I admit I'm surprised to hear Rugova supporting the bombing, although it doesn't change my position.
>So if any people is so irresponsible as to choose alliance with the West
>over oppression by a locally based oppressor, their self-determination has
>no legitimacy, and "leftists" have the right to speak in their name for
>their interests?
Rugova can speak for himself. His views are legitimate. But the bombers belong to the West, so we have every right to decide whether or not to use them to bomb Kosovo/Serbia. I disagree with Rugova - I don't think the bombing campaign is serving any decent purpose.
>But one point is true, those who side with Milosevic's regime that the
>Kosovars desires are illegitimate can consistently oppose the intervention.
I can't understand your dogged persistence in claiming those who oppose the bombing are "siding" with the Milosevic regime. I can put forth a reasonable set of guiding principles which should be adhered to in these kind of situations. In fact, I've already done this. Since neither the KLA nor Milosevic nor NATO, nor, it seems, Rugova support these priciples, none of them deserve my support. There is no reason to limit the options to either support of Milosevic or support of the bombing. There are other, better options.
>But those who have argued that the intervention has accomplished nothing for
>the Kosovars and that, in the name of the Kosovars, the intervention should
>end - well, they might take the desires of Rugova and the whole range of
>Kosovar leadership that apparently think the intervention is effective
>enough on their behalf that it should not end.
Since our (military) resources are at stake, we do have the right to make such judgements. The Kosovars may or may not agree with our conclusions, but we are responsible for how our military is used. The opinion of the Kosovar leadership is simply one factor to consider.
Brett