In the discourse over the future status of Kosovo, many arguments against independence are brought up. For instance, some say Kosovo independence would violate international law because it would destroy the “territorial integrity” of Serbia. Others say a minority population shouldn’t be granted independence from a larger state. Some say that Kosovo independence is only an attempt by the international community to water down Russia’s emerging power. Others say it’s an attempt by Albanians to create a Greater Albania. And others argue that Kosovo independence will spark a “wildfire” of separatist states, leading to mass instability in the region and elsewhere in the world.
There is another argument against Kosovo independence that often times lurks beneath the surface. But once you understand this “alternative” argument, you will realize that it — above all the others I listed above in the first paragraph — constitutes the thrust of any argument against Kosovo independence.
What is the “alternative” argument? The Muslim Conspiracy argument.
It goes something like this. Kosovars are run by Muslims. And the last thing the world needs is another Muslim state. Why? According to the conspiracy, Muslims are jihadists and terrorists, and by supporting a Muslim state, we are essentially sponsoring future jihad and terrorism. Further, Muslims hate everyone else who are not Muslims and thus, Christians — such as Serbs and most of Europe — are in grave danger. And, finally, all Muslims are separatists and because of that, granting Kosovo independence will spark a wildfire of Muslim populations in Christian states to declare independence.
The Muslim conspiracy argument against Kosovo independence is a racist one that is nothing more than fear-mongering. The Muslim conspiracy argument against Kosovo independence is one that attempts to place all Muslims in the convenient little terrorist box. The Muslim conspiracy argument against Kosovo independence is one that attempts to draw a connection where one does not exist.
I could spend the rest of this post knocking down the Muslim conspiracy argument as it relates to Kosovo independence. But that is not my purpose here. Rather, the purpose of this post is to raise the question of how the Muslim conspiracy argument affects the discourse over the future status of Kosovo. Or, more particularly, what is the effect of placing the Muslim conspiracy argument beneath the surface of any discourse over Kosovo’s future status?
Perhaps it is either political correctness or the fact that the argument is so patently backwards as to make the utterer sound like a neanderthal that rarely do people call the Muslim conspiracy argument for what it is. Read some articles against Kosovo independence and you will often find it masquerading behind legal arguments, “territorial integrity” arguments, or “wildfire” of separatist nation arguments. The Muslim conspiracy argument is usually carefully hidden if you don’t know what you’re looking for, but often times you can recognize it when “Albanian terrorist” or “Muslim separatist” are peppered throughout the article.
The problem of having the Muslim conspiracy argument lurking beneath the surface is that instead of debating the biases — justifiable or not — that a person has against Muslims, the debate centers around “academic” arguments of legality or of territorial integrity or of separatism. In that regard, the debate becomes meaningless, because the real motivation against Kosovo independence to these individuals does not stem from the “academic” arguments but from the intrinsic biases they have against Muslims. In that regard, no amount of negotiations will change a thing if the Muslim bias is, in fact, the horse pulling their cart.
Let’s put down the political correctness and call it for what it is. Let’s debate the Muslim conspiracy argument. Let’s get to the root behind the arguments of many of those against Kosovo independence. Otherwise, we’re just beating around the bush. Our discourse over the future status of Kosovo has to become more transparent if it is to be successful.
Here are some examples of “beating around the bush” and a few of telling it like it is:
a) “Kosovo might not start out jihadist, but unless it is actively anti-jihadist, it may drift in that direction. It takes only a small minority committed to jihad to cause serious trouble.” Here.
b) “The separation of Kosovo from Serbia is now a way to pacify Islamic terrorism at someone else’s expense, just as the world, in Munich, in 1938, at someone else’s expense tried to pacify Nazism, warn the Czechs exiled from the ‘Sudetenland’ region after the annexation of the region in 1939 by Hitler’s Germany.” Here.
c) “Islam has no place in modern society it is not compatible with freedom and exists to oppress both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. If Kosovo is granted its wish, radical Islam will corrupt it and its people will suffer. I can make it no clearer than that.” Here.
d) “The ongoing Kosovo status culminations are inescapably related to the quest of “Great Albania” by Albanian nationalists, Islamic organizations and ambiguous international interests linked in various occasions with transnational criminal entities. The real cause of their aim is the influence across the Balkans so as to format a convenient base for their final target which is Europe.” Here.
e) “…the Kosovo situation really is: a violent demand by a Muslim minority that has seized power in this Serbian province and is issuing separatist demands while being militarily shielded by a NATO force, there to allegedly keep peace.” Here.
f) “The tragedy of western action in response to the Serbian crackdown is that the U.S. [ ] ended up rewarding the terrorists. I’ll say it again: The Clinton administration, using NATO as its tool, ended up rewarding the terrorists.” Here.
g) “Albanian terrorism, oriented toward driving out the Serbian and other non-Albanian populations from Kosovo and Metohija, has lasted for centuries.” Here.
h) “[Kosovo independence] would lead to the elimination of the remaining Christian Serb population from Kosovo, creating a mono-religious (Muslim) and mono-ethnic (Albanian) state. It would establish the principal that once a militant Muslim minority resorts to violence in a majority non-Muslim country, they are “entitled” to detach the area where they are concentrated and create a new state where they can persecute and uproot the non-Muslims. Worst of all from the standpoint of the United States, it would strengthen global jihad terrorism.” Here.