Monday, 13.10.2008.
14:35
Tibor Varadi says that, "to the best of his knowledge", the UN General Assembly did not ask for urgent procedure for Serbia's ICJ resolution.
Izvor: Danas
pre 15 godina
You're right Teddy, only six "law-breakers".
But I wouldn't speculate so much on how everyone will vote or abstain.
As for getting reckognized from Serbia th logical term seems to be when both states will be ripe for EU (with Serbia being actually in advantage), and the variable EULEX coming in soon. Uh, and that understanding that moving forward is better then remaining stuck.
pre 15 godina
genc,
Get your facts straight. I clicked your link and there are only 6 "law-breakers". The Registrar doesn't count as a judge. There are 9 "law-obeyers". I doubt you will get Jordan or Morocco on your side in time and I really wonder if the Japanese judge will be political. Anyways, trying to handicap the judges is useless. Whatever ruling they make has to be legally justified; arguing that UDIs are legal only when you get the US on your side won't cut it. The British tactic of counting what happened before 1999 and leaving out what's happened since 1999 won't cut it either. The once-off explanation won't fly either. Your only, slim, hope is if the ICJ throws the case out like they did when Yugoslavia sued NATO for attacking Belgrade in 1999. But this is academic. Like it or not, Kosovo is a frozen conflict and not a state until it gets recognition from Serbia. And it won't get that recognition until your supporters start serious negotiations with the Serbs rather than dictating to them.
pre 15 godina
Miles,
get your facts straight.
http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=2&p3=1
There are seven "law-breakers" and two "to-be law-breakers".
pre 15 godina
I have just checked out the members of ICJ there are only three judges from the axis of international law breakers, a British, an American and a German judge, so there is a good chance that justice will be upheld, atleast in name.
O and by the way, shame on Montenegro.
pre 15 godina
I have just checked out the members of ICJ there are only three judges from the axis of international law breakers, a British, an American and a German judge, so there is a good chance that justice will be upheld, atleast in name.
O and by the way, shame on Montenegro.
pre 15 godina
genc,
Get your facts straight. I clicked your link and there are only 6 "law-breakers". The Registrar doesn't count as a judge. There are 9 "law-obeyers". I doubt you will get Jordan or Morocco on your side in time and I really wonder if the Japanese judge will be political. Anyways, trying to handicap the judges is useless. Whatever ruling they make has to be legally justified; arguing that UDIs are legal only when you get the US on your side won't cut it. The British tactic of counting what happened before 1999 and leaving out what's happened since 1999 won't cut it either. The once-off explanation won't fly either. Your only, slim, hope is if the ICJ throws the case out like they did when Yugoslavia sued NATO for attacking Belgrade in 1999. But this is academic. Like it or not, Kosovo is a frozen conflict and not a state until it gets recognition from Serbia. And it won't get that recognition until your supporters start serious negotiations with the Serbs rather than dictating to them.
pre 15 godina
Miles,
get your facts straight.
http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=2&p3=1
There are seven "law-breakers" and two "to-be law-breakers".
pre 15 godina
You're right Teddy, only six "law-breakers".
But I wouldn't speculate so much on how everyone will vote or abstain.
As for getting reckognized from Serbia th logical term seems to be when both states will be ripe for EU (with Serbia being actually in advantage), and the variable EULEX coming in soon. Uh, and that understanding that moving forward is better then remaining stuck.
pre 15 godina
I have just checked out the members of ICJ there are only three judges from the axis of international law breakers, a British, an American and a German judge, so there is a good chance that justice will be upheld, atleast in name.
O and by the way, shame on Montenegro.
pre 15 godina
Miles,
get your facts straight.
http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=2&p3=1
There are seven "law-breakers" and two "to-be law-breakers".
pre 15 godina
genc,
Get your facts straight. I clicked your link and there are only 6 "law-breakers". The Registrar doesn't count as a judge. There are 9 "law-obeyers". I doubt you will get Jordan or Morocco on your side in time and I really wonder if the Japanese judge will be political. Anyways, trying to handicap the judges is useless. Whatever ruling they make has to be legally justified; arguing that UDIs are legal only when you get the US on your side won't cut it. The British tactic of counting what happened before 1999 and leaving out what's happened since 1999 won't cut it either. The once-off explanation won't fly either. Your only, slim, hope is if the ICJ throws the case out like they did when Yugoslavia sued NATO for attacking Belgrade in 1999. But this is academic. Like it or not, Kosovo is a frozen conflict and not a state until it gets recognition from Serbia. And it won't get that recognition until your supporters start serious negotiations with the Serbs rather than dictating to them.
pre 15 godina
You're right Teddy, only six "law-breakers".
But I wouldn't speculate so much on how everyone will vote or abstain.
As for getting reckognized from Serbia th logical term seems to be when both states will be ripe for EU (with Serbia being actually in advantage), and the variable EULEX coming in soon. Uh, and that understanding that moving forward is better then remaining stuck.
4 Komentari
Sortiraj po: