guage in Kosovo, while in the eonstitution of thernprovince it is not obHgatory?”rnAnother man asked about the ereetion of a monument to thernAlbanian Prizren League, vvhieh he eharactcrized as a faseistrnorganization that sought to tear Yugoslavia apart. He alsornasked why the program of the Albanian nationalist group,rnBalli Combetar, was being earried out in Kosovo. Othersrncondemned Serbian communists in Kosovo who “served withrnthe Albanians” in putting their personal interests ahead of thernnational interest. The complaints that Milosevic heard werernmore personal and specific than what he may have heard whilernsitting in Belgrade, but thcv certainly could not have come asrna surprise. I le must have been aware of past efforts by otherrnYugoslav- leaders to deal with the Kosovo problem.rnDuring his struggle to seize power during Wodd War II,rnthe communist leader of the guerrilla movement, JosiprnBroz I’ito, promised the Kosovo Albanians much in return forrntheir assistance. The Albanians insist that he promised themrnthe right of self-determination, including the right to bernannexed to Albania, but I’ito and his comrades denied thatrnclaim. In any case, in 1946 he made the Kosovo-Mctohijarnarea (now simply Kosovo) an autonomous province withinrnthe republic of Serbia. That autonomy was considerablyrnaugmented in 196’5, 1969, and especially in 1974. Tito andrnhis communist comrades proceeded on the assumption, erroneousrnas it turned out, that if given broad autonomy—perhapsrnmore extensiye than that granted to a minority in any otherrnI’iropean state—the Kosovo Albanians would be loyal citizensrnof Yugoslavia.rnFollowing the adoption of Yugoslavia’s 1974 constitution,rnthe Kosovo Allianians became, in effect, a law unto thcmscKes.rnIt is as if part of an American state, say New York City,rngained such power that it could ignore New York staternauthorities, wbich could not intervene to stop the eit’ fromrniolating the state’s laws and constitution or change any lawsrnaffecting the city without its consent.rnWhy, it might be asked, did the Serbs object to such powerrnfor Kosovo? For the same reason that a comparable situationrnwould not be acceptable to the state of New York. Morernprecisely, the Kosovo Albanians abused their enlarged autonomrnto force the Serbian minority to leave Kosovo. Their attemptrnat “ethnic cleansing” was initially made easier by Tito’srnexplicit order forbidding the return of Serbs who had fled thernarea during World War II to escape Albanian and Bulgarianrnpersecution. Moreover, Tito, who had promised the KosovornAlbanians mucli in the hope that they would help him seizernpower, wittingly or unwittingly encouraged large-scale immigrationrnfrom Albania as a way of changing the ethnic compositionrnof Kosovo.rnThe Kosovo Albanian persecution of Serbs included therndesecration of historic Orthodox Christian monasteries,rnchurches, and cemeteries; the burning of barns and haystacks;rnthe theft or mutilation of cattle and other livestock; the destructionrnof Serbian houses; pressure to force Serbs into sellingrntheir properties; as well as rape and other physical assaults.rnPrior to Tito’s death in 1980, there was no public mention ofrnthese actions. There were unpublieizcd protests, locally asrnwell as to high Communist Party circles, which were to nornaail. Fven the official protest to Tito by the Serbian OrthodoxrnChurch in 1969 brought only a statement declaring thatrnhe had ordered governmental authorities to apply the law.rnFollowing the demonstrations in 1981 by the Kosovo Albanians,rndemanding the status of a separate republic—which theyrnhad in all but name—and even the right to be annexed tornAlbania, the problem reached high party authorities morernthan once. And this was several years before Milosevic camernon the scene.rnFor example, the Bar Association of Serbia, in letters to thernpresidents of the Serbian and Yugoslav pariiaments on July 3,rn1985, called attention to the violation of the eonstitution andrnthe laws in Kosovo, (‘lexts of letters and replies and speechesrnreferred to herein can be found in the autobiography of VcljkornGubcrina, onetime president of the Serbian Bar Association.)rnThe letter to the president of the Serbian parliament, DusanrnCkrebic, demanded answers to nine specific questions, including;rn”Flow many families who were forced to sell theirrnproperties under duress have returned to their land?” “Whatrnhas happened to the lost court papers and was anyone heldrnresponsible?” The letter concluded with the statement thatrn”only one nullification of an agreement made under duress tornpurchase property and the return of that family to their landrnwould contribute more than all the appeals and assurancesrnconcerning the settlement of the situation in Kosovo.”rnCkrebic answered on July 29, claiming that a lot was beingrndone but admitting that it was not enough. I le added that “ofrnspecial concern was the failure to achieve constitutional principlesrnconcerning the equality of nations and nationalities”rnwhose consequences have led to Serbs leaving Kosovo, whichrnhe said was “the most difficult problem.” I Ic also said that thernactivities of Albanian irredentists and other enemies in Kosovorncannot be neutralized by governmental agencies alone. Itrnis necessary, he argued, “to create a broad front of workingrnpeople and citizens, belonging to all nations and nationalitiesrnagainst irredentist forces.”rnI’hc letter to Miodrag Trifunovic’, president of the FederalrnCouncil of the padiament of Yugoslavia, complained that seriousrncrimes were being treated as misdemeanors in Kosovo,rnthat not one sale of property under duress had been nullified,rnand that the emigration of Serbs and Montenegrins continued.rnTrifunovic’s answer on July 18 cited specific acts of parliamentrnordering governmental authorities to deal with abuses.rnI le admitted that some of these were not carried out and saidrnparliament was asking the Constitutional Court to concernrnitself with these matters. He added that parliament wouldrnlook into the execution of decisions by the Federal Councilrnconcerning the emigration of Serbs under pressure.rnOn July 6, 1985, a letter on behalf of the League of Republicrnand Province bar associations was sent to the president of thernFederal Council of the Yugoslav parliament. Letters of similarrncontent were sent to all other federal bodies. The lettersrnspoke of violations of constitutional and legal rights, specificallyrnof non-Albanian citizens, failure to nullify real estaternsales that had been made under duress, the damaging of cultural-rnhistorical monuments and cemeteries, and policies thatrnforced Serbs, Turks, Gypsies, and others to leave Kosovo.rnThe president of the Serbian Bar Association, Veljko Gubcrina,rnsaid in speeches in Serbia, Croatia, and Slovenia inrn1988 that the violations of the rights of Serbs in Kosovo remindedrnhim of the “dark days of the occupation when fascismrnruled over the expanse of our country.” In one speech hernconcluded, “Emigration continues and oppression hasrnincreased, as if the enemies of this country desired to demon-rnAPRIL 1995/15rnrnrn