Solution to immediately follow elections

I wander why he doesn't say it openly that Kosovo is gone, where ever America comes, dignity is gone! Serbia is going to face another reality, a reality without Kosovo.Wish we could live in a world witout America's policies.

"Should we protect the territorial integrity of every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens"

So now we hear the justification of the precedence. Any state that has some internal conflict is no longer protected the guarantee of national integrity - clearly Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Trans-Dniester, taipei, tibet, Tamils in North Sri Lanka etc etc... Even the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija can be given a UN seat with such precedence!

How far back does this precedence apply to? Surely the US state no longer has a guarantee of it's own territorial integrity - on this basis the Indigenous America Indians can claim a seat at the UN and territory that it rightly owns. Lets think how many nations could such a precedence be related to - I would imagine all nations of the world - certainly Scotland has an even stronger argument then the "Albanians" of Kosovo & Metohija for independence from the English - maybe the Scottish Nationalist Party will be interested in this Ambassadors comments.

Well done Polt I think the more you say the stronger the Serbian principled and legally correct stance becomes. Please add more! Congratulations on ensuring that Serbia continues to maintain it's territorial integrity.

Hopefully now all the peoples of Serbia can see that the US and UK opinion will not be acceptable without the Serbian governments full acceptance before it goes to the UN. Given that all parties have endorsed the new constitution who ever wins will continue this principled and legal stance that Kosovo is and always will remain Serbian. Maybe the Serbian government should ask - why wait till the Serbian elections since the US & UK position is clear and it is obvious that their opinion is bias and fortunately without legal basis.

Roll on 2007!!!

"Polt also said that the preservation of territorial integrity is not a central question in the Kosovo discussions."
“Should we protect the territorial integrity of every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens?” Polt asked"


Couldn't have put it better myself. Belgrade is pretty much owned from the very start. But the Serb leadership, and especially the Serb readers on this site are too thick-headed to understand what is being said here. Either that or they choose to shy away from reality by day dreaming.

What he really means is violence by Serbians will not be tolerated. The international community constantly ignores the violence against the Serbs in Kosovo. Where's the outrage that a school was targeted with a bomb? Little innocent children?

“If Belgrade rejects the agreement and resists it... I would like to know if the people of Serbia really want that kind of a future.”

Mr. Polt is BLUFFING. His threats are empty. No one will bomb or sanction Serbia for embargoing Kosovo. Furthermore, one need not declare formal sanctions in order to practice significant sanctions. The economic potential of Serbia outweighs the costs of threatening Serbia. Blocking the Balkans from the EU means regionalizaton & the regional giant is Serbia. It can do what it wants and Mr. Polt knows it. Look at the weakness of his words.

Please explain, Mr. Polt: Exactly how will the people of Serbia have a bad future by "not playing ball over Kosovo?"

Finally someone is spelling out a clearer message, although it should have been given much earlier. This should sober up some of the Serb radicals. May justice triumph!

This is called powertalk. Powertalk is influential and carries long distancies. It is powerful because of speaker's position, not because of speakers wisdom.

Serbia, a regime? If Michael Polt didn't learn it in school, he can have a look at the web site of wikipedia:

regime: [...] a government headed by a specific person ("the Saddam regime", or "the Salazar regime") or based on a particular ideology ("a communist" regime", "a fascist regime", or "a military regime").

...of course, asked from a Kosovo Albanian, Serbia is a state of a fascist regime. Today as much as yesterday. No revolution ever happened.

Polt: “A violent past exists in Kosovo and we cannot forget who started that past violence in the 1990s."

OK., Mr. Polt. Who started it?

And who supported it? On 12 March 2000 The Sunday Times published details showing that the CIA trained members of the KLA in the 1990s.

And who advocated the escalation of violence? And for which purposes?

U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee, on August 12, 1998:
"Planning for a U.S. led NATO intervention in Kosovo is now largely in place.... The only missing element seems to be an event - with suitably vivid media coverage - that would make the intervention politically salable."

The US special envoy to Yugoslavia, Richard Holbrooke, appeared in newspapers around the world, photographed sitting in a brotherly manner next to a masked KLA gunner.

Well, have to admit, in the end they did get some vivid media coverage.

There's no doubt of Milosevic's quilt on violence and horror. But the whole picture is more complex. Milosevic wasn't the only one who grabbed his sword.

“...every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens?"
Is there a chance that Mr. Polt counts in KLA regime, too? Or are its reasons to kill filed under "acceptable"?

"If Belgrade rejects the reached agreement for Kosovo..."

Reached agreement...? Have I missed something?

Kosovo independence will be a success story of multiethnicity and tolerance.. this because we have a model to be based on, that's Albania, a point of referment and a common culture and history.
I hope that kosovo serbs will contribute to this, and work together.
And serbia starts being helpful in this process, because it may loose more than kosovo, it will loose respect and improved relations.

Territorial integrity is an issue in 1244 and Polt is wrong to dismiss this.

The current elected democratic government of Serbia is not one that kills its own citizens and does not deserve to be judged as such.

Milosevic was a traitor to Serbia and induced the bombing needlessly in order to try to keep his own status - Serbia does not have to give up territory to pay for his evil, and neither should it be asked to.

The issue has always been 'two-sided'. Serbia has had bad guys - but so has Kosovo.

A non-nationalist future is outlined in 1244 - a democratic Serbia giving democratic autonomy to a non-nationalist Kosovo. Serbia should not be punished if it stands by this - the world community should ensure that this solution is supported. Non-violence, cooperation, and a future integrated within Europe should not be achieved by imposition based on a NATO bombing campaign.

If Kosovo wants a future in Europe, it should not be as a nationalistic entity. Independance would be a wrong solution. On the other hand, a non-nationalistic Kosovo should be given an honoured place in the world.

Whatever happens however, a good future needs to be non-violent, and whoever starts the fighting should be dealt with accordingly.

Mr. Polt hit it right on the mark with his wise comments. Serbia knows very well that Kosova will become the new country in Balkans and there is nothing they can do about it. If they even think that they can keep Kosova by force, they are mistaken big time. Another think is very ironik at firts Serb politcians did not want to even hear about resolution 1244 and now they say that 1244 should be respected.

First of all the Milosevic regime was overthrown. HE IS DEAD. You are not punishing him by giving Kosovo independence you are punishing Serbia and innocent Serbs. Who has elected a terrorist leader? Kosovo ALbanians who elected Ceku. Serbia has peaceful leaders. Why punish them for Milosevic?

I wander why he doesn't say it openly that Kosovo is gone, where ever America comes, dignity is gone! Serbia is going to face another reality, a reality without Kosovo.Wish we could live in a world witout America's policies.

"Should we protect the territorial integrity of every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens"

So now we hear the justification of the precedence. Any state that has some internal conflict is no longer protected the guarantee of national integrity - clearly Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Trans-Dniester, taipei, tibet, Tamils in North Sri Lanka etc etc... Even the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija can be given a UN seat with such precedence!

How far back does this precedence apply to? Surely the US state no longer has a guarantee of it's own territorial integrity - on this basis the Indigenous America Indians can claim a seat at the UN and territory that it rightly owns. Lets think how many nations could such a precedence be related to - I would imagine all nations of the world - certainly Scotland has an even stronger argument then the "Albanians" of Kosovo & Metohija for independence from the English - maybe the Scottish Nationalist Party will be interested in this Ambassadors comments.

Well done Polt I think the more you say the stronger the Serbian principled and legally correct stance becomes. Please add more! Congratulations on ensuring that Serbia continues to maintain it's territorial integrity.

Hopefully now all the peoples of Serbia can see that the US and UK opinion will not be acceptable without the Serbian governments full acceptance before it goes to the UN. Given that all parties have endorsed the new constitution who ever wins will continue this principled and legal stance that Kosovo is and always will remain Serbian. Maybe the Serbian government should ask - why wait till the Serbian elections since the US & UK position is clear and it is obvious that their opinion is bias and fortunately without legal basis.

Roll on 2007!!!

"Polt also said that the preservation of territorial integrity is not a central question in the Kosovo discussions."
“Should we protect the territorial integrity of every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens?” Polt asked"


Couldn't have put it better myself. Belgrade is pretty much owned from the very start. But the Serb leadership, and especially the Serb readers on this site are too thick-headed to understand what is being said here. Either that or they choose to shy away from reality by day dreaming.

What he really means is violence by Serbians will not be tolerated. The international community constantly ignores the violence against the Serbs in Kosovo. Where's the outrage that a school was targeted with a bomb? Little innocent children?

“If Belgrade rejects the agreement and resists it... I would like to know if the people of Serbia really want that kind of a future.”

Mr. Polt is BLUFFING. His threats are empty. No one will bomb or sanction Serbia for embargoing Kosovo. Furthermore, one need not declare formal sanctions in order to practice significant sanctions. The economic potential of Serbia outweighs the costs of threatening Serbia. Blocking the Balkans from the EU means regionalizaton & the regional giant is Serbia. It can do what it wants and Mr. Polt knows it. Look at the weakness of his words.

Please explain, Mr. Polt: Exactly how will the people of Serbia have a bad future by "not playing ball over Kosovo?"

Finally someone is spelling out a clearer message, although it should have been given much earlier. This should sober up some of the Serb radicals. May justice triumph!

This is called powertalk. Powertalk is influential and carries long distancies. It is powerful because of speaker's position, not because of speakers wisdom.

Serbia, a regime? If Michael Polt didn't learn it in school, he can have a look at the web site of wikipedia:

regime: [...] a government headed by a specific person ("the Saddam regime", or "the Salazar regime") or based on a particular ideology ("a communist" regime", "a fascist regime", or "a military regime").

...of course, asked from a Kosovo Albanian, Serbia is a state of a fascist regime. Today as much as yesterday. No revolution ever happened.

Polt: “A violent past exists in Kosovo and we cannot forget who started that past violence in the 1990s."

OK., Mr. Polt. Who started it?

And who supported it? On 12 March 2000 The Sunday Times published details showing that the CIA trained members of the KLA in the 1990s.

And who advocated the escalation of violence? And for which purposes?

U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee, on August 12, 1998:
"Planning for a U.S. led NATO intervention in Kosovo is now largely in place.... The only missing element seems to be an event - with suitably vivid media coverage - that would make the intervention politically salable."

The US special envoy to Yugoslavia, Richard Holbrooke, appeared in newspapers around the world, photographed sitting in a brotherly manner next to a masked KLA gunner.

Well, have to admit, in the end they did get some vivid media coverage.

There's no doubt of Milosevic's quilt on violence and horror. But the whole picture is more complex. Milosevic wasn't the only one who grabbed his sword.

“...every regime that chooses to kill its own citizens?"
Is there a chance that Mr. Polt counts in KLA regime, too? Or are its reasons to kill filed under "acceptable"?

"If Belgrade rejects the reached agreement for Kosovo..."

Reached agreement...? Have I missed something?

Kosovo independence will be a success story of multiethnicity and tolerance.. this because we have a model to be based on, that's Albania, a point of referment and a common culture and history.
I hope that kosovo serbs will contribute to this, and work together.
And serbia starts being helpful in this process, because it may loose more than kosovo, it will loose respect and improved relations.

Territorial integrity is an issue in 1244 and Polt is wrong to dismiss this.

The current elected democratic government of Serbia is not one that kills its own citizens and does not deserve to be judged as such.

Milosevic was a traitor to Serbia and induced the bombing needlessly in order to try to keep his own status - Serbia does not have to give up territory to pay for his evil, and neither should it be asked to.

The issue has always been 'two-sided'. Serbia has had bad guys - but so has Kosovo.

A non-nationalist future is outlined in 1244 - a democratic Serbia giving democratic autonomy to a non-nationalist Kosovo. Serbia should not be punished if it stands by this - the world community should ensure that this solution is supported. Non-violence, cooperation, and a future integrated within Europe should not be achieved by imposition based on a NATO bombing campaign.

If Kosovo wants a future in Europe, it should not be as a nationalistic entity. Independance would be a wrong solution. On the other hand, a non-nationalistic Kosovo should be given an honoured place in the world.

Whatever happens however, a good future needs to be non-violent, and whoever starts the fighting should be dealt with accordingly.

Mr. Polt hit it right on the mark with his wise comments. Serbia knows very well that Kosova will become the new country in Balkans and there is nothing they can do about it. If they even think that they can keep Kosova by force, they are mistaken big time. Another think is very ironik at firts Serb politcians did not want to even hear about resolution 1244 and now they say that 1244 should be respected.

First of all the Milosevic regime was overthrown. HE IS DEAD. You are not punishing him by giving Kosovo independence you are punishing Serbia and innocent Serbs. Who has elected a terrorist leader? Kosovo ALbanians who elected Ceku. Serbia has peaceful leaders. Why punish them for Milosevic?