IS RICHARD HOLBROOKE NOW OPENLY THREATENING RUSSIA?

Holbrooke, he of the CFR and the National Endowment for Democracy, has a piece in The Washington Post today, entitled "Russia's Test In Kosovo" at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/12/AR2007031200972.html

In it Holbrooke threatens that if Russia blocks giving Kosovo autonomy there will be another war in the Balkans.

Now Kosovo is shaping up as the biggest international test yet of Vladimir Putin. If Moscow vetoes or delays the Ahtisaari plan, the Kosovar Albanians will declare independence unilaterally. Some countries, including the United States and many Muslim states, would probably recognize them, but most of the European Union would not. A major European crisis would be assured. Bloodshed would return to the Balkans. NATO, which is pledged to keep peace in Kosovo, could find itself back in battle in Europe.

Would the Russians really benefit from all this? Certainly not. European security and stability -- and Russia's relationship with the West -- are on the line.

Is he simply advising, or threatening?

Well, to answer that we had better look at how and why Kosovo gained its "independence".

During the 1990's there was always war in the Balkans for some reason or another. Yugoslavia was being broken up in one way or another. NATO bombers played a significant part, particularly towards the end. It was all about "freedom and democracy" we were told.

Not so.

As with Iraq, it was all about oil.

There was to be a large pipeline built across the Balkans, called the Trans-Balkan Pipeline, which would carry oil from the Caspian Region to Bulgaria and into Southern Europe, making countries along the pipeline dependent on the USA. That pipeline was to be constructed by AMBO, The Albanian-Macedonia-Bulgarian Company. You may not be surprised to learn that AMBO had significant links to Halliburton, and also had all the major Anglo-American oil companies involved.

So it was imperative that Yugoslavia be broken up, and in any way possible, so that the pipeline could proceed. Milosevic either opposed the pipeline, or wanted too much as a pay-off.

Regarding Kosovo, the Anglo-Americans supported the autonomy of Kosovo and supported it in a number of ways, particularly through the Kosovo Liberation Army. Fighting with the KLA were the CIA and there one-time partners, the Mujahideen. MI6 and the SAS were involved too. It was all financed by drug money laundered through greedy, ask-no-questions European banks.

So when Holbrooke uses words like,

Bloodshed would return to the Balkans. NATO, which is pledged to keep peace in Kosovo, could find itself back in battle in Europe.

is he really so unaware of the real reason for 10 years of warfare in the Balkans?