EC head says "UN SC unable to solve Kosovo status”

So if we leave it to each individual country to accept or reject indpendent Kosovo then the outcome is clear.
No independence.

Since majority of the world is against independence and the great US claims to uphold democracy and majority rules policy then we have a clear outcome.

Kosovo remains Serbian.

“The European Union showed that it is ready and capable of leading a process of stabilization in the western Balkans and make the status solution process easier,” -

How exactly ? when it is clear that the EU are not unified and hence why they kopped out of a unified Foreign policy and came up with the line that;

“The EU has no authority regarding that question. In response, some countries recognized Kosovo, and others have not,”

Barroso show us what legal basis the EU can set up an INLEX (lawless) mission if you actually believe it!

Moreover if you are now stating that UN has no control then I guess we are back to the point prior to 10th June 1999 and the EU have even less claim that they are stabilising on the contrary the EU INLEX (lawless) mission is in breach of Serbia's sovereignity and totally illegal.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Jose Manuel Barroso said that the UN Security Council was "incapable of solving the Kosovo status crisis" – the EU or the Security Council? Let all of us think very hard how he has on his mind to decide the million dollar question.... maybe the EU Brussels has been politicians. Brussels would just love to be a power on to it self unanswerable to no one a demagog on to it self.
“The European Union showed that it is ready and capable of leading a process of stabilization in the western Balkans and make the status solution process easier,” Barroso said. Of course easier for EU Brussels it has long ago decided to implement its illegal plans and has set them in motion. How dare most of the Serbs not go with their plans for not just Kosovo but for all of Serbia and not let them dictate what will happen and be masters over the Serbs. Have not the Serbs bought in to their worthless pieces of paper and signed over Serbia to Brussels. Like it happened to the Czechs over the Sudetenland's as I remember it was suppose to be peace in our time. “The EU has no authority same like Nazi Germany but it didn't stop them lets see how far EU Brussels will go with its law breaking before people wizen up to danger of such a organization that makes it self law only on to it self!

There was a perfectly good autonomy plan in the UN resolution until certain over-bearing countries decided they'd thwart it by making promises they should never have made. Now they can never back down because it would expose their weakness and stupidity.

The penalty for democratic Serbia is that it will not be able to join the EU because it wants to keep Kosovo and have believed the EU lie that there is no connection between joining the EU and the Kosovo issue. That is another broken promise from the EU however, so either way the EU have messed up.

Until the EU address Serbia's view, there can be no resolution - just imposition ... and that will be resisted at every turn.

Lets be very clear here. Most of the UN is on the side of Russia, China and Serbia. That is very obvious by the dismal number of countries that have recognised Kosovo (only 20 odd so far against 175 that have NOT).

The reason it failed at the UN is because the powers that be (US, France, UK) decided to go against the majority of the UN and attempted to force their own solution. Serbia did try to negotiate a solution but the US was not interested.

The reason the EU wants to control it now is to cut out Russia, China, Serbia and pretty much the overwhelming majority of UN members and to engineer the US solution within itself by using the support of some EU members.

Therefore, it is the US blocking a solution by going against the world, who are opposed to recognition!

you are only temporary occupiers on serbian soil.

so, the definitive solution will not be up to you.

remember "1244" :)

This has generated an even bigger mess in the Balkans. By leaving it up to individual states to recognize or not, it makes Kosovo, an already illegal entity into something that's also barely legitimate, and completely dependent on those recognizing states for life.

First, Barroso says there's deadlock at the UN. Why was there deadlock? The refusal of the US and Russia to come to any agreement. Washington was clearly pushing for complete independence regardless of outcome or repercussion, and Russia was blocking. Russia didn't even say why it needed to block. It simply needed to show that it was blocking what was widely seen as US unilateralism one more time. Does Russia have its own agenda, of course. But as in the past, the US realizes it can't get what it wants at the UN so it decides to seek a way elsewhere, reinforcing the statement that some states can buck laws and regulations that other states cannot.

Second, Barroso says “The EU has no authority regarding that question [Kosovo's so-called independence]." This means that the very organization that is occupying Kosovo and acting as an executive authority, does not recognize the sovereign status of the land. Feith, as a representative of the EU, is therefore someone acting and working on still Serbian-owned territory as far as Brussels is concerned.

Third, by placing recognition at the absolute bottom of the barrel - individual states, we not only buck international law, we also engage in 21st century colonialism. It's been two weeks since Pristina's unilateral declaration of dependence on the West, and the talking heads in Washington and Brussels are still trying to sell this sick man of the Balkans to potential buyers.

Considering the damage done to international law (albeit in need of serious revision), state sovereignty, Serbian government, and general stability in SE Europe, I'd say any alternative to what is currently sanctioned would have been a better solution.

Tangled web Princip? More like knotted.

Will: intend to refer to you as 'wil' - makes post easier to write :)

In the short term, is not a case of re-integration - too much bad blood on both sides. Situation more than likely will boil down to defacto partition with recognition by some & no recognition by most.

As for UNSC being ineffective, depends on what one believes is the aim of the UN.

If like the current US administration, you attempt to saddle it with impossible problems in an attempt to discredit it's effectiveness, thereby giving you justification to implement your own foreign policy aims in the guise of 'concern' for the welfare of some group - then yes, it's not effective.

If, on the other hand, you believe that the UNSC's function is to act as a 'brake' on the escalation of international tensions through the use of a veto on the part of a major power, then it is indeed effective & has worked very well.

As for Russia's economy being 'minute', think again. It's in the top 10 & growing. As also is that of China - whose economy will supercede that of the US's sometime in the next 50 years. These figures incidentally are those of Goldman-Sachs.

And lastly, bear in mind ( :) ) that the foreign policy 'geniuses' that support this policy of hostility to the UN in the US are the same 'bright sparks' that gave the world the mess in Iraq, non-existent WMD's, & opposition to a concerted global action on global warming.

Great track-record guys.. keep it up.


Olf:

Appears will (not wil) have to correct you.

Decision at UNSC was not possible because K-albanians had no reason to compromise.
They did not have to compromise because US gave K-albanians implicit support.

This is the truth & everybody knows it.


And russians DO have special connection with serbs & vice versa. Indeed, some russians like serbs more than other russians.

As for Russia (notice distinction), Putin/Medvedev have not forgotten events of last decade & are certainly willing to flex Russia's muscles.

The fact that from a legal perspective, they are right is a nice bonus.

I wonder why the UNSC wasnt able to come to an agreement on Kosovo..im not sure but it might be the fact that KOSOVOS INDEPENDENCE WAS IS ILLEGAL

I am embarrassed for Mr. Barroso.
What utter nonsense and mumbo-jumbo he has spoken.

Barroso says… “The solution was blocked in the UN Security Council”

There was never a vote in the UNSC.

So, as Mr. Barrsos sees it, there is only one “Solution”, and if that ‘Solution” can’t pass at the UNSC then the democratic process will be ignored and the EU and the US will impose their “Solution”.

The EU now looks as foolish those individuals who run the US State Department.

According to some commenters, in the absence of new UN Security Council resolutions, Kosovo is now back to the status quo ante, as it was before 10 June 1999.

I'm sure this warms patriotic hearts. But what does it mean in real life? Is the Serbian flag now flying over Kosovo's capital and government offices throughout Kosovo? Are Belgrade's administrators, troops and police back in charge, as they were before they (triumphantly!?) withdrew in June 10, 1999? Are Serbian flags currently flying over Kosovo's border crossings with Albania and Macedonia, and Montenegro? And are Serbian border guards checking visas and stamping the passports of those who cross in and out of Kosovo? Are the residents of Kosovo presently paying taxes to the ministry in Belgrade and do they follow the laws and regulations passed by the parliament and government in Belgrade?

That is what sovereignty means in practice, and Serbia has not been in a position to do any of the above in Kosovo for nine years now.

Burning down a border checkpoint or two (or an embassy or two in Belgrade), while shouting "Kosovo je Srbija", does not restore lost sovereignty. Sovereignty means the effective exercise of governmental authority -- which requires the consent of the governed.

In Kosovo, the reality is at the present time (and for the foreseeable future): Serbia does not exercise effective state authority over the territory, nor does it have the consent of vast majority of the people who live there. And that is not likely to change.

Oh what a complete mess! Totally agree with Princip, UK, the UN SC supposedly can't solve the problem, the EU says it can, but then leaves it up to individual countries to recognise the work the EU is doing....right, I can see Kosovo is in capable hands. Who is the EU fooling? Honestly!

you are only temporary occupiers on serbian soil.

so, the definitive solution will not be up to you.

remember "1244" :)
(Jovan, 3 March 2008 14:01)

Jovan just to say that I love your rational, non-emotional, non-defiant, positive, valuable, unbiased, and above all realistic reckoning :)

Decision at UN SC was not possible due to Russian opposition.
We have all agreed that Russia is not doing this because they follow the International Law, which they have broken many times themselves, not because they have a special relations with Serbia or sympathy but because they wanted to come back to International scene as a superpower again.

Guys, don’t you read between the lines in here. Don’t you see that he is telling everyone that UNMIK is going and EU is taking over because UNMIK is not able to carry on, like may of Serbs posters said few months back.

However, it is interesting to see that Serbs now want UNMIK to remain.

Peggy
caouold you please tellus where do you see Kosova in Serbia still?

Princip, whilst some countries may not support Kosovo independence, thats not to say that they automatically support Serbia. Far from truth. Even these countries like Spain will not support re-integration of Kosovo into Serbia as everyone remembers 90's and the destruction inflicted by serbian military.

As for UNSC, I think its dissolving as for a long time it has been ineffective. On top of that, countries like Germany, Japan who are one of top funders of UN are at mercy of a minute economic country like Russia. Who is to say that Kosovo independence is supported by some countries in particular to with the view of dissolving UNSC and undermine russia? After all, a precedent will affect a Russian Federation the most because it has more autonomous provinces and states than any other country. Russia argues a precedent. In doing this, it could be falling on its own sword.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner Monday stated that Kosovo's independence is "carried out in a good way" and that "there was no other solution".
--

Such narrow-mindedness is why the Western/US unipolar world is once again changing into a multipolar world with the resurgence of Russia, the rise of China and the fading of the US.

The world has had enough of Western nonsense. Serbia just needs to stand firm.

Peter,

Whilst you are right that Russia's economy is not 'minute' it is also far from huge. And Olf's point was certainly true with respect to Japan. Its economy is four times larger than Russia, and its population very similar - why should Japan not also have veto power. I know there is a campaign (supported at least by the UK) to extend the permanent membership of the UNSC. However, I can't see how 10 veto wielders could ever come to any agreement - and no current veto holder will ever give it up.
Oh and just to note peter. It's nice to quote that Russia is larg(ish) and growing economically, but I think you are looking at PPP figures which are better for looking at the economy for people within a nation more than its external impact. In addition it is also worth noting that the EU economy is 14xRussia, US is 13xRussia and Japan is 4xRussia. Between them that is 67% of the world economy (even Spain and Canada are bigger than Russia). Not exactly making Russia look amazing is it.

Bruce:
"And Olf's point was..."

Believe you're actually referring to my rebuttal (#13) of 'Wils' point (#4) :)

Only referred to Russia's economy in my last post because 'Wil' described it as 'minute' - which was inaccurate, so felt obliged to correct him :)

However what I did say is correct, as indeed is most of what you had to say (at least about economics). Could get involved in a discussion about PPP vs 'Nominal' GDP figures, BRIC's vs G6 economies etc., but won't - primary topic here is about UN. Besides which, last time I launched into economic trivia, B92 truncated most of my post.. hmphhh! :)

Trust you realise Japan & Germany didn't get veto because axis lost in WWII, so when 'veto recipients' were decided, they lost out - justifiably so in my opinion.

As to getting the veto now.. the issue is largely problematic as isn't going to happen - why would current 'veto holders' want to extend their membership? There is also the small matter of the Japanese mindset - don't like to apologise.

And as to the issue of the 'veto' itself, real issue isn't about coming to an agreement.. real issue is about powerful countries having a way [[[ other than the military ]]] of scuppering an issue they feel strongly about - think of it as a pressure release valve for international tension.

ps: current commodity prices are here to stay (relatively speaking).


KS:

Yugoslavia no longer exists, so what's your point?

Certainly can't be talking about Serbia - recent elections were free & fair - as attested to by EU.

As for peak oil - leaving aside the question of just what is, & what is not in Siberia, most of the rest of the world has already passed that point (& I'm not taking into account factors such as
non-disclosure of real vs paper reserves). And as supply falls, prices rise - decline in revenues won't be as dramatic as you appear to think (US$200 a barrel anyone?).

CIA? Same outfit that messed up on WMD?

And about possible russian fragmentation.. good argument for denying a K-albanian UDI, although don't think NATO jets have the range :)

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner Monday stated that Kosovo's independence is "carried out in a good way" and that "there was no other solution".

"The situation is not that bad," Kouchner said
Who better then Kouchner know about Kosovo, its future, its destiny and what is best for region. The answer is none know better then him.
So, trust him. What was done was to make the region stable and peaceful. End of story.

I wonder why the UNSC wasnt able to come to an agreement on Kosovo..im not sure but it might be the fact that KOSOVOS INDEPENDENCE WAS IS ILLEGAL
(Peter V, 3 March 2008 16:58)

I'm glad you understand the fact that Kosova is independent, but is that your opinion? Sooner or later the UN will adopt which will be a firm line between self-determination and a nation's sovereignty.
Was America's independence in 1776 illegal? I'm sure all the ex-soviet states are illegal as well; possibly every country is illegal because they broke off from a parent country.

Peter,

the future of Russia is of the same as yugoslavia. While Russia is growing economically (oil & gas) it is killing all democratic institutions and tramping on inealinable human rights (free speech). When Russian oil peaks in the '11 or so, expect a revolt. Maybe a c.i.-A inspired otpor? Russia's history will repeat and more of these "ex soviet" states will emerge.

According to some commenters, in the absence of new UN Security Council resolutions, Kosovo is now back to the status quo ante, as it was before 10 June 1999.

I'm sure this warms patriotic hearts. But what does it mean in real life? Is the Serbian flag now flying over Kosovo's capital and government offices throughout Kosovo? Are Belgrade's administrators, troops and police back in charge, as they were before they (triumphantly!?) withdrew in June 10, 1999? Are Serbian flags currently flying over Kosovo's border crossings with Albania and Macedonia, and Montenegro? And are Serbian border guards checking visas and stamping the passports of those who cross in and out of Kosovo? Are the residents of Kosovo presently paying taxes to the ministry in Belgrade and do they follow the laws and regulations passed by the parliament and government in Belgrade?

That is what sovereignty means in practice, and Serbia has not been in a position to do any of the above in Kosovo for nine years now.

Burning down a border checkpoint or two (or an embassy or two in Belgrade), while shouting "Kosovo je Srbija", does not restore lost sovereignty. Sovereignty means the effective exercise of governmental authority -- which requires the consent of the governed.

In Kosovo, the reality is at the present time (and for the foreseeable future): Serbia does not exercise effective state authority over the territory, nor does it have the consent of vast majority of the people who live there. And that is not likely to change.

Decision at UN SC was not possible due to Russian opposition.
We have all agreed that Russia is not doing this because they follow the International Law, which they have broken many times themselves, not because they have a special relations with Serbia or sympathy but because they wanted to come back to International scene as a superpower again.

Guys, don’t you read between the lines in here. Don’t you see that he is telling everyone that UNMIK is going and EU is taking over because UNMIK is not able to carry on, like may of Serbs posters said few months back.

However, it is interesting to see that Serbs now want UNMIK to remain.

Peggy
caouold you please tellus where do you see Kosova in Serbia still?

Princip, whilst some countries may not support Kosovo independence, thats not to say that they automatically support Serbia. Far from truth. Even these countries like Spain will not support re-integration of Kosovo into Serbia as everyone remembers 90's and the destruction inflicted by serbian military.

As for UNSC, I think its dissolving as for a long time it has been ineffective. On top of that, countries like Germany, Japan who are one of top funders of UN are at mercy of a minute economic country like Russia. Who is to say that Kosovo independence is supported by some countries in particular to with the view of dissolving UNSC and undermine russia? After all, a precedent will affect a Russian Federation the most because it has more autonomous provinces and states than any other country. Russia argues a precedent. In doing this, it could be falling on its own sword.

Peter,

Whilst you are right that Russia's economy is not 'minute' it is also far from huge. And Olf's point was certainly true with respect to Japan. Its economy is four times larger than Russia, and its population very similar - why should Japan not also have veto power. I know there is a campaign (supported at least by the UK) to extend the permanent membership of the UNSC. However, I can't see how 10 veto wielders could ever come to any agreement - and no current veto holder will ever give it up.
Oh and just to note peter. It's nice to quote that Russia is larg(ish) and growing economically, but I think you are looking at PPP figures which are better for looking at the economy for people within a nation more than its external impact. In addition it is also worth noting that the EU economy is 14xRussia, US is 13xRussia and Japan is 4xRussia. Between them that is 67% of the world economy (even Spain and Canada are bigger than Russia). Not exactly making Russia look amazing is it.

you are only temporary occupiers on serbian soil.

so, the definitive solution will not be up to you.

remember "1244" :)
(Jovan, 3 March 2008 14:01)

Jovan just to say that I love your rational, non-emotional, non-defiant, positive, valuable, unbiased, and above all realistic reckoning :)

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner Monday stated that Kosovo's independence is "carried out in a good way" and that "there was no other solution".

"The situation is not that bad," Kouchner said
Who better then Kouchner know about Kosovo, its future, its destiny and what is best for region. The answer is none know better then him.
So, trust him. What was done was to make the region stable and peaceful. End of story.

“The European Union showed that it is ready and capable of leading a process of stabilization in the western Balkans and make the status solution process easier,” -

How exactly ? when it is clear that the EU are not unified and hence why they kopped out of a unified Foreign policy and came up with the line that;

“The EU has no authority regarding that question. In response, some countries recognized Kosovo, and others have not,”

Barroso show us what legal basis the EU can set up an INLEX (lawless) mission if you actually believe it!

Moreover if you are now stating that UN has no control then I guess we are back to the point prior to 10th June 1999 and the EU have even less claim that they are stabilising on the contrary the EU INLEX (lawless) mission is in breach of Serbia's sovereignity and totally illegal.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Jose Manuel Barroso said that the UN Security Council was "incapable of solving the Kosovo status crisis" – the EU or the Security Council? Let all of us think very hard how he has on his mind to decide the million dollar question.... maybe the EU Brussels has been politicians. Brussels would just love to be a power on to it self unanswerable to no one a demagog on to it self.
“The European Union showed that it is ready and capable of leading a process of stabilization in the western Balkans and make the status solution process easier,” Barroso said. Of course easier for EU Brussels it has long ago decided to implement its illegal plans and has set them in motion. How dare most of the Serbs not go with their plans for not just Kosovo but for all of Serbia and not let them dictate what will happen and be masters over the Serbs. Have not the Serbs bought in to their worthless pieces of paper and signed over Serbia to Brussels. Like it happened to the Czechs over the Sudetenland's as I remember it was suppose to be peace in our time. “The EU has no authority same like Nazi Germany but it didn't stop them lets see how far EU Brussels will go with its law breaking before people wizen up to danger of such a organization that makes it self law only on to it self!

So if we leave it to each individual country to accept or reject indpendent Kosovo then the outcome is clear.
No independence.

Since majority of the world is against independence and the great US claims to uphold democracy and majority rules policy then we have a clear outcome.

Kosovo remains Serbian.

There was a perfectly good autonomy plan in the UN resolution until certain over-bearing countries decided they'd thwart it by making promises they should never have made. Now they can never back down because it would expose their weakness and stupidity.

The penalty for democratic Serbia is that it will not be able to join the EU because it wants to keep Kosovo and have believed the EU lie that there is no connection between joining the EU and the Kosovo issue. That is another broken promise from the EU however, so either way the EU have messed up.

Until the EU address Serbia's view, there can be no resolution - just imposition ... and that will be resisted at every turn.

you are only temporary occupiers on serbian soil.

so, the definitive solution will not be up to you.

remember "1244" :)

I am embarrassed for Mr. Barroso.
What utter nonsense and mumbo-jumbo he has spoken.

Barroso says… “The solution was blocked in the UN Security Council”

There was never a vote in the UNSC.

So, as Mr. Barrsos sees it, there is only one “Solution”, and if that ‘Solution” can’t pass at the UNSC then the democratic process will be ignored and the EU and the US will impose their “Solution”.

The EU now looks as foolish those individuals who run the US State Department.

Oh what a complete mess! Totally agree with Princip, UK, the UN SC supposedly can't solve the problem, the EU says it can, but then leaves it up to individual countries to recognise the work the EU is doing....right, I can see Kosovo is in capable hands. Who is the EU fooling? Honestly!

This has generated an even bigger mess in the Balkans. By leaving it up to individual states to recognize or not, it makes Kosovo, an already illegal entity into something that's also barely legitimate, and completely dependent on those recognizing states for life.

First, Barroso says there's deadlock at the UN. Why was there deadlock? The refusal of the US and Russia to come to any agreement. Washington was clearly pushing for complete independence regardless of outcome or repercussion, and Russia was blocking. Russia didn't even say why it needed to block. It simply needed to show that it was blocking what was widely seen as US unilateralism one more time. Does Russia have its own agenda, of course. But as in the past, the US realizes it can't get what it wants at the UN so it decides to seek a way elsewhere, reinforcing the statement that some states can buck laws and regulations that other states cannot.

Second, Barroso says “The EU has no authority regarding that question [Kosovo's so-called independence]." This means that the very organization that is occupying Kosovo and acting as an executive authority, does not recognize the sovereign status of the land. Feith, as a representative of the EU, is therefore someone acting and working on still Serbian-owned territory as far as Brussels is concerned.

Third, by placing recognition at the absolute bottom of the barrel - individual states, we not only buck international law, we also engage in 21st century colonialism. It's been two weeks since Pristina's unilateral declaration of dependence on the West, and the talking heads in Washington and Brussels are still trying to sell this sick man of the Balkans to potential buyers.

Considering the damage done to international law (albeit in need of serious revision), state sovereignty, Serbian government, and general stability in SE Europe, I'd say any alternative to what is currently sanctioned would have been a better solution.

Tangled web Princip? More like knotted.

Will: intend to refer to you as 'wil' - makes post easier to write :)

In the short term, is not a case of re-integration - too much bad blood on both sides. Situation more than likely will boil down to defacto partition with recognition by some & no recognition by most.

As for UNSC being ineffective, depends on what one believes is the aim of the UN.

If like the current US administration, you attempt to saddle it with impossible problems in an attempt to discredit it's effectiveness, thereby giving you justification to implement your own foreign policy aims in the guise of 'concern' for the welfare of some group - then yes, it's not effective.

If, on the other hand, you believe that the UNSC's function is to act as a 'brake' on the escalation of international tensions through the use of a veto on the part of a major power, then it is indeed effective & has worked very well.

As for Russia's economy being 'minute', think again. It's in the top 10 & growing. As also is that of China - whose economy will supercede that of the US's sometime in the next 50 years. These figures incidentally are those of Goldman-Sachs.

And lastly, bear in mind ( :) ) that the foreign policy 'geniuses' that support this policy of hostility to the UN in the US are the same 'bright sparks' that gave the world the mess in Iraq, non-existent WMD's, & opposition to a concerted global action on global warming.

Great track-record guys.. keep it up.


Olf:

Appears will (not wil) have to correct you.

Decision at UNSC was not possible because K-albanians had no reason to compromise.
They did not have to compromise because US gave K-albanians implicit support.

This is the truth & everybody knows it.


And russians DO have special connection with serbs & vice versa. Indeed, some russians like serbs more than other russians.

As for Russia (notice distinction), Putin/Medvedev have not forgotten events of last decade & are certainly willing to flex Russia's muscles.

The fact that from a legal perspective, they are right is a nice bonus.

I wonder why the UNSC wasnt able to come to an agreement on Kosovo..im not sure but it might be the fact that KOSOVOS INDEPENDENCE WAS IS ILLEGAL

Lets be very clear here. Most of the UN is on the side of Russia, China and Serbia. That is very obvious by the dismal number of countries that have recognised Kosovo (only 20 odd so far against 175 that have NOT).

The reason it failed at the UN is because the powers that be (US, France, UK) decided to go against the majority of the UN and attempted to force their own solution. Serbia did try to negotiate a solution but the US was not interested.

The reason the EU wants to control it now is to cut out Russia, China, Serbia and pretty much the overwhelming majority of UN members and to engineer the US solution within itself by using the support of some EU members.

Therefore, it is the US blocking a solution by going against the world, who are opposed to recognition!

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner Monday stated that Kosovo's independence is "carried out in a good way" and that "there was no other solution".
--

Such narrow-mindedness is why the Western/US unipolar world is once again changing into a multipolar world with the resurgence of Russia, the rise of China and the fading of the US.

The world has had enough of Western nonsense. Serbia just needs to stand firm.

I wonder why the UNSC wasnt able to come to an agreement on Kosovo..im not sure but it might be the fact that KOSOVOS INDEPENDENCE WAS IS ILLEGAL
(Peter V, 3 March 2008 16:58)

I'm glad you understand the fact that Kosova is independent, but is that your opinion? Sooner or later the UN will adopt which will be a firm line between self-determination and a nation's sovereignty.
Was America's independence in 1776 illegal? I'm sure all the ex-soviet states are illegal as well; possibly every country is illegal because they broke off from a parent country.

Peter,

the future of Russia is of the same as yugoslavia. While Russia is growing economically (oil & gas) it is killing all democratic institutions and tramping on inealinable human rights (free speech). When Russian oil peaks in the '11 or so, expect a revolt. Maybe a c.i.-A inspired otpor? Russia's history will repeat and more of these "ex soviet" states will emerge.

Bruce:
"And Olf's point was..."

Believe you're actually referring to my rebuttal (#13) of 'Wils' point (#4) :)

Only referred to Russia's economy in my last post because 'Wil' described it as 'minute' - which was inaccurate, so felt obliged to correct him :)

However what I did say is correct, as indeed is most of what you had to say (at least about economics). Could get involved in a discussion about PPP vs 'Nominal' GDP figures, BRIC's vs G6 economies etc., but won't - primary topic here is about UN. Besides which, last time I launched into economic trivia, B92 truncated most of my post.. hmphhh! :)

Trust you realise Japan & Germany didn't get veto because axis lost in WWII, so when 'veto recipients' were decided, they lost out - justifiably so in my opinion.

As to getting the veto now.. the issue is largely problematic as isn't going to happen - why would current 'veto holders' want to extend their membership? There is also the small matter of the Japanese mindset - don't like to apologise.

And as to the issue of the 'veto' itself, real issue isn't about coming to an agreement.. real issue is about powerful countries having a way [[[ other than the military ]]] of scuppering an issue they feel strongly about - think of it as a pressure release valve for international tension.

ps: current commodity prices are here to stay (relatively speaking).


KS:

Yugoslavia no longer exists, so what's your point?

Certainly can't be talking about Serbia - recent elections were free & fair - as attested to by EU.

As for peak oil - leaving aside the question of just what is, & what is not in Siberia, most of the rest of the world has already passed that point (& I'm not taking into account factors such as
non-disclosure of real vs paper reserves). And as supply falls, prices rise - decline in revenues won't be as dramatic as you appear to think (US$200 a barrel anyone?).

CIA? Same outfit that messed up on WMD?

And about possible russian fragmentation.. good argument for denying a K-albanian UDI, although don't think NATO jets have the range :)