Anti-Americanism as state suicide: Kosovo, America in international anarchic system

Such a comparison in the title of this essay seems irrational, but to some extent it can be reasoned with the effort of essay, as long as it allows space in a daily newspaper, to understand position and adaptation, among other things in both countries, within the international system where they make their lives as states. This seems quite necessary especially to reflect on the current political rhetoric in Kosovo.

Recently in the unnecessary and artificial tangle created in an institutional and political context, an anti-American approach, more specified towards the white house, the US administrator, policy executive, in this case even foreign policy. While the White House represents the official position of the United States, then the positioning against the White House also means positioning against Washington's official policy. White House is the address through which the U.S. communicates with the world.

Such rhetoric, in addition to reaching a few votes, is very harmful for strategic orientation and for the very existence of the state of Kosovo. Such an approach, in turn, can be classified into two types: ideological, or political amateurs built on the basis of gullibility. The first can be more challenging and stable, requiring time and investment to change, the second being less harmful and can improve over time. Which is feeding the current anti-Americanism in Kosovo remains to be seen, but how it would be such an approach does not go to the official policy of a state, which could not be created or even survive without US support.

Social and democratic Pluralism, which the US brought to Kosovo and across the region, endures and even stimulates all sorts of ideas and attitudes, but such an attitude in official politics in Kosovo is beyond absurdity.

The state of Kosovo has been created under the circumstances and in the development of an international system, where the US as a world power supported by its allies, with moral and political responsibilities for peace and security in the world, has fulfilled its moral obligation, first to prevent the genocide of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and then trying to create opportunities for freedom and democracy even in this part of the world, supporting the democratic right of citizens to have their own state where they can enjoy freedom.

We can easily say that we are the most fortunate people in modern history, which in the dome of the international security system structure has been launched by the US, among the first democracies and the world's greatest supporter of freedom and democratisation, these values that have determined US foreign policy even in the case of Kosovo, from peaceful resistance, the KLA war, to the establishment of the state and international recognition of Kosovo.

Thus, Kosovo has gradually been given the opportunity, mainly from the US, by not denying the contribution of others, to be part of the international system, even though the process has not yet been completed and is in progress, and within this system, as each state does, to try to adapt and find itself. Kosovo's entry into this system, with state-building, and staying within this system, is institutionalised in continued maintenance of the alliance with the US. No other state, no other power ensures the existence of the state of Kosovo within the international system. Even the EU, I take on the basis of the capacities it has, or better say it does not, and different wills within it regarding Kosovo's citizenship.

To further illustrate such a relationship between Kosovo and the US, and to understand how a clear reflection of the position of the state of Kosovo in this system, on which it should be maintained continually, not just the coalition with the US, but the entire internal policy of Kosovo would have to be built.

Peace and security have consistently been targets in the international system, with international relations and policies being organised and organised. One of the primary mercanisms in meeting these objectives is considered balancing powers, risking or lack of time has produced conflicts, making peace and security without stability. In addition, with former American President Wilson's initiative, nations established the first international organisation to replace the balance mechanism of powers in achieving peace and security, which had failed to start the first world war. This organization, the League of Nations, was mandated with the responsibility of preserving world peace and security, hoping it can be a more efficient mechanism.

However, both the League of Nations and then its successor, the United Nations, failed to meet these goals, turning orientation toward the need for balance of powers. Among the main reasons for the failure of the two organisations, along with their functioning and domestic decision-making, is the constant international system, arrogant or regulated anarchy. In the international anarchic or anarchic system regulated, states such as subjects and primary acts in world politics adapt to anarchy conditions, their continued struggle for political, economic, and even legal survival. How endangered the states in this anarchic structure depend on their capacities, such as economic, military, political, power of influence, etc. In this anarchy, each state tries to find itself, and pursues its goals within its limited resources.

In the presence of UN authority and international law as well as the necessary need for peace and security, which is directly linked to the existence of states, the moral and political responsibility for peace and security falls on the great powers. They are recognised as power, by other states, due to the decisive capacities they have in achieving and preserving world peace and security. The same applies to regional powers, even though the action of these powers is in advance dependent on world powers.

In the international system during the century. 20 and present, the US has been and is one of the key and demining acts in the achievement of world peace and security. Its role in ending the first world war and establishing international mechanisms for preserving peace and security in the world is local and incompatible. Also, US intervention in World War II to defeat the axis of evil, and Nazi-fascism was crucial. Imagine the world of what it would look like if the United States did not intervene in the fight against Nazism. In addition to Europe's liberation from Nazi-fascism, the United States also freed the world from its evil axis, and opened up opportunities for democracy and freedom at a global level. Among other things, it is important to mention the democratisation of Europe, especially Germany's democratisation and denization, and the provision of security against the Soviet threat. It is exactly the US, or NATO, but NATO would not make sense without the US, which created a safe environment within which security was offered from the communist-sovjektic threat, and where Western Europe could start and succeed with the European integration project. Moreover, the Marshall Plan and the opening of US markets for European products also enabled the recovery of these economies.

Imagine what Europe would look like in the face of the communist-Soviet threat and their contribution to Naziism that cost many Eastern Europe and a number of other countries in the world, if the US decided to return to its foreign isolation policy, as happened after the first world war, and leave Stalin's hands in their traditionally extensive efforts, from the Moskovite family that lay in Moscow's district of the century. 14, spreading continuously to an actual area of about 9 million square miles.

On the other side of the world, The US monitored Japan's democratisation and deilitarisation process, trying to provide opportunities for democracy, freedom, economic development in this part of the world as well. Which happened. This oversight proved very profitable to Japan. The Yoshiida doctrine, which one of its elements had confidence in Japan's security issue in U.S.A., it was very successful. Soon Japan, in the late 1960 ' s, despite being caught up in war, managed to become the second economy in the world, thanks to privileged access to markets and American resources. Such oversight included restrictions on Japan, which resulted in fruitfulness at the end of the day. It was in Japan's interest to map out its positions in foreign policy with the United States, for example. not normalizing diplomatic relations with communist China until 1972, even though China was the leading economic partner before the war and Japan needed its resources. Today, the U.S. continues to guarantee the main security guarantee, not only for Japan, but the entire East and South East Asia region faced continuing threats from growing China.

Although today it seems as though some of the power has begun to shift to other centers, such as China, Russia, to some extent the EU, which is sometimes trying to create some kind of subjectivity in the family of the great powers, the US continues to have the primat in this system. Even all three other centres are heavily dependent on the US, China and Russia economically, while the EU is economically and secure. The need for US security goes beyond the EU in Europe. To illustrate, how things would turn out in the 98/99 in Kosovo without NATO's intervention, and NATO in large ways means the US. Who would stop ethnic cleansing and the Yugoslav Serb genocide against Kosovo Albanians. Let me talk about the possibility of creating the state of Kosovo without the United States.

Peace and security at the global level continue to remain directly dependent on the US. Imagine the Middle East today without US commitment. It could easily end up in conflicts of global proportions, in efforts by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, to export its totalitarian and authoritarian regime to all countries in the region and beyond, as part of the political objectives built by instrumentalising religion for political purposes.

Also, EU and European security in general continues to remain dependent on US support. Without a US pledge, the Ukraine issue would have been forgotten now, and Russia would have included other former Soviet republics, such as the Baltic states, increasing pressure and threat to other EU member states as well.

The world without the US angagia would be more uncertain, authoritarian and dictatorial, much less democratic.

On the basis of what was said above, we can conclude that the principle of the UN charter that it sells is equal is the most naive principle on which only naive policies can be produced, which can question the very existence of those states that expect from this principle. In the context of the archaic of the international pyramid system, according to the power of the states, the small countries like us who populate the end of the system hierarchy, the only solution is for the alliance (smugwagoing) and the reliance on the great powers to compensate for their power.

Any change in this course is a dangerous advance at the cost of existence for the state of Kosovo.

Dr. Avdi Smajljaj has completed Doctora's studies ( PhD in Political Sciences) at the Political Science Field at Duisburg-Essen University in Germany. He is a legalist of political science.