The modern wave of Albanian-Serb hostility goes back to the early 1980s, a time when the breakup of Yugoslavia was not yet on the horizon and so there was no fear of an oppressive Albanian ethnostate. Rather, the Serb rhetoric was driven by a claim that Albanians were squatters on historic Serb land.

An independent Kosovo would have become a state chiefly for the Albanian ethnicity simply due to demographics, but it need not have become completely hostile to Serbs and Bosniaks, if the Serbs had acted more wisely. The Republic of Albania itself contains a number of Greek, South Slavic-speaking, and Aromanian villages. And had the Serbs acted more wisely, Kosovo undoubtedly would have been partitioned at Mitrovica.

The latest claim sounds disingenous. I'm too painfully aware that no partitions of USSR were redone with regards of actual ethnic occupancy (especially when talking about Russians, that's Serbs in case of Yugoslavia).

So all the new states are extremely imperialistic and will not give up on any of "their" lands even if they did not have ethnic dominance there. So no, Kosovar Albanians will still demand Mitrovica.

However, it is actually outrageous that Serbs were made to give out their actual UN recognized lands, and they had full motivation to try and keep those, like Azeri did. And in fact it's not off the table yet. Let's suppose something bad happens to NATO, Serbs can try to Karabakh-2023 Kosovo.

This is just warmed over Milosevic, these are not credible claims and I would defer to archive communications and even things like admissions against interest over such conspiracies.

The Yugoslav debt crisis was very real, as are the differing birth rates between Serbs and Albanians. The rest is an unsourced set of claims designed to create a retroactive justification for the appalling behavior of the Serbian communist league against not only other ethnicities, but Serbian civil society.

The side with the capitol, the federal presidency, the JNA equipment, and the largest population is not a collective victim. The victims are the everyday people forced into an artificially heightened conflict.

I would really recommend reading Yugoslavia, Death of a nation. Nobody comes off as an innocent because it sticks to the mutually agreed upon facts, the empirical records, the cabinet meetings, the internal planning documents, and so on.

You really discredit your own cause by telling stories about a monolithic other which inexplicably conspired against you despite being militarily nearly defenseless. Preventative war remains a war crime because it is, categorically, used by bigger nations to rationalize attacking smaller ones.

Being "military defenseless" is not very important if your claim on the land suddenly recognized by UN states. These states can supply their own manpower.

A Serb or a Russian is just a single ordinary human being. You can oppress them ethnically exactly in the same fashion as you would oppress a small stateless minority.

In short, where you expected to get a bloodless happy independence, you would get a civil war half of the time, and you can blame yourself or your foreign coercers. This is contrary to the rosy picture the USA liked to paint when it plunges countries into civil wars.