Ahtisaari deputy: UNMIK in difficult position

In summary, the message is: all this situation has been created in order to help the Serbs, it's just that they don't understand it and boycott a great plan. Right?

Strange, Ahtisaari's deputy does not mention the basic principle of all international relations: the Law. Or is this the end of the law?

Ahmet

Please come back to planet Earth. In case you didn't know, every permanent member of the Security Council has a VETO, which overrides any vote but since it didn't even get to that, it is still rejected.

Since the overwhelming majority of the UN general assembly (i.e. The World)oppose Kosovo independence, it is also rejected.

The wading powers that be can try to engineer a solution through the dismal support they have but the simply fact is that Serbia and most of the world reject this puppet entity.

The problem here is that the Ahtisaari plan was rejected by both Russia and China, two permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The sooner this is realised the better. It is the US and its servants that are having difficulties implementing a rejected plan. Serbia is just abiding by the law.

Mr Rohan,
"He said that the problem was that Serbs were boycotting the international and Kosovo institutions on Belgrade’s instructions, and this was leading to a scenario where the measures intended for their protection could not be applied."
Is it too difficult for you and your string masters to understand that the Serbs want to be governed by Serbia. Why on earth would Serbs want to be enslaved by the Albanians and their masters, the International Community.
I thought all you diplomats were educated and were able to comprehend deductive reasoning. It is time for legal representation of Kosovo Serbs. But more so, it is time for all of you international diplomats to endeavour as Taxi Cab Drivers.

Taking out the spin, we have:

UNMIK has not received instructions from the UN for any transfer to EULEX because there are none forthcoming. EULEX is a rogue entity operating without UN sanction.

Ahtisaari status plan was never approved by UN. So such can give no support for K-albanian UDI.

Without UN approval, status plan is for all intents & purposes, merely the opinion of those who wrote it.

These people - Albert Rohan included, were employed by the UN

And the fact that these very same people are ignoring the rules under which the UN operates, can only serve to further invalidate the OPINIONS they advocate.

K-albanians never had any incentive to negotiate as they had the implicit 'carte blanche' support of the US. Status plan is nothing more than an imposed solution by external powers with their own agendas.

Rohan says that plan is the only way forward as there was no way parties could reach agreement. This is rubbish & the plan solves nothing.

A plan that basically ignores one side of the dispute while capitulating to the other merely postpones & buries the issue - it doesn't solve it. And using force to impose this solution will only exacerbate things down the track.

Gunboat diplomacy does not work.

PRN

Ahtisaari obviously made the wrong choice and Serbia, Russia and China will make sure the US and the minority pushing for independence know it.

It will take a lot of repetitive arguements to come to that realisation but it will eventually hit home.

Finally!!!
The article says's....."We took independence as the basis of our proposal,..." I thought I would never read anything like this - a confession! So, all the efforts were since always "pro independence"! Weren't you supposed to take SC resolution 1244 and provisions of international law as a basis????
As for the UN being in a difficult position - they got themselves in this position - they never and still aren't exercising their executive power! However, it's about time someone says loud and clear that UN will stay in Kosovo for much longer than many expected. This time with more support from China as well. Tibet issue will make them more interested in supporting Kosovo remain in Serbia.

ZK UK,
Actually the plan was never put up for a vote, and you can leave China out because they pretty much stayed neutral on the issue.Reality is that 3 out 5 permanent members support the plan one against and one obstaining. To me this is clear majority for Kosova's Independence including Ahtisari's plan.Getting back to the article. UN has to come up with clear definition of its future mission in Kosova, and this will be done sometime in June.

ZK UK,
May I suggest you not waste your time trying to enlighten Ahmet Isufi regarding the workings of the UNSC.

Ahmet Isufi, or whoever he may be, uses several aliases (verified by B92) and has been told before, by several posters, and yet continues to write this gibberish regarding the veto power within the UNSC.

Dear ZK UK,

I think it is mad to enter a pointless debate on how legal Ahtisari plan was/is.

Forget the hypocracy of morality, BUT get the facts together...

Marti Ahtisari was chosen by the UNSC (including Russia and China).

Naturally his conclusions had to be accepted by UNSC because they send him for this mission...

Let me remind you that he had 2 BIG choices:
1. Independence for Kosovo
2. No independence for Kosovo

...which, whatever the choice the UNSC should have endorsed...

However,now one can see that for Russia only no-independence option was acceptable!!!!...thus limiting Ahtisari's options to make a fair conclusion...

Hmmmmm....

Do you think one need to be genious to relise this....

This is a typical hypocracy...

Ban to Ban Moscow agenda
do you now what i mean....................

Ok..since nobody says it, i'll say it...UNSCR 1244 as any other other art. in any law national or Int. law (especially the latter) leave space to interpretation...so we take it from there....you can call upon it by saying that it doesn't allow ks independece..I SAY it didn't exclude it as an option...

But as i see very soon serbia will replace the glory of the roman law by it's knowledge of LAW ;)

Peace

Alba:
> I SAY it didn't exclude it as an option...

You are of course entitled to your opinion regarding the interpretation of UN resolution 1244.

On the other hand, my opinion is that the purpose of 1244 was to stabilise the situation in Kosovo until a solution could be agreed upon by all sides of the dispute.

But when one side seeks to impose its own solution on the other unilaterally & then argues that it can do so by taking elements of that resolution out of context & ignoring most of the rest of it in order to justify it's actions, that I & others are fully entitled to call this action into question.

K-albanians have 'broken the egg to free the yolk'.

Now let's see if the chick emerges, or the yolk gets eaten.

ZK UK,
Actually the plan was never put up for a vote, and you can leave China out because they pretty much stayed neutral on the issue.Reality is that 3 out 5 permanent members support the plan one against and one obstaining. To me this is clear majority for Kosova's Independence including Ahtisari's plan.Getting back to the article. UN has to come up with clear definition of its future mission in Kosova, and this will be done sometime in June.

Mr Rohan,
"He said that the problem was that Serbs were boycotting the international and Kosovo institutions on Belgrade’s instructions, and this was leading to a scenario where the measures intended for their protection could not be applied."
Is it too difficult for you and your string masters to understand that the Serbs want to be governed by Serbia. Why on earth would Serbs want to be enslaved by the Albanians and their masters, the International Community.
I thought all you diplomats were educated and were able to comprehend deductive reasoning. It is time for legal representation of Kosovo Serbs. But more so, it is time for all of you international diplomats to endeavour as Taxi Cab Drivers.

In summary, the message is: all this situation has been created in order to help the Serbs, it's just that they don't understand it and boycott a great plan. Right?

Strange, Ahtisaari's deputy does not mention the basic principle of all international relations: the Law. Or is this the end of the law?

Ahmet

Please come back to planet Earth. In case you didn't know, every permanent member of the Security Council has a VETO, which overrides any vote but since it didn't even get to that, it is still rejected.

Since the overwhelming majority of the UN general assembly (i.e. The World)oppose Kosovo independence, it is also rejected.

The wading powers that be can try to engineer a solution through the dismal support they have but the simply fact is that Serbia and most of the world reject this puppet entity.

ZK UK,
May I suggest you not waste your time trying to enlighten Ahmet Isufi regarding the workings of the UNSC.

Ahmet Isufi, or whoever he may be, uses several aliases (verified by B92) and has been told before, by several posters, and yet continues to write this gibberish regarding the veto power within the UNSC.

Dear ZK UK,

I think it is mad to enter a pointless debate on how legal Ahtisari plan was/is.

Forget the hypocracy of morality, BUT get the facts together...

Marti Ahtisari was chosen by the UNSC (including Russia and China).

Naturally his conclusions had to be accepted by UNSC because they send him for this mission...

Let me remind you that he had 2 BIG choices:
1. Independence for Kosovo
2. No independence for Kosovo

...which, whatever the choice the UNSC should have endorsed...

However,now one can see that for Russia only no-independence option was acceptable!!!!...thus limiting Ahtisari's options to make a fair conclusion...

Hmmmmm....

Do you think one need to be genious to relise this....

This is a typical hypocracy...

PRN

Ahtisaari obviously made the wrong choice and Serbia, Russia and China will make sure the US and the minority pushing for independence know it.

It will take a lot of repetitive arguements to come to that realisation but it will eventually hit home.

Finally!!!
The article says's....."We took independence as the basis of our proposal,..." I thought I would never read anything like this - a confession! So, all the efforts were since always "pro independence"! Weren't you supposed to take SC resolution 1244 and provisions of international law as a basis????
As for the UN being in a difficult position - they got themselves in this position - they never and still aren't exercising their executive power! However, it's about time someone says loud and clear that UN will stay in Kosovo for much longer than many expected. This time with more support from China as well. Tibet issue will make them more interested in supporting Kosovo remain in Serbia.

The problem here is that the Ahtisaari plan was rejected by both Russia and China, two permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The sooner this is realised the better. It is the US and its servants that are having difficulties implementing a rejected plan. Serbia is just abiding by the law.

Taking out the spin, we have:

UNMIK has not received instructions from the UN for any transfer to EULEX because there are none forthcoming. EULEX is a rogue entity operating without UN sanction.

Ahtisaari status plan was never approved by UN. So such can give no support for K-albanian UDI.

Without UN approval, status plan is for all intents & purposes, merely the opinion of those who wrote it.

These people - Albert Rohan included, were employed by the UN

And the fact that these very same people are ignoring the rules under which the UN operates, can only serve to further invalidate the OPINIONS they advocate.

K-albanians never had any incentive to negotiate as they had the implicit 'carte blanche' support of the US. Status plan is nothing more than an imposed solution by external powers with their own agendas.

Rohan says that plan is the only way forward as there was no way parties could reach agreement. This is rubbish & the plan solves nothing.

A plan that basically ignores one side of the dispute while capitulating to the other merely postpones & buries the issue - it doesn't solve it. And using force to impose this solution will only exacerbate things down the track.

Gunboat diplomacy does not work.

Ban to Ban Moscow agenda
do you now what i mean....................

Ok..since nobody says it, i'll say it...UNSCR 1244 as any other other art. in any law national or Int. law (especially the latter) leave space to interpretation...so we take it from there....you can call upon it by saying that it doesn't allow ks independece..I SAY it didn't exclude it as an option...

But as i see very soon serbia will replace the glory of the roman law by it's knowledge of LAW ;)

Peace

Alba:
> I SAY it didn't exclude it as an option...

You are of course entitled to your opinion regarding the interpretation of UN resolution 1244.

On the other hand, my opinion is that the purpose of 1244 was to stabilise the situation in Kosovo until a solution could be agreed upon by all sides of the dispute.

But when one side seeks to impose its own solution on the other unilaterally & then argues that it can do so by taking elements of that resolution out of context & ignoring most of the rest of it in order to justify it's actions, that I & others are fully entitled to call this action into question.

K-albanians have 'broken the egg to free the yolk'.

Now let's see if the chick emerges, or the yolk gets eaten.