks to final status for Kosovo, one must approach the matter
with caution, and strongly guard against the temptation to push aside the
moderating insubordination of the ways of the world. Rightly so, for to
downplay the particularities of history is to precipitate its repetition.
To that end, I wrote on the subject of Serbia's national interests and
foreign policy objectives in the Belgrade daily Politika (25 Feb 2003).
About Kosovo I said something like the following:
While it is clear that Belgrade's future relationship with Pristina will
be unlike anything in the last 90 years (for moral, political and economic
reasons), Serbia retains two vital interests in that entity: the promotion
of the full rights of the population loyal to the state (i.e. Kosovo's
Serbs) and the maintenance of sovereignty over Serbian ecclesiastical and
cultural patrimony. The furtherance of these interests requires Serbia to
realize that UNMIK is an ally, not an adversary, because there is a
congruence of viewpoints.
Specifically, the doctrine of "standards before status" is of great
advantage to the Serbian position, since it insists on the return of
Kosovo's Serbs, on the establishment of the rule of law and on the
necessity of dialogue with Belgrade, among other things.
Serbs must embrace the standards and reign-in those among them who fear
participating in Kosovo's interim institutions. Finally, in support of the
continuation of sovereignty over Serbia's patrimonial heritage, the
Serbian Orthodox Church should consider returning its patriarchal seat to
Pec. When the time for final status negotiations comes, Serbia will have
put itself in the best possible bargaining position.
Today, in Washington, New York, and Brussels, we have begun to see a turn
away from the view that all have legitimate security and political
interests in the Balkans save for Serbia. Southeastern Europe's
metropolitan power is back, and things look good for the region as a
whole. As an old teacher of mine in college used to say about how too many
local Balkan politicians make choices, "the train is leaving the station.
You either get on the train or you blow up the train." And I think we can
all agree: the era of uncompromise and violence is over. Europe beckons,
and America encourages. Otherwise, there is a real prospect of being left
behind by the future because we are unable to conquer our past.
Thank you for your attention.
Damjan de Krnjevic-Miskovic, Senior Fellow at the
Institute on Religion and Public Policy, is Assistant Managing Editor at
The National Interest, a leading foreign policy magazine. Formerly a
columnist for the Russian daily Izvestia and a professor of political
science at Assumption College, his academic training has combined
political science, history, and philosophy. As a policy analyst, his area
of expertise includes South-Eastern European politics, American foreign
policy and U.S.-European relations. His essays have appeared in the
Journal of Democracy, National Review, the Weekly Standard, the Review of
Metaphysics and the Journal of Ecumenical Studies, among others, the
French journal Commentaire, and all the major Belgrade papers, including
Politika and Danas. He is at work on a book length study of Bush's
rhetoric of freedom and another entitled The Recovery of Being,
Philosophy, and Ordinary Experience. He serves on the International
Relations Committee of G17PLUS, a Serbian political party.
TOP
ERP KIM
Info-Service is the official Information Service of the Serbian Orthodox
Diocese of Raska and Prizren and works with the blessing of His Grace
Bishop Artemije.
Our Information Service is distributing news on Kosovo related issues. The
main focus of the Info-Service is the life of the Serbian Orthodox Church
and the Serbian community in the Province of Kosovo and Metohija. ERP KIM
Info Service works in cooperation with
www.serbian-translation.com as well as the
Kosovo
Daily News (KDN) News List
Disclaimer:
The views expressed by the authors of newspaper articles or other texts
which are not official communiqués or news reports by the Diocese are
their own and do not necessarily represent the views of the Serbian
Orthodox Church
Our Newsletters are
available on our ERP KIM Info-service Web-Page:
/erpkiminfo.html
Additional
information on our Diocese and the life of the Kosovo Serb Community may
be found at:
Copyright 2003, ERP KIM Info-Service
|
