JS leader opens possibility of talks with DS

SAA can be sent to Parliment and conditioally ratified - conditioed on the EU clarifying that when Serbia initialed and signs such agreement the EU must respect Serbia's soverignity and territorial integrity.

In that position the ball falls squarely with the EU - are they true about being a friend of Serbia or Not?

Is the the european door open or are they the ones who close it by disrespecting international norms and law and mutualality?

Lets recall Rupel on soverignity for another nation on the perripehry of geographic europe;

""The European Union reiterates its full commitment for ensuring territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia and will continue to strive for peaceful resolution of disputes," Rupel said after the meeting, according to the Slovenian Foreign Ministry."
http://www.sta.si/en/vest.php?s=a&t=0&id=1283608&pr=1

So what should be any different to Serbia - well and truly in Europe?

EU has to act with mutual respect if it really means what it says!

“Serbia, unlike Georgia, came down extremely and unnecessarily hard on the local population, especially civilians, after they attempted to separate from the mother country. (Peter Sudyka, 16 May 2008 15:10)”

Actually Peter, only 2000 people were killed in clashes in Kosovo before the NATO bombing, despite claims of up to 100,000 dead.

It is true that Milosevic cracked down excessively after the NATO bombing, but the decision of the West to split Kosovo off from Serbia was made when the death toll was relatively low. You can not justified the NATO actions with the crimes that came AFTER.

Between 200,000 and 900,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq fighting insurgents there.

I just can’t see 2,000 deaths in fighting with violent separatists to be adequate justification for splitting up a country.

More Kurds than that died in a single act (using chemical weapons) under Saddam yet no Right to Self Determination for them and they don’t even have ONE country to call home, let alone two.

Strange as it is for me to agree with Palma, I'm forced to do so. Two groupings in the election argued in favor of Kosovo at the expense of Serbia's EU integration, and lost 250,000 voters from the last election. Two groupings (ZES and SPS-PUPS-JS) argued in favor of preserving both Kosovo and Serbia's EU integration, and gained 300,000 voters. This is why I expect that Princip and like-minded colleagues are in for a big surprise when it is announced that DS and SPS have opted to join forces at the national level. Its only logical: only those that are committed to fulfilling our heritage (Kosovo) and our destiny (the EU) have our best interests at heart. SRS, DSS, and LDP quite simply don't get it. As difficult as it is for me to admit, the SPS coalition apparently does.

The SPS/PUPS/JS boat is looking a little rocky and one gets the impression that Dacic is being stretched from within his coalition and from outside - the other two coalitions.

From a place of comfort of being able to choose, its becoming very difficult. If the reports are true both sides are telling Dacic its an all or nothing deal; either Belgrade and the country or nothing. I almost feel sorry for Dacic.

The verbal jousting between Tadic and Kostunica is symptomatic of the problem.

Dacic must make his mind up soon or an already tense situation will get worse.

rolerkoster

You sound like Joe who does not like to pass up the opportunity the let everyone know that he is a US citizen.

Serbia has every right to be a part of EU, no less than anyone in Europe, as long as they meet the requirements.

Peter Sudyka

Hi, Piotr ! Since you forgot to say good bye I escape open polemics with you but almost every post of yours is full of disinformation. You are too educated and informed not to know the following :

1. That Georgia is ruled by a regime whose only merit is that it opposes Russia.
2. That Georgians as a nation were formed by the Russians and thus during last 5000 years they existed as separate state only 17 years. Meanwhile The Ossetians and the Abkhasins joined Russia as separate states. And they did it long before Russians saved the hostile to each other Kartli tribes and declared them to be one nation.
3. Georgia when it broke away tried to steal territories inhabited for 2000 years by the Ossetians and Abkhasians. But they failed and it always happened without Russian support.
4.You should also be aware that Georgians were "cleaned" only in Abkhasia and that Abkhasia has returned all the Georgians (70 000 ) who were able to prove that they had made no crimes against this people. There is no other precedent in the history of wars.
5. Though Ossetians have 1000 times more rights to separate from Georgia than the K-Albanians from Serbia Russia still not recognized their independence. But Russia raised the stakes by stepping toward the recongnition unless the US back vocals stop disintegration of Serbia.

Piotr it's a long list but because the Poles usually stop to be reasonable when it comes to Russian interests I stop it here. Don't worry about Serbs ,Ossetians and Abkhasians because we stand on their side. Better take care of the K-Albanistan you create in Europe. The only guilt of the Serbs is that they are not used to sing in the chorus.

Cheers !

as an EU citizen I would be pleased about a storno of the SAA by the zastava coalition. EULEX is the best solution - and as long as the The Hague cooperation of Serbia is such a farce, there should be no economical EU privileges to Serbia.

Princip

You have to remember that Abkhazia and South Ossetia attempted to break away from Georgia in the early ninetees in violent separatist wars where thousands of Georgians were ethnically cleansed and from these territories and still not allowed back, or killed.

Serbia, unlike Georgia, came down extremely and unnecessarily hard on the local population, especially civilians, after they attempted to separate from the mother country. Georgia sent in troops to take out the separatist forces, but there were no campaigns carried out against the local populace (I am sure there were incidents, but not on the same scale as in Kosovo, for example), attempting the same strategy as the Macedonians did against their Albanian separatists, without the same success, of course.

This is why the EU agrees with the Georgian stance and not with the Serbian one, at least I think so, though indeed political orientation probably plays a role too.

I'm not shure whether Palma actually read the agreement. Art.135 stipulates:
"This Agreement shall apply, on the one hand, to the territories in which the Treaties establishing the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community are applied and under the conditions laid down in those Treaties, and to the territory of Serbia on the other.
The Agreement shall not apply in Kosovo which is at present under international administration pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999. This is without prejudice to the current status of Kosovo or the determination of its final status under the same Resolution."
Which means that this agreement is signed with a Serbia without Kosovo.
Furthermore Art.5 says:
"International and regional peace and stability, the development of good neighbourly relations , human rights and the respect and protection of minorities are central to the Stabilisation and Association process referred to in the conclusions of the Council of the European Union on 21 June 1999. The conclusion and the implementation of this Agreement come within the framework of the conclusions of the Council of the European Union of 29 April 1997 and are based on the individual merits of Serbia."
And Art.6:
Serbia commits itself to continue to foster cooperation and good neighbourly relations with the other countries of the region including an appropriate level of mutual concessions concerning the movement of persons, goods, capital and services as well as the development of projects of common interest,..."
Remember that for 18 of the contracting nation Kosovo is an independent state and you'll understand that a lack of cooperation and good "neighbourly" relations with this quasi state could be interpreted as a failure of Belgrade to fullfill the conditions of this agreement.

This is why it is so urgent to clear those points with EU before ratifying this agreement.

"Serbia has every right to be a part of EU, no less than anyone in Europe, as long as they meet the requirements."

Peter, sure it has that right! And i would be happy when one day my city (Timisoara) and Novi Sad will simply be neighboring cities in a united Europe. And they want that too. But it seems that there is a majority in central Serbia that doesn`t want to see that happen.

Princip,

Well said!!! Europe is begging you to join them, while Serbia should put the preconditions, otherwise no agreement. Bravo Principe bravo Serbia. Don’t even think to defer, not for a single mm, and you will “harm” Europeans, and will stay with Russia, India and China (Asia - good friendship). While, “poor” Kosova will have to travel with Europe and USA. What can we do, we don’t have a choice, while you have three “powerful” countries with you, we only have USA, Europe (27), Australia, Canada, South Korea, Japan, Peru etc etc. in other words, countries from the all continents.

Matthew I fully agree with you. However looking back doesn't get us anywhere.
Also all these talk about the E.U. has to show they are our friends, or we can't be friends with countries that has bombed us and taken Kosovo away or the E.U. needs us and we don't need the E.U. is the biggest nonsense ever.
There are no friends in international relationships. The status of Kosovo needed to be resolved, unfortunately we didn't have the U.S. behind us, and the E.U. isn't capable of solving anything on its own. Doesn't mean that we won't have the support on other matters, or that we don't need the E.U. or to remain good relationships with our widespread neigbours in Europe. Are we really different then Bosnia or Croatia who both are trying to get into the E.U.? Why does Croatia thinks it needs to enter the E.U. Are we richer are we in a better position?

And the SAA agreement was discussed with Kostunica, everything was already written down before Kosovo became indepened. Ofcourse it only aplies to Serbia without Kosovo because Kosovo is under U.N. juristriction and not under Belgrade. The SAA has been discussed with Belgrade. So indepenedend or not the SAA would still only apply to Serbia without Kosovo. So Markovic is right on this one.

“I am against annulling the SAA, and I am also for Kosovo remaining an integral part of Serbia, because that is written in Resolution 1244. In the SAA, there is article 135 which speaks of respecting Resolution 1244, and that’s end of story,” Marković said.

Richard Z,

I'm pro-Europe, just not in a hurry.

No one is joining the EU anytime soon. The EU is having a bit of an identity crisis and can’t even agree on a new constitution, let alone new members. Croatia will certainly get in the EU sooner, they have a more “Western” feel to their culture and work habits.

Bosnia remains an EU colony lagging far behind Serbia in joining, despite the fact that the EU pretty much runs the place and makes all the final decisions.

I honestly do not feel that delaying the ratification of the SAA until we get further clarification from the EU will delay final entry into the EU. Already they are talking of allowing the region to join as a block in order that they don’t block each other.

Besides, I personally feel Serbia would get a better deal in the end if she were to continue to move towards Russia a little more right now. If done in an intelligent manner so as not to push Western Europe away, but to bring Russia and Western Europe together, it could only help and balance Europe as a whole. Its always been Serbia’s destiny to be that bridge between East and West.

Besides, the reality is, the EU can not allow Russia to regain a strong sphere of influence in such a strategic region. The EU need Serbia to finish the set. Ever play the game Risk? I am quite sure the EU would be willing to pay a decent price to retain Serbia in their plans for a future Europe.

SAA can be sent to Parliment and conditioally ratified - conditioed on the EU clarifying that when Serbia initialed and signs such agreement the EU must respect Serbia's soverignity and territorial integrity.

In that position the ball falls squarely with the EU - are they true about being a friend of Serbia or Not?

Is the the european door open or are they the ones who close it by disrespecting international norms and law and mutualality?

Lets recall Rupel on soverignity for another nation on the perripehry of geographic europe;

""The European Union reiterates its full commitment for ensuring territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia and will continue to strive for peaceful resolution of disputes," Rupel said after the meeting, according to the Slovenian Foreign Ministry."
http://www.sta.si/en/vest.php?s=a&t=0&id=1283608&pr=1

So what should be any different to Serbia - well and truly in Europe?

EU has to act with mutual respect if it really means what it says!

as an EU citizen I would be pleased about a storno of the SAA by the zastava coalition. EULEX is the best solution - and as long as the The Hague cooperation of Serbia is such a farce, there should be no economical EU privileges to Serbia.

Princip

You have to remember that Abkhazia and South Ossetia attempted to break away from Georgia in the early ninetees in violent separatist wars where thousands of Georgians were ethnically cleansed and from these territories and still not allowed back, or killed.

Serbia, unlike Georgia, came down extremely and unnecessarily hard on the local population, especially civilians, after they attempted to separate from the mother country. Georgia sent in troops to take out the separatist forces, but there were no campaigns carried out against the local populace (I am sure there were incidents, but not on the same scale as in Kosovo, for example), attempting the same strategy as the Macedonians did against their Albanian separatists, without the same success, of course.

This is why the EU agrees with the Georgian stance and not with the Serbian one, at least I think so, though indeed political orientation probably plays a role too.

Princip,

Well said!!! Europe is begging you to join them, while Serbia should put the preconditions, otherwise no agreement. Bravo Principe bravo Serbia. Don’t even think to defer, not for a single mm, and you will “harm” Europeans, and will stay with Russia, India and China (Asia - good friendship). While, “poor” Kosova will have to travel with Europe and USA. What can we do, we don’t have a choice, while you have three “powerful” countries with you, we only have USA, Europe (27), Australia, Canada, South Korea, Japan, Peru etc etc. in other words, countries from the all continents.

rolerkoster

You sound like Joe who does not like to pass up the opportunity the let everyone know that he is a US citizen.

Serbia has every right to be a part of EU, no less than anyone in Europe, as long as they meet the requirements.

I'm not shure whether Palma actually read the agreement. Art.135 stipulates:
"This Agreement shall apply, on the one hand, to the territories in which the Treaties establishing the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community are applied and under the conditions laid down in those Treaties, and to the territory of Serbia on the other.
The Agreement shall not apply in Kosovo which is at present under international administration pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999. This is without prejudice to the current status of Kosovo or the determination of its final status under the same Resolution."
Which means that this agreement is signed with a Serbia without Kosovo.
Furthermore Art.5 says:
"International and regional peace and stability, the development of good neighbourly relations , human rights and the respect and protection of minorities are central to the Stabilisation and Association process referred to in the conclusions of the Council of the European Union on 21 June 1999. The conclusion and the implementation of this Agreement come within the framework of the conclusions of the Council of the European Union of 29 April 1997 and are based on the individual merits of Serbia."
And Art.6:
Serbia commits itself to continue to foster cooperation and good neighbourly relations with the other countries of the region including an appropriate level of mutual concessions concerning the movement of persons, goods, capital and services as well as the development of projects of common interest,..."
Remember that for 18 of the contracting nation Kosovo is an independent state and you'll understand that a lack of cooperation and good "neighbourly" relations with this quasi state could be interpreted as a failure of Belgrade to fullfill the conditions of this agreement.

This is why it is so urgent to clear those points with EU before ratifying this agreement.

“Serbia, unlike Georgia, came down extremely and unnecessarily hard on the local population, especially civilians, after they attempted to separate from the mother country. (Peter Sudyka, 16 May 2008 15:10)”

Actually Peter, only 2000 people were killed in clashes in Kosovo before the NATO bombing, despite claims of up to 100,000 dead.

It is true that Milosevic cracked down excessively after the NATO bombing, but the decision of the West to split Kosovo off from Serbia was made when the death toll was relatively low. You can not justified the NATO actions with the crimes that came AFTER.

Between 200,000 and 900,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq fighting insurgents there.

I just can’t see 2,000 deaths in fighting with violent separatists to be adequate justification for splitting up a country.

More Kurds than that died in a single act (using chemical weapons) under Saddam yet no Right to Self Determination for them and they don’t even have ONE country to call home, let alone two.

The SPS/PUPS/JS boat is looking a little rocky and one gets the impression that Dacic is being stretched from within his coalition and from outside - the other two coalitions.

From a place of comfort of being able to choose, its becoming very difficult. If the reports are true both sides are telling Dacic its an all or nothing deal; either Belgrade and the country or nothing. I almost feel sorry for Dacic.

The verbal jousting between Tadic and Kostunica is symptomatic of the problem.

Dacic must make his mind up soon or an already tense situation will get worse.

Strange as it is for me to agree with Palma, I'm forced to do so. Two groupings in the election argued in favor of Kosovo at the expense of Serbia's EU integration, and lost 250,000 voters from the last election. Two groupings (ZES and SPS-PUPS-JS) argued in favor of preserving both Kosovo and Serbia's EU integration, and gained 300,000 voters. This is why I expect that Princip and like-minded colleagues are in for a big surprise when it is announced that DS and SPS have opted to join forces at the national level. Its only logical: only those that are committed to fulfilling our heritage (Kosovo) and our destiny (the EU) have our best interests at heart. SRS, DSS, and LDP quite simply don't get it. As difficult as it is for me to admit, the SPS coalition apparently does.

Matthew I fully agree with you. However looking back doesn't get us anywhere.
Also all these talk about the E.U. has to show they are our friends, or we can't be friends with countries that has bombed us and taken Kosovo away or the E.U. needs us and we don't need the E.U. is the biggest nonsense ever.
There are no friends in international relationships. The status of Kosovo needed to be resolved, unfortunately we didn't have the U.S. behind us, and the E.U. isn't capable of solving anything on its own. Doesn't mean that we won't have the support on other matters, or that we don't need the E.U. or to remain good relationships with our widespread neigbours in Europe. Are we really different then Bosnia or Croatia who both are trying to get into the E.U.? Why does Croatia thinks it needs to enter the E.U. Are we richer are we in a better position?

And the SAA agreement was discussed with Kostunica, everything was already written down before Kosovo became indepened. Ofcourse it only aplies to Serbia without Kosovo because Kosovo is under U.N. juristriction and not under Belgrade. The SAA has been discussed with Belgrade. So indepenedend or not the SAA would still only apply to Serbia without Kosovo. So Markovic is right on this one.

“I am against annulling the SAA, and I am also for Kosovo remaining an integral part of Serbia, because that is written in Resolution 1244. In the SAA, there is article 135 which speaks of respecting Resolution 1244, and that’s end of story,” Marković said.

Peter Sudyka

Hi, Piotr ! Since you forgot to say good bye I escape open polemics with you but almost every post of yours is full of disinformation. You are too educated and informed not to know the following :

1. That Georgia is ruled by a regime whose only merit is that it opposes Russia.
2. That Georgians as a nation were formed by the Russians and thus during last 5000 years they existed as separate state only 17 years. Meanwhile The Ossetians and the Abkhasins joined Russia as separate states. And they did it long before Russians saved the hostile to each other Kartli tribes and declared them to be one nation.
3. Georgia when it broke away tried to steal territories inhabited for 2000 years by the Ossetians and Abkhasians. But they failed and it always happened without Russian support.
4.You should also be aware that Georgians were "cleaned" only in Abkhasia and that Abkhasia has returned all the Georgians (70 000 ) who were able to prove that they had made no crimes against this people. There is no other precedent in the history of wars.
5. Though Ossetians have 1000 times more rights to separate from Georgia than the K-Albanians from Serbia Russia still not recognized their independence. But Russia raised the stakes by stepping toward the recongnition unless the US back vocals stop disintegration of Serbia.

Piotr it's a long list but because the Poles usually stop to be reasonable when it comes to Russian interests I stop it here. Don't worry about Serbs ,Ossetians and Abkhasians because we stand on their side. Better take care of the K-Albanistan you create in Europe. The only guilt of the Serbs is that they are not used to sing in the chorus.

Cheers !

Richard Z,

I'm pro-Europe, just not in a hurry.

No one is joining the EU anytime soon. The EU is having a bit of an identity crisis and can’t even agree on a new constitution, let alone new members. Croatia will certainly get in the EU sooner, they have a more “Western” feel to their culture and work habits.

Bosnia remains an EU colony lagging far behind Serbia in joining, despite the fact that the EU pretty much runs the place and makes all the final decisions.

I honestly do not feel that delaying the ratification of the SAA until we get further clarification from the EU will delay final entry into the EU. Already they are talking of allowing the region to join as a block in order that they don’t block each other.

Besides, I personally feel Serbia would get a better deal in the end if she were to continue to move towards Russia a little more right now. If done in an intelligent manner so as not to push Western Europe away, but to bring Russia and Western Europe together, it could only help and balance Europe as a whole. Its always been Serbia’s destiny to be that bridge between East and West.

Besides, the reality is, the EU can not allow Russia to regain a strong sphere of influence in such a strategic region. The EU need Serbia to finish the set. Ever play the game Risk? I am quite sure the EU would be willing to pay a decent price to retain Serbia in their plans for a future Europe.

"Serbia has every right to be a part of EU, no less than anyone in Europe, as long as they meet the requirements."

Peter, sure it has that right! And i would be happy when one day my city (Timisoara) and Novi Sad will simply be neighboring cities in a united Europe. And they want that too. But it seems that there is a majority in central Serbia that doesn`t want to see that happen.