As refugee families spend another day in makeshift tents on a hillside above their ruined village, an Albanian farmer spells out the argument which may finally push NATO into launching air strikes against Serbia later this week.
"We can't go back home unless we get a guarantee," said the father of three who was unwilling to give his name. "We're expecting a new offensive by the Serbs. They lie all the time."
His sentiments are echoed by Western diplomats from the international team which has been monitoring events in Kosovo for the last few weeks as part of an officially-sanctioned observer mission.
Under the threat of NATO action they note a clear change in Serb tactics. "Yugoslav army and Serb police action has subsided really significantly since September 30th, but there is no guarantee that it will not resume, " said one monitor.
Serb helicopters have been dropping leaflets over refugee campsites, promising Albanians safety to return home and amnesty if they surrender weapons. Brandishing one of the leaflets, the farmer asked: "What weapons? I haven't got any."
The international monitors report that similar fears are widespread among displaced Albanians. The recent attack on a convoy of civilians in Vraniq, who accepted Serb promises of a safe return home and then had their vehicles destroyed, while the men were taken away for questioning, has not eased the atmosphere.
Nor have the reports of massacres in which women and children were shot dead at short range. Besides the roughly 50,000 displaced people still living in the open, another 300,000 are staying with relatives or with other Albanians who have agreed to take a refugee family in.
Although Yugoslav president, Mr Slobodan Milosevic, has called a halt to military action since September 30th, after which his guns fell silent throughout most of Kosovo and many troops pulled back to barracks, diplomats in Pristina sense that the tide of thinking among NATO governments is turning towards a decision for military action.
Its aim would be "to punish and deter". This implies limited air strikes in the first instance, with the clear message that a more comprehensive wave of attacks could follow if there is any hint of new Serb offensives or reprisals.
The diplomats list two main arguments in favour of action. Firstly, although Mr Milosevic is currently showing substantial compliance with the UN call on September 23rd for an immediate ceasefire, it took him a week to do so. In the seven intervening days he launched two major new offensives, in south-west Kosovo and in Drenica, which made more tens of thousands of Albanians homeless. The offensives included two apparent massacres, which, instead of prompting disciplinary inquiries, the Serb government has encouraged its state-run media to dismiss as stage-managed fakes.
Secondly, a failure to act would send bad signals to both sides. For Albanians, already disappointed by the West's tough talk followed by passivity this summer, it would be yet another blow, perhaps the final one, to their dwindling faith in the outside world. It could lead to further polarisation and kill off any chance of the Albanian negotiators making a compromise deal with Belgrade under which they would delay demands for full independence to some future date.
To Mr Milosevic, Western inaction would be a signal that once again he has got away with judging just how little compliance with international demands he need to make and still escape scot free. "We must not let him always stay ahead of the game", as one diplomat put it.
If the political decision for air strikes is made, the argument is said to be strong for implementing it quickly. Waiting a few days would allow Mr Milosevic to try to erode the consensus in favour of intervention by arguing that he has held his ceasefire for at least a week, and NATO action is disproportionate.
Diplomats also see a danger that the Kosovo Liberation Army, the pro-independence guerrilla movement, might exploit the partial Serb withdrawal of forces to step up its current patchy actions. This could muddy the waters, and revive doubts among some Western officials that they are taking sides with the KLA.