With Barack Obama finally wrapping up the presidential nomination for the Democrats, pundits and experts alike are rushing to proclaim who might get the nod for Vice-President.  A good vice-presidential pick, according to Chris Bowers from openleft.com, should “reinforce[ ] his strengths, not one who balances out his perceived weakness.”

With that in mind, the first name that obviously emerges as the top VP pick is none other than Hillary Clinton.  I don’t know whether this is just a knee-jerk reaction because she was so close to picking up the nomination herself, or the fact that Obama and Clinton monopolized the political landscape for the last several months so that no one can think of anyone other than Clinton. 

Either way, the lack of any creative thought is a sad reality for the Democrats and for Barack Obama.  But once the ”Go Hillary Go” dust settles, many viable Vice Presidential candidates will remain.  This is not to say that Hillary Clinton is not a good Vice Presidential pick (she certainly is but don’t ask me why).  Rather, the democrats have to realize that there are viable and meritorious Vice Presidential candidates out there who can galvanize the electoral base and support Barack Obama other than just Hillary Clinton.  To that end, here is my list of the top-five running mates for Barack Obama.  I have analyzed several data sources, spoken with numerous people, and consulted various indices both in the U.S. and abroad.

1)  Zohan:  Zohan, a former Isreali assassin and now a hairdresser, is just the kind of “action-man” Obama needs to support the rhetoric in his speeches. After all, Obama is really good with words and rousing arenas with awesome one-liners, but no one knows whether he can actually do what he says he is going to do.  With Zohan by his side, voters really won’t care.  Zohan can fill in the Obama ”action” gap with his quick wit and proven record of hits.  Zohan will also erase any doubt that Barack is not a friend of Isreal.  Finally, Zohan’s profession as a hairdresser is just the kind of dichotomy the democrats need.  The assassin part will sway blue dog democrats and libertarians to vote for an Obama/Zohan ticket, and the hairdresser part will sway those democrats who want to vote for Ralph Nader.

2) Ronald McDonald:  What Obama lacks in age and experience, Ronald McDonald can make up for it with his ageless, international charm. We cannot overlook the fact that Ronald McDonald is fluent in approximately 31 languages, which will dampen any criticisms that Obama lacks foreign policy experience.  Further, McDonald has corporate connections as the CHO (Chief Happiness Officer) for the megacorporation, McDonalds.  This will certainly allay any fears that Obama is a ”corporate hater” or “business hater” or “socialist.”  Ronald McDonald’s corporate upbringing, coupled with his generosity, compassion, and color coordination, will help tip on-the-fence republicans and conservative democrats towards an Obama/Mcdonald ticket.

3) Sir Alexander Ferguson: Sir Alexander Ferguson’s record as the greatest football coach in English Football — and perhaps the greatest football coach in the world – is just the kind of “aged star quality” that Obama needs to counteract his own “young star quality.”  Sir Ferguson has solid, no-nonsense managerial experience running such teams as top ranked Manchester United.  Of course, if Sir Ferguson can manage his football teams so well, then imagine what he could do with a country?  Who else had the foresight and shrewdness to sign Cristiano Ronaldo when he was 19 years old?  That’s exactly the kind of message that an Obama/Ferguson ticket will have.  Ferguson has a proven track record of making the right choices during difficult times and when it mattered the most.  This is something that Obama hasn’t shown.  But by having Ferguson on his ticket, voters will forget that Obama has no track record.

4) Min Behadur Sherchan:  At 77 years old, Sherchan is the oldest person on record to climb the formidable Mt. Everest. John McCain may be 71 years young, but can McCain climb Mt. Everest?  I don’t think so.  And that’s exactly the kind of weakness that Obama needs to ruthlessly exploit by having Sherchan on his ticket.  With such a monumentous achievement as climbing Mt. Everest, it truly doesn’t matter what else Sherchan has done or what he believes in or what his economic policies are or even what his views are on the Iraq War.  It all doesn’t matter.  Sherchan can rest on his laurels.  What is there left to do after climbing Mt. Everest?  Nothing, except to run for Vice President with Barack Obama.

5) Chewbacca:  As a towering Wookie, Chewbacca has exactly the kind of presence that Obama so desperately needs to win the general election.  He has the physical stature to deflect any claims against Obama of being weak on terror or on crime or on unions – issues that usually kill the democrats in a general election.  Chewbacca is a certifiable badass. He also has the international stature to deflect any claims against Obama as lacking foreign policy experience.  It goes without saying that Chewbacca has experience in other universes, a fact that even McCain cannot dispute, as well as language skill.  Chewbacca is also a certifiable wingman and will be a loyal vice president.  Voters will know that he has no aims to be the president or some ulterior motive to control the president, as many know Hillary will want to do if she gets the VP nod.  Finally, Chewbacca can only help Obama with his rhetorical jibberjab to confuse and bewilder voters into voting for an Obama/Chewbacca ticket.  As we all know, the famed “Chewbacca defense” was no accident, and it something that Obama has mastered.  Why not have the person-practice that Obama mastered on his very own ticket?

In the end, the choice of VP will be an important decision for Obama.  Only time will tell if Obama has made the right pick.

In Kosovo’s attempt to become more “European,” one thing, apart from obvious statehood, has held Kosovo back:  airline flights.  Airline flights?  If you want to go to Kosovo, you’re only bet other than a NATO flight, is to catch a connecting flight to Pristina from Vienna on Austrian Airlines or Budapest on Malev Airlines.  And, if you want to leave Kosovo to visit other parts of Europe or the United States, you have to do the same thing:  catch a connecting flight from either Vienna or Budapest.

To be sure, there is a wider selection of choices at Skopje Airport . . . but that’s in Macedonia.  Unless you have a free ride, you’re out on at least a 120 Euro taxi ride, not to mention anywhere from 10 minutes to two hours at the Macedonian border.  There’s also cheap and convenient flights from Belgrade . . . but the visa situation for a Kosovo traveler is extremely difficult (a traveler cannot come into Serbia directly from Kosovo without a prior “entry stamp”).  There’s also special charter flights to Germany and Switzerland run by Kosovo Airlines, but they run only once a week.  There is one true bright spot:  a quick flight to Istanbul, which has direct flights to many other places, for a roundtrip which will sink you back no more than 185 Euros.

For Kosovo to become more integrated with the rest of the world, people not only need an easier way to come to Kosovo, but also an easier way to get out of Kosovo.  Although many people can’t point to Kosovo on a map to save their lives, Kosovo is in a highly accessible place by way of the crow.  It’s a stones throw to Bulgaria, a coffee spill to Greece, a whisper to Albania or Montenegro, and a football pass to Italy.  But to get to these places by plane is either ridiculously expensive or ridiculously inconvenient.   Often times, a traveler from Pristina will have to travel to Central Europe before he or she can reach a major capital in the Balkans.

Cheaper and more varied travel options need to be provided, particularly for flights within the Balkans.  You have to take a 10 hour plus bus to get to Budva or Sofia.  A 15 hour bus ride to get to Sarajevo.  Imagine if there were more travel options than slaving in the chicken buses. 

Croatia Airlines has joined the bandwagon.  It will have flights three times a week from Zagreb to Pristina, starting June 16.  I checked the website and a roundtrip flight will cost you about 4200 Croatian Kuna, which is about 575 Euros.  True, this is ridiculously expensive but at least the airlines are coming in with flights.  That’s the first step.  Get the planes in.  Hopefully the next step will be lower prices.

Pristina Airport is ready for more traffic.  True, they need an air traffic control system to support the new renovations at their airport.  But they’re ready.

It would also be beneficial if the former Yugoslavia had a more integrated train system.  This may be difficult given the amount of mountain passes.  But as many of the countries in the Former Yugoslavia seek membership in the EU, a revamped train system could do  wonders in helping the economy, cleaning up the environment, and opening up the doors to visitors who have never experienced the Balkans.

Famed actress Tatum O’Neal was busted Sunday night for purchasing a couple bags of cocaine in the Lower East Side.  O’Neal was nabbed in what narcotics police call an “observation sale.”  In an “observation sale” operation, as opposed to a “buy and bust” operation, police do not use undercover police officers to purchase drugs but instead, observe drug sales taking place on the street between a seller and a buyer.  And for those who live in a cave, drug sales take place in open view, on the street, at all times of the day.  

The fact that O’Neal was caught buying drugs on the street is rather interesting for a celebrity like her.  Most celebrities have a “connect,” which means that a celebrity will generally purchase drugs inside in the comfort of their apartment or a friend’s apartment, not on the street, in open view of narcotics police.  Purchasing drugs on the street in the quantities that O’Neal purchased (likely two dime or two twenty bags), puts her in the same boat as the “usual” addicts that run through Manhattan’s criminal court on 100 Centre Street.  There is a certain level of desperation to a street purchase.  Given O’Neal’s history with drugs and the circumstances surrounding this arrest, highly suggests that O’Neal has a narcotics addiction.

She was charged with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Seventh Degree.  This is a misdemeanor in New York, punishable by up to one year.  Of course, it is the rare defendant who actually is sentenced to this.  This will generally happen if a defendant goes to trial on a felony and is convicted of a lesser-included misdemeanor offense.  However, most defendants who are charged with CPCS 7 are either sentenced to community service or a very short jail period — depending on their criminal history.

But herein lies the problem with New York’s drug treatment programs.  When a defendant is charged with a felony, such as Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth Degree (500 milligrams or more of pure cocaine) or Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree (any amount of narcotics), a defendant is offered a much larger menu of comprehensive drug treatment.  The issue is that most of the hardcore addicts are not charged with felonies, because they do not have the resources to either sell drugs or buy enough drugs to get them up to a felony.  Thus, if you walk into a Manhattan Criminal Court Arraignment, the worst looking cocaine or heroin addicts — the street buyers – are charged with the misdemeanor of simple possession.

What happens when a defendant is charged with a misdemeanor?  Either the defendant is given a slap on the wrist or the drug treatment offered is not comprehensive enough.  The resources are saved for defendants charged with felonies.  On paper and in politics, this makes a lot of sense.  But in practice, there are definite inequities that only perpetuate drug addiction. 

The defendants with some of the biggest drug problems (imagine someone like Bubbles from The Wire) are not given the opportunity for real life-changing and comprehensive drug treatment, because they are given the fortune of a misdemeanor charge.

But is society really doing anyone a favor?  I am not saying that defendants charged with misdemeanors should be charged with felonies.  What I am saying is that the opportunities for drug treatment that defendants charged with felonies receive should be given to those defendants charged with misdemeanors. 

Felony defendants are given the opportunity for long-term residential drug treatment — the kind of drug treatment that can work.  These defendants take part in multi-step programs, from removing the narcotics addition to living independently.  Some of these defendants are in these programs for five plus years. 

But when you are charged with a misdemeanor, you’ll be lucky if you can get a spot in a residential drug treatment program.  You’ll likely get assigned a once a week outpatient program.  Is it any wonder that many of these defendants do not succeed?

Although you will read that Tatum O’Neal will likely receive a drug treatment program, it will not do much for fixing her problem.  Of course, a person with an addiction has to want to improve.  There is no question that a level of individual will is involved.  But a person with an addiction must be given the opportunities to make that choice, in a supportive environment.  Drug treatment programs for those charged with felonies attempt to equip people with the wherewithal to make that choice.  The same cannot be said for those charged with misdemeanors.  

O’Neal’s best bet will not be through the state but through private, long-term residential drug treatment.  Tatum O’Neal has the resources to fix her life. 

But the same cannot be said for the majority of drug addicts, who will cycle through the criminal justice system — untreated — just below the “felony radar.”

New York Governor David Paterson yesterday ordered state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages solemnized in other jurisdictions, such as in California.  The governer’s decision was based on New York’s long standing “marriage recognition rule.”  What is the “marriage recognition rule”?  For over one hundred years, New York has recognized marriages solemnized outside of New York unless they fall into two categories of exceptions:

1) marriage, the recognition of which is prohibited by the “positive law” of New York and 2) marriages involving incest or polygamy, both of which fall within the prohibitions of “natural law”.  (See Martinez v. County of Monroe, et. al., Appellate Division, Fourth Department, Slip Decision 1562 CA 06-02591).

Put another way, if a marriage is valid in the place where it was entered, “it is to be recognized as such in [New York] courts, unless contrary to the prohibitions of natural law or the express prohibitions of a statute.”  See Moore v. Hegeman, 92 NY 521, 524.

Under the “marriage recognition rule” and the law set forth under the Appellate Division (New York’s intermediate appellate court), Governor Paterson issued the administrative order to recognize same-sex marriages solemnized in other jurisdictions.  By doing so, Governor Paterson in effect made the determination that a) gay marriages in other states were not contrary to “natural law” and b) gay marriages were not “expressly” prohibited by New York statute.

New York State Senate Majority Leader, Joseph Bruno, plans to challenge the Governor’s decision on the grounds that Governor Paterson violated the state constitution’s separation of power’s clause.  It’s an interesting planned move by Joe Bruno.  

Joseph Bruno is referring to is a set of New York Court of Appeals decisions, Hernandez v. Robles, Samuels v. New York State Department of Health, In Re Elissa Kane v. Marsolais, Seymour v. Holcomb.  The main question in these sets of cases was whether New York’s Domestic Relations law – long interpreted to allow only opposite-sex couples to marry – violated the state’s constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process.  In a 4-2 decision, New York Court of Appeals (New York’s highest court) determined that its constitution did not require the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  The plurality decision determined that same-sex marriage was not a “fundamental right” requiring strict scrutiny, but rather the more relaxed rational basis test.  Using the rational basis or rational relation test, it was not surprising that the plurality court did not strike down the Domestic Relations law (courts rarely strike down a law if no fundamental right is involved). 

Although the New York decision was not a favorable one to the movement for same-sex marriages, the decision was not as sweeping as State Senator Joseph Bruno or others want it to be.  After all, the decision dealt with the narrow issue of whether the NY constitution mandated the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  The New York decision did not deal with the more general concept of whether same-sex marriages violated natural law, statutory law, or any other legal concept, such as due process or equal protection.

To be sure, one may argue that the New York decision expressly upheld the Domestic Relations law as one solemnizing a marriage only between a man and a woman.  Therefore, one may argue, the decision held — by logical extension — that a marriage between the same sex violates that law.

The court, however, never expressly stated as such.  The reasoning it used to support its ruling — that the constitution does not mandate the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples — was primarily dicta.  Dicta is only instructive, not binding, on other courts.  Thus, the argument that the “logical extension” of the decision was to preclude marriage between the same sex, is not supported by the language of the court ruling itself.

Sure, it is a hyper-technical argument, but most legal arguments are hyper-technical by their very nature.  Of course, it will be for a court to determine expressly whether Governor Paterson’s administrative decision violates the Domestic Relations Law.

Until that time, New York will recognize same-sex marriages solemnized in other states.  Governor Paterson’s move was a shrewd one and shows without a shadow of a doubt that he learned a thing or two in over his twenty years in Albany. 

All eyes were on Moscow last night for the much anticipated Champions League final between Manchester United and Chelsea.  The game’s drama — from Ronaldo’s header to Drogba’s red card to Terry’s major choke job – did not disappoint fans looking for some excitement.  The quality of the game, though, was an entirely different story.  As a whole, it was subpar at best.  Perhaps it was the pitch, the jitters, or the rain, or maybe it was the atmosphere of playing in a different country.  In the end, though, the penalty shootout made most of us forget how “unbeautifully played” the prior 120 minutes were.

Sure, there were moments of glory on both sides, but none of this was sustained.  How many long balls did you see kicked that went nowhere?  How many times did you see either team string more than six passes together (not including those on their side of the half)?  How many crosses did you see that were even close to connecting?  How many shots did you see that were actually on goal (Ballack was aiming at a goal somewhere in the upper deck of the stadium)?

Now don’t get me wrong.  I am a big fan of English football.  I am also a big fan of Liverpool (so, yes, I still believe Liverpool should have been in the final and could have beat Manchester United in regular time).  And that’s why I’m writing this post here:  I don’t think the game last night was representative of the beauty of English football, and particularly what either Chelsea or Manchester United are capable of.  It seemed more like a kickball match with occasional moments of individual glory — from Ronaldo to Lampard.  The only thing that truly saved this game from mediocrity was the penalty shootout.  The shootout hoodwinked us to thinking how amazing the game it was.

To be sure, it was amazing in terms of overall excitement, much like watching a dog brawl.  But was it amazing in terms of high quality soccer?  I don’t think so.

In the end, I do feel bad for Chelsea.  To me, if Chelsea can get past the first half without losing too much, they always have a shot to win.  Chelsea is a second-half team.  And as anyone could see last night, Edwin Van Der Sar seemed mighty weak and tentative last night.  I think Ballack could see that and he kept shooting.  It was the right thing to do except that Ballack was missing awfully.  If Chelsea had a few more shots on goal, then the seemingly flat-footed Van Der Sar would have some serious problems stopping them.  Who knows what would have happened then.  Did you see Essien’s left-footed shot to the right corner?  Van Der Sar was studying rocks when the shot was taken.

Manchester United had their opportunities in the first half for at least two extra goals, but they couldn’t convert.  Chelsea made MU pay for their failure, when Lampard was in the right place at the right time.  Lampard was certainly fortunate but he wasn’t lucky.  Great players like Lampard are in the right place at the right time for a reason.

The second-half was dominated by Chelsea, even though Drogba was pretty much useless.  Chelsea controlled the ball and for the most part sidelined Ronaldo from doing much of anything.  Although Chelsea had their opportunities, Manchester United was not truly pressed by Chelesea’s offense.  Kalou should have been put in much earlier.  His quickness was too much for Manchester United, but he wasn’t in long enough to really sustain a solid string of attacks.  Of course, too, Terry, the master defender, had his head in the right place at the right time to stop Giggs from attaining glory in the last few minutes.

Then came the shootouts.  It’s more mental task than one of skill at that point and especially for these professionals.  No one wants to be the one to miss and that fact will always weigh heavy on a player’s mind — to some, much more.  Ronaldo, not surprisingly, missed his shot in a stupid attempt at a start/stop.  What’s his deal?  I think Ronaldo is to penalty shots as Shaq is to free throws.  It’s a big mental wall for him, which is a little hard to explain for such a great player.  To be fair to Cech, he seemed to be in the right place at the right time, for most of the initial shots.  Unlike Van Der Sar’s performance, Cech seemed like he was capable of stopping any of the shots.  With Van Der Sar, you just hoped that a player missed or shot it directly at him.

And then came John Terry.  It only seemed right that the final goal should come down to him.  This is what soccer dreams are made of:  to shoot the final goal to win the whole enchilada.  It’s like bases loaded, 2 outs, bottom of the 9th.  But Terry didn’t hit a homerun.  He didn’t hit much of anything, in fact.  Sure, he slipped on the pitch. 

Blame it on the rain.  Blame it on the Russians.  Blame it on the rising prise of crude oil.  Frankly, though, he choked.  Terry choked.  There is no getting around it.  He is the heart and soul of that Chelsea team and when he slipped and missed, all knew that was the end for Chelsea.  Sure, he didn’t lose the game for Chelsea, but he surely didn’t win it for them either.

It would only be a matter of time before an unlucky Chelsea player missed — Anelka – in what ended up being a good guess stop by Van Der Sar.  This was no testament at all to Van Der Sar’s prior attempts at stopping the other Chelsea players, such as Lampard, who had pretty much kicked a fastball a few feet to Van Der Sar’s left. 

In the end, whoever won the game last night would be a testament to their luck as opposed to being the better team.  At least for this go round, Manchester United was the luckier.

From 1999 until now, a slew of articles and pundits have addressed everything that  is wrong with Kosovo’s justice system, such as its lack of transparency or lack of independence.  Many of these articles, particularly those from Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch, make some very important observations about Kosovo’s judicial system.  You can find these reports online by simply visiting their respective websites.

I don’t intend to repeat here word for word what already has been said about Kosovo’s justice system or provide a laundry list of complaints.  I will just focus on two issues that can go a long way to improving an emerging system.  There are other issues, but for the sake of this post, I will rely on two.

Now, don’t get me wrong.  Kosovo’s justice system has made improvements, but much is left to be desired.  Of course, no justice system is perfect and we shouldn’t judge Kosovo by that standard.  But for a new emerging state, the choices leaders and internationals make now in Kosovo (and dealing with decisions that should not have been made before), are critical to the question of whether Kosovo’s judicial system will be an independent, fair, and an effective institution.

1) Mentoring:  Too Little, Too Late:  UNMIK Regulation 2000/64 provided International Prosecutors with the power to remove cases from local prosecutors and judges.  The basis for this regulation stemmed from the failure of local prosecutors and judges to handle certain cases with either the impartiality or competence required.  Local prosecutors and judges demonstrated a complete failure to apply the rule of law and, instead, placed ethnic nationalism over that.  For instance, a Serbian who threw a rock at a passing car driven by an Albanian would be charged with attempted murder.  In other cases, an Albanian perpetrator who committed murder or some other serious crime would not be prosecuted past the “investigation” stage.  International Prosecutors soon were handling the most serious of Kosovo’s cases, i.e. war crimes, and inter-ethnic cases, either between victim and perpetrator, or perpetrator/victim and prosecutor (i.e., Serbian defendant; Albanian prosecutor). 

While this was a unique opportunity to establish the Rule of Law — and, in fact, was the first time such a model in which an international prosecutor could remove a case from the local judiciary existed – it did nothing to empower the “local” judicial institution.  International prosecutors and judges were dealing with the most serious and complex of cases while local prosecutors were left with the “easier” stuff.  It quickly created a dependency by the “local” judicial institution.  You have too much work in your case?  Well, it must be too complex.  Hey, give it to the International Prosecutors to handle.  

This bifurcated system created no incentive by local prosecutors or judges to “own” their cases.  Further, there was no communication between the “local” and “international” system.  One generally didn’t know what the other was doing.  So, while on paper, the Rule of Law was being improved because there were War Crime or Inter-ethnic investigations and indictments and trials, the “locals” were being left behind.  The “international” system was arguably improving, but the ”local” system?  Far from it.

Only in 2007, six years after the creation of International Prosecutors and Judges, did the Internationals decide it was time to start a mentoring program, under the guise of the Kosovo Special Prosecutor’s Office.  These Special Prosecutors were supposed to be the best of the best of Kosovo’s local prosecutors.  KSPO prosecutors were going to be mentored by International Prosecutors.  In theory, despite the late implementation of such a program, it’s a good idea. 

Mentoring helps because it integrates the ”international” and “local” system and provides education for local prosecutors on how to better handle certain types of cases.  In practice, it’s not enough.  The KSPO consists of about 7 - 10 special prosecutors.  They are all based in Pristina.  What about the other regions?  What about the other prosecutors in the other five regions, including t he local prosecutors in Pristina?  How were they improving?  How were they integrating into the UN goals of improving the Rule of Law?

To be sure, US Aid, US DOJ and other organizations ran lectures and trainings for local prosecutors and judges.  But, frankly, that should have been the UN’s job.  It was the UN’s priority to establish the Rule of Law, not simply on paper, but to empower those who have most ownership in Kosovo — the local prosecutors and judges — to carry on with those ideals once the internationals left the scene.  Organizations such as US AID can only hope to supplement skills and education that local prosecutors and judges should have been learning from day one.  Instead, these organizations, rather than the UN, are providing the substantive work.  UNMIK’s DOJ has its priorities mixed up and is been sitting on its hands for too long.

Hopefully, the new EULEX mission will change all that.  There will be more of a mentoring/monitoring role of international prosecutors and judges.  International prosecutors and judges will not all be in Pristina but in all the regions.  It’s a shame that the mentoring/monitoring idea has only started to come into fruition now.  This doesn’t make much sense, as the police utilized the mentoring/monitoring model almost from day one.  Kosovo’s Police Service is in a much better position to run things independently than local prosecutors or judges.  In fact, KPS has taken over some enforcement responsibilities completely from UNMIK’s International Police.   

2)  Before Independence, There Must Be Competence:  The big mantra by any group or pundit or politician, like Thaci, is, “Kosovo’s Judiciary Must Be Independent!”  This is hard to argue with.  An effective judicial system does require independence.  Independence from political pressure.  Independence from corruption.  Independence between prosecutors and judges.  The list goes on. 

But one thing that isn’t discussed too often is independence from incompetence.  Before a judicial system can be truly independent, you must first have competent prosecutors and judges.

More focus and resources must be placed not simply on fixing the structure of Kosovo’s current judicial system, but improving Kosovo’s legal education model.  The majority of local judges and prosecutors of today are trained under the old communist Yugoslav model.  There is nothing wrong with this model but its a different world.  What worked then really won’t work now. 

If you want to get a taste of the competence of local prosecutors and judges, step into any courtroom in Kosovo.  You will see lawyers who have no idea how to either make a legal argument or to ask questions to a witness.  Sure, training can help improve the legal acumen and trial skills of local prosecutors and judges, but the real foundation must start with proper legal education.  Training works best when there is a foundation to start with.  For many prosecutors and judges, you might as well be speaking Greek to them when you start talking about the most basic of legal concepts.  This must change and those leaders in Kosovo’s goverment should start making education more of a priority rather than passing the buck to international organizations.

* * *

In the end, much work is left to improve Kosovo’s judicial system.  But these two reforms are probably the easiest and quickest way to get Kosovo on the road  to an effective and independent judicial institution.

The ”big” news yesterday was President George W. Bush authorized a supply of weapons to Kosovo.  Almost like clockwork, Serbianna.com and others began characterizing the U.S. supply of weapons to Kosovo as either a) a provactive escalation of a proxy arms race between the U.S. and Russia, leading to ”one-upmanship” which leads to Cold War, b) an arming of jihadist terrorists making up the “narco-state” of Kosovo, a country which is the root of all drug trafficking, organized crime, and human trafficking on the planet, bent on destroying everything Christian and Jewish or c) a combination of both.  As with most things, I think we have to look past the headlines and the knee-jerk reaction conclusion and to assess the facts as they truly exist.

You may be wondering why I used quotes for “Kosovo” in the headline.  Well, if you just read the headlines, one may think that the weapons are going to the Kosovo government or the Kosovo military (or, if you Serbianna is on your “favorites” list, then to jihadist terrorists/criminals).  But there is no Kosovo military.  Of course, there is KFOR, which is a multi-national military force that protects Kosovo under the NATO Umbrella.  KFOR has the sole responsibility for the protection of Kosovo. 

To be sure, as some may point out, there is a 5000 strong Kosovo Protection Corps (TMK).  What do they do?  They do what most protection corps do in other parts of the world:  provide disaster response, humanitarian assistance, etc.  More importantly, what do they not do?  They have absolutely no authorized role, under either UN Security Council Resolution 1244 or the Ahtisaari Plan, in either Kosovo’s defense, law enforcement, riot control, internal security or any other law and order task.  Kosovo will have, under the Ahtisaari Plan, a lightly-armed NATO supervised/controlled security force.  And, finally, under UN SCR 1244 and Ahtisaari Plan, there is the Kosovo Police Service, which is about a 7,000 member strong police force, which critically is subordinate to the UNMIK Police.  

Under the circumstances, while it appears that the weapons are going to “Kosovo,” they are really going to the international forces which ultimately have supreme control and power over Kosovo despite its declaration of independence on February 17, 2008.  In two words, this legal mumbo jumbo is called: ”supervised independence”.  So, when you read Serbianna, please do not get the mistaken impression that nuclear weapons or stinger missiles are going to be handed out free to anyone in front of the Grand Hotel in Pristina at 12:30 p.m. this Friday.

But there are several questions that we still need answers to.  For instance, how many weapons are being sent to Kosovo and what kind of weapons are being sent?  Is it just ”light weapons” like firearms or is it “heavy weapons,” such as missiles?  What measures are in place to ensure that the weapons do not get in the wrong hands?  Regardless of the answer, it would be interesting to see which defense firm or firms are getting this “Kosovo” contract — either because the defense firms could disperse these weapons at a loss and thus receive major tax benefits or disperse the weapons at an overinflated price to either conceal total losses or rake in major profit.  Indeed, that is a different inquiry altogether. 

Further, one must ask why President George W. Bush remained rather opaque in his statement about the weapons delivery.  Sure, his advisers or the State Department will likely cite security concerns, but the President could have certainly said a little more than: “I hereby find that the furnishing of defense articles and defense services to Kosovo will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace.”  What the hell kind of statement is that?  It sounds like a draft of a washing machine contract or a manifesto for the imaginary Country Island of Galacktigar that President Bush was too lazy to transform into a readable speech.  Perhaps he spent so much time on his “War Speech” yesterday that he forgot about this one. 

President Bush left too many questions that will undoubtedly leave those like Russia and Serbia vexed.  Of course, regardless of whether these two countries will always be vexed at the hip by U.S. policy, President Bush could have added more facts or assurances (hah, yes, these are different) about the nature of the weapons, who they were going to, and that the U.S. was not intending to start a proxy arms race.  But by leaving these issues completely unaddressed, countries like Russia and Serbia are certainly justified to think the worst.

As history has taught us, Cold Wars can start on faulty assumptions and quickly cascade into an arms race.  The idiot from NSA who probably drafted President Bush’s “speech,” should spend a little more time crafting better words for the President instead of trying to find justifications for the Iraq War.

With the recent announcement by Japan and Canada recognizing Kosovo’s independence, coupled with a list of countries which are expected to recognize Kosovo’s independence in the very near future, such as Bulgaria, Hungary, Czech Republic, Norway, Lithuania and Pakistan, Serbian Ambassadors should certainly start feeling a bit uncomfortable about their job security.  As most know, being appointed an ambassador by your government is a fairly plush job.  You attend dinners.  You have guests.  You hold meetings.  You give speeches here and there.  You write Letters to the Editor.  You get to be somewhere other than your home country.  And you get paid pretty well.  That’s why those who are appointed ambassadors generally are very well-connected to their home country’s government.  Indeed, an ambassadorship is often a prized job.

But as the list of countries recognizing Kosovo’s independence grows — particularly the ones that most would like to visit on a holiday — so has the unemployment line for Serbian ambassadors.  For every country that recognizes Kosovo’s independence, the Serbian government recalls their ambassador back to Serbia.

Ouch.  Hate to break it to the remaining Serbian ambassadors . . . but the list of countries recognizing Kosovo’s independence is growing not shrinking.  So, to the remaining ambassadors out there, if you haven’t done your “tour” of the country yet or tried the local cuisine, you better do so quickly.  Because once a country recognizes Kosovo’s independence, Serbia usually gives you no more than 48 hours to return home.  Thus, to the ambassador in Japan, I hope you had some good sushi; to the ambassador in Canada, I hope you had an opportunity to view some great hockey and to sip on some Labatts.

Here’s a list of countries that have recognized Kosovo’s independence as of March 19, 2008:

1. Costa Rica
2. United States
3. France
4. Afghanistan
5. Albania
6. Turkey
7. United Kingdom
8. Australia
9. Senegal
10. Malaysia
11. Germany
12. Latvia
13. Denmark
14. Estonia
15. Italy
16. Luxembourg
17. Peru
18. Belgium
19. Poland
20. Switzerland
21. Austria
22. Ireland
23. Sweden
24. Netherlands
25. Iceland
26. Slovenia
27. Finland
28. Japan
29. Canada

Principal Deputy Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General in Kosovo, Larry Rossin, is a mentiroso.  Let me show you how. In a recent press conference, PDSRSG Larry Rossin stated:

I personally spoke to Minister Samardzic on Friday evening to . .  .underscore that while we hoped and wanted to resolve this situation peacefully and without any resort to force and through persuasion, that we were disinclined to permit this occupation to continue indefinitely or for very long . . .I know that there has been some statements to the effect that somehow there was an implicit or explicit agreement that we would not move until he visited. That was not the case. I made it clear that we would move at a time of our own choosing . . .I further made it clear to him when I spoke to him yesterday morning, while events were going on in Mitrovica, that we had not had such an arrangement and in fact he agreed with me in our private telephone conversation, that there had been no such agreement.

Okay, it seems pretty clear from Mr. Rossin’s statement that there was no “private” agreement whatsoever regarding when the police would move in to remove the protesters inside the Mitrovica courthouse.  But was there any “private” agreement dealing with the protesters that were arrested?  That question apparently was not asked to Mr. Rossin and therefore not answered by him. 

Larry Rossin went on to say the following:

That being the case and after planning and consultation with COMKFOR and with the Police Commissioner, I authorized the operation that took place early Monday morning to reassert our control of the courthouse and to re-establish legality and law and order in North Mitrovica at the courthouse.

Okay, Mr. Rossin “authorized” the operation. Without commenting at length on how a PDSRSG becomes the person in charge of “authorizing” a police action, it is clear that at least in Mr. Rossin’s mind, he believes to be in charge.  Fine, give Napolean his due. 

Here is where it gets interesting.  Here is where most newspapers are going to get it wrong.  And here is where lying by omission becomes tangible.  Larry Rossin then quickly said the following:

According to the established Kosovo law, thirty-two of the court occupiers were temporarily detained, processed, and then released back to north Mitrovica. Criminal investigations into all these illegal acts, including murder and attempted murder, perpetrated on UNMIK and on KFOR soldiers are ongoing and we firmly intend to bring those responsible for these crimes to justice.

It’s interesting that all the questions by the press dealt either with the “agreement” Larry Rossin had with Minister Samardzic or what the UN plans on doing in Mitrovica. The real issue here deals with Rossin’s statement about “thirty-two of the court occupiers” who were “temporarily detained, processed, and then released back to north Mitrovica.” Mr. Rossin smoothly talked past this subject with the same ease as Bill Clinton.  Suprisingly or perhaps not surprisingly, no one picked up on it.

Doesn’t anyone find it the least bit interesting that thirty-two protesters were only “temporarily detained” after they were apparently “arrested.” As I mentioned in an earlier post, the police have no more than 72 hours to detain an individual who has been arrested. The policy reason behind the “72 hour rule” is to allow the police to gather additional evidence. 

Now, answer me this, Mr. Rossin:  what could the police truly have gathered on 32 protesters if they were only temporarily detained? Nada.  Further, how are the police going to find the thirty-two protesters in North Mitrovica to continue with their investigation?  Good luck with that. 

Essentially, these 32 protesters were released without a full and thorough investigation.  What kind of message does this send about the rule of law?  In many ways, the message is that violence works.  Shoot at police and throw grenades at police anytime anyone gets arrested.  So much for taking a stand.

The question is, why? Mr. Rossin’s version of events makes absolutely no sense. Let’s break down his statement:

1) There was no implicit or explicit agreement with the Serbian Minister;

-plus-

2) The situation of the protesters in the building was a serious one because they were there illegally and had to be removed to establish the rule of law;

-plus-

3) Rossin authorized an operation to remove the protesters;

-EQUALS-

Protesters are removed and then released later that day back to North Mitrovica.

Huh?  This doesn’t add up. Someone from Reuters should ask Larry Rossin directly about why the thirty-two protesters were only temporarily detained and not arrested. Someone should ask Larry Rossin whether he had anything to do with why the thirty-two protesters were only temporarily detained and not arrested? 

Senior Lieutenant Ihor Kinal, a UN policemen from the Ukraine, died last night from shrapnel injuries sustained yesterday from Serbian protesters.  In fact, all twenty Ukrainian officers from the Special Police Unit involved in the situation in Mitrovica are in the hospital due to injuries.  All of this started yesterday when United Nations police arrested thirty-two protesters (none of them were minors or “youths”) who were illegally occupying the courthouse in Mitrovica. 

None of these thirty-two protesters were hurt at all by police, nor anyone else for that matter inside the courthouse.  To be sure, several police came into the building armed and with protective gear.  But that was a precaution in any type of case where police are entering a building such as this and particularly when there was a grounded belief that the protesters may have weapons (due to the fact that a grenade was found last Friday in the courtyard of the courthouse after the protesters removed the gates and stormed the building). 

The protesters were arrested on the minor charge of Unlawful Occupation of Real Property, which carries a sentence of between a fine to 1 year imprisonment.  These protesters were released yesterday after questioning in Pristina.  It is unclear why they were released when the police certainly did not complete their full investigation, but I am sure there was a political component that sidelined a full and complete police investigation.  I’ll save that for a later post, but journalists should ask the Police Commissioner and the Head of the Department of Justice about who forced them to sideline their investigation.  Unfortunately, the answer is business as usual, because while those residing in the UN’s Main HQ preach volumes about judicial independence and the rule of the law, their actions are precisely contrary to that.

Anyway, as the 32 protesters were being placed into vehicles for the drive to Pristina for processing, a large group of Serbian protesters (none of them were minors or “youths” as some have reported) began throwing stones and other objects at the vehicles.  The police were able to remove the 32 protesters safely from Mitrovica, but not before several UN vehicles were destroyed or set ablaze by the Serbian protesters.  At that point, KFOR released tear gas and only tear gas. 

Angry that the 32 protesters were arrested for illegally occupying the courthouse and apparently believing that tear gas was a lethal threat to their lives, several Serbian protesters began shooting AK-47s and throwing grenades at the KFOR soldiers. The shrapnel from one of these grenades thrown by a Serbian protester caused the death of Senior Lieutenant Ihor Kinal.  Other law enforcement officials were injured severely as well due to the attacks by the Serbian protesters.

It was only after Serbian protesters began directing lethal force at KFOR did KFOR respond.  Even then, KFOR’s response was muted due to political pressures. 

For his part, and to prove to the world that he is in touch with reality, Serbia’s President Boris Tadic publicly and vehemently accused the UN and KFOR of using “excessive force.” 

WTF?!  What the hell planet is he from?  And to think he’s the “moderate” one?