Monday, 13.07.2009.
10:35
Representatives of the Kosovo Albanian government in Priština will on July 17 send additional arguments to the International Court of Justice, reports said.
Izvor: Beta
pre 14 godina
We serbs lost legal and moral and whathaveyou right to our own land, kosovo? :) darlings, you lost your minds. try as hard as you like but facts are facts. facts: kosovo is serbian land. separatists and their supporters formed joint criminal enterprise trying to steal it. they cant. its a frozen conflict and limbo. that is all there is.
pre 14 godina
I just want to stress out one fact that was never mentioned in the previous posts.
Namely, the question Serbia sent to the ICJ was: "Was the UNILATERAL declaration of independence in accordance to the Intl.Law."
That word: UNILATERAL - is the key word.
I won't spare my words arguing what will happen if ICJ rule in favor of Serbia. Many posters have elaborated that theme in detail. I would like to say just a few words about the case ICJ come up with the ruling in favor of K-Albanian's UNILATERAL declaration of independence.
In that case every single separation movement in the would get an open invitation to UNILATERALLY proclaim its independence from central government. There will be no low that could stop them to do that. They could claim to have moral rights to secession since Government oppress them, they have legal right to secession since they follower self-determination. They could say they don't care if they should become UN member since the recognition of their UNILATERAL proclamation of independence is the act that any single state could wage on their behalf, etc...
As you can see, in that case world will be on the brink of chaos.
First that come to my mind is the Kurd minority in Turkey which suffered much worse state terror and for much longer time then K-Albanians. Why should they won't be allowed to UNILATERALLY declare their independence from Turkey? And after that we could imagine Basks, Corsicans, Flamans, Laponians, Uigurs, etc... And not to mention Africa.
So one could draw its own conclusion from that.
pre 14 godina
so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
(robertoruss, 13 July 2009 22:01)
--
Credibility? LOL!!!!
pre 14 godina
I doubt they sent any arguments on their own. The story should read, Western European and US lawyers sent new arguments. I doubt seriously that Kosovo's albanian lawyers could have crafted any meaningful arguments without the help of good Western lawyers
pre 14 godina
roberto said..."give that elitism a rest."
Really, roberto?
Practice what you preach.
pre 14 godina
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Thanks Kate, J-C would have said "forgive them because they don't know what they are doing..."
And what this gentlemen do not know is that during our last election our strongest and % leading right wing party, including his leader, were fortunately wiped out because of too extreme views...
Should I call it "ignorance", maybe better "not well informed!"
Salutations de M. le Suisse :)
pre 14 godina
The Kosovar albanians have a big advantage, a golf-style handicap in the ICJ. The handicap consists of support from the criminals that launched the attack on Yugoslavia 1999. But even with this handicap they will face problems because ICJ should make decisions based on the rule of law, not on the rule of criminals. The law is on the side of Serbia and the Albanians have the criminals. So the question is if the criminals or if justice will prevail in the International Court of Justice.
pre 14 godina
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 21:37)
Thanks for your rather confusing book about the way we should look at the different aspect of law and it's interpretation....
Believe it or not I have a totally opposite view and you can write another book it will not change my opinion!
As to my extremisms/bigotry, you made me laugh because you apparently have so little clue about what Switzerland is composed off and moreover the region where am coming from is certainly the most coloured in terms of well integrated nationalities.
My parents neighbours are wounderfull K-A and I don't want to open a polemic here by repeating what they are saying about the current K leadership! You would certainly call them traitors!
You also certainly know that less than 1% of K-A leaving in Switzerland had even the desire to return, guess why!
I would stress one more time the word "integrated' because we are certainly an example of integration of multi-nationalities, however most of the K-A welcomed in Switzerland during the war have not only never integrated but are causing a lot of problems and you certainly know in which field their are active... You might well look yourself at the statistics!!
Now if giving facts is a sign of bigotry and ignorance, then let me be ignorant, if not agreeing with the UDI is a a sign of supporting the serbian regime, then let me be a supporter and finally if believing in a "straight" international law is a funny thing nowadays, then let me dream of a better world order!
Last but not least if I would be the represented of bla bla bla, then Switzerland would have not recognized this UDI, not because of their inhabitants but because of the way if was done, simply illegaly.
Unfortunately, likewise so many other countries, we were forced to do it for various reasons...
Since you seem to be a well educated and smart person I would love to hear your interpretation of law regarding another dozen of regions that have been fighting for decades to have a well deserved country. I believe I do not have to list them, they are certainly know to you!
Cheers
pre 14 godina
"Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it."
Patrik, international community already has troops in Kosova, ever heard of KFOR? If you think that Serbia can use the ICJ to get an international consensus to start a war, than all I can say is "good luck"! In any case Serbia vs NATO is like a cat hissing at a tiger.
pre 14 godina
'Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. '
This is only an advisory ruling.
pre 14 godina
It is true that the upcoming ICJ ruling is non-binding. i was not in favor of the blgd regime taking this route, because it was clear all along that this would just be used as just another piece of ammunition, more fodder in the "non-violent" war against kosovo/a. nevertheless, they were able to trick/pressure/coerce enough members of the UNGA (as, apparently, according to their rules) to endorse the move. before the vote was even complete, the blgd regime announced (and has since oft repeated)that it would NEVER accept a ruling contrary to their particular legal opinion. in other words, the context for this whole ruling is questionable, to say the least, and blg's credibility low-low-low.
as to the spec's of the arguments of Kosovo/a, as provided in this article, i believe that they are absolutely reasonable and sound. i will not write a thesis paper right now defending each of them -- they have all been argued, many times, by myself and many other capable persons here.
ok, it is true that i am not an international legal expert. i personally know only one, and she would probably not be classifed as a "world expert" altho she is an intl law professor here in CAL, and is, shall we say, sympathetic to our side. as are many others. so, i am not an official "expert" but then, neither is anyone else writing here. and i am not impressed by the so-called arguments from the other side. At all.
i have said many times that the icj will NEVER rule in serbia's side in this case, and i stand by my word (unlike so many others who assured us that kosovo/a would never rec. more than 5, 10, 15 recognitions -- they'd all be taken back, bla bla bla.) so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
i have said that it will probably be some kind of mishy mashy ruling, as they are known for -- as in: yes, somehow serbia was responsible for not stopping the genocide of srebrenica, but not ACTually responsible (therefore supposedly don't need to pay reparations or feel too bad...) that should have made any legal expert wince, or cry, and many did, but the world has gone on, oft badly. for the morally impaired icj, it is biz as usual...
cheers!
roberto
frisco
ps we don't need any comments from people about the "substandard" use of the english language. first, because i could easily take a red pen to 90% of the postings here and be utterly justified. second, because my own use of english grammar, puntuation, etc. here is oft lazy and um creative, substandard, though i think sufficient for the circumstances. and third, because we are encouraging a variety of ideas and opinions here, even if some contributors are still in the process of learning or mastering english. if i had to compose these messages in serbo-croatian-bosnian, much less albanian, (hungarian??!) or even in german i would come up painfully short, as would most persons here! give that elitism a rest.
pre 14 godina
I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
(Kosova-USA, 13 July 2009 20:09)
--
Turkey is not a neighbour but if we are considering non-neighbours then lets include China and India, who strongly support Serbia.
pre 14 godina
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism?
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Kate with all due respect allow me to quote……
“I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!”
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
pre 14 godina
"temporary authorities of Kosovo"
They are temporary, new elections will have to be held every 4 years. Is that what B92 meant?
pre 14 godina
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Zoran,
In this case since you mentioned Romania, I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
pre 14 godina
(Adrian Gashi, 13 July 2009 17:45) Where to begin.....
You are correct. Any opinion that the ICJ renders is just that, an opinion. However, it may justify the use of force should Serbian choose that road. There is no court to sue in and Kosovo's leaders would not likely follow a court decision anyway. The whole point of sending to the ICJ is simply to get an international consensus. If the court renders a decision in Serbia's favor and Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it. Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. Of course if a decision is against them the end is near. But, either way this is a win/win for Serbia. Either they win the decision and take back Kosova or they lose and can tell the people "we tried".
pre 14 godina
Denis's comment to The Swiss: "It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives."
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism? Nothing at all!
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
pre 14 godina
There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 18:48)
--
These are the kind of myths and lies I am referring to. Taken from the US State Department site:
"After October 5, 2000, foreign embassies, including that of the U.S., reopened and Serbia, as the successor state to the F.R.Y., regained its seat in such international organizations as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the UN, and is actively participating in International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank projects." Check http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.htm
So just as Russia became the successor state to the USSR so did Serbia become the successor state to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Now come my southern Serbian citizens, please try to get your facts right. How do you expect to win an international court case if you can't even get the basics right?
pre 14 godina
Kate for each Nations constitution there is an atached high court that interprets that. Let alone any such thing as 1244 and Helsinki.
I am sure you are speculating as any of us in this site, what ICJ might rule or "advice". But according to Serbias neighbours, all interpreted both the UN and Helsinki and countless other relative treaties as above sufficient for the Kosovo independence.
Now if neighbours see it as that is the best result knowing Serbia deeper than anyone in Spain or India, the ICJ has the obligation for stabilising the region.
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that.
(Drink Water, 13 July 2009 14:59)
--
What hope do you have of convincing international judges when you can't even get your basic facts correct?
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Sooner or later our southern citizens (mainly of Albanian ethnicity) will realise that negotiations are the only path to lasting peace.
All these myths and lies will only delay the prosperity and well being of the province. It's time to face reality and to work towards a future for all - based on understanding and compromise.
pre 14 godina
To the Swiss,
It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives. As a swiss you should stick with what you do best, be neutral, and enjoy the wealth that this brings to you. Leave the others to care about the world conflicts and affairs.
Now when it comes to ICJ ruling I must say that many of the countries that are nowadays sovereign 'appeared' on the world's political map long before there was any 'international law' or even the UN. So to suggest that Kosovo's independence cannot be legitimate given UN objections (which are only partly so) is to take a naive interpretation of how international relations function. Int'l law is an array of interests (simplistically said, of course) which, when there's no convergence, it is 'violated' repeatedly.
Kosovo's claim to statehood, amongst many valid claims, should be primarily anchored on the 'moral argument' of state-sponsored killings which made Serbia's continued claim to sovereignty over Kosovo an untenable position. Note that the US's declaration of independence, long before there was any modern-day int'l law or an int'l org like the UN was based primarily on the idea of UK's colonial, repressive policy.
But, speaking of int'l law: how come Serbia consistently claims coverage by int'l law over its Kosovo sovereignty claim, when this same law was repeatedly violated through the commission of state-sponsored war crimes? What part of int'l law sanctions this kind of behavior?
Also Serbian side does not have a reasonable argument when it comes to explain how 1244 applies to Serbia's soverengity, as 1244 mentions only Yugoslavia. There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
pre 14 godina
It is simple: just check the Yugoslave constitution!
Kosovo is province, not a republic!
Stop wasting time and money and start building up this province!
pre 14 godina
Olf: "I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now."
Following WWII many international laws were revamped with the formation of the UN and it is by these that countries must abide today.
Under the Helsinki Agreement, the UN Charter and UN Resolution 1244 international laws have been breached by the Unilateral Declaration of Independence declared by the province of Kosovo and the support of various countries does not alter this fact.
If the ICJ finds in favour of Serbia then many countries may choose to reverse recognition rather than be party to a proven illegality.
pre 14 godina
I would have to disappoint many readers here who believe that Serbia can sue any country based on the ICJ ruling. They forget some very obvious facts:
1. ICJ ruling will be advisory in nature, or simply a response to a question, and is not legally binding to anyone, let alone third parties. Therefore you can not use such a ruling in any court of law, to sue anybody. It was Serbia who chose to ask for an advisory opinion, and not a legally binding one. Therefore Serbia can not change the nature of the ruling after the ruling has been made.
2. The question that was asked was simply "was Kosova's declaration of independence in line with the international law". So the court will deal simply with the act of declaration, and can't issue a ruling on whether the recognition of Kosova by other countries, is legal or not. In fact, there is no clause anywhere in the International Law that prevents or obliges a country, to recognize another country, or government. That falls squarely within the sovereign rights of that country.
You can't sue Maldives for the act of declaration of independence of Kosova, because the independence of Kosova was not declared by Maldives, but by the Parliament of Kosova, expressing the will of the people. And you can't sue Maldives for recognizing the independence of Kosova, based on the ICJ ruling, because ICJ will not deal with the act of recognitions, in addition to it being advisory in nature.
Regarding the Ahtisaari Plan. If Serbs has any objections, as to the format of the negotiations, or the choice of the UN envoy, they should have made those objections known before the negotiations started. They should have not entered the negotiations at all, nobody forced them. They could have pulled out of the negotiations if they didn't agree with the process that was being followed.
Same with Russia. They had the power to block the appointment of the UN envoy, or the format being followed. Everything was done with the active participation of Russia, that was an active member of the Contact Group. If Russia's condition was that the result of the negotiations had to be within 100% of the Serbia's demands, they should have put that condition before the negotiations started, not after the envoy presented the plan. You can't negotiate for two years, go along with process and at the end say that you didn't like the negotiations, because you didn't like the results. If you want to be considered a serious state, you can not act like a teenage drama queen.
pre 14 godina
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
As far as I can remember you are a foreigner leaving in Kosovo, (or maybe you just pretented it) therefore I believe that you could "neutraly" contribute to a lot of B92 articles by sharing your outsider eye!
However I have realized that you are unfortunately more interested to continiousely critize whatever good news might be siding with what you call "the serbian regime supporters".
You might have your own reasons which I will then be very interested to share!
A lot of posters are certainly neither pro-serbian nor pro-kosovo but simply interested to have the international laws finally respected again irrespective of which side it at the end helps, and am one of those posters!
There is not one single day passing where you can not read the dirty UK/USA tricks used all around the world to cover the mess they created the last 10 years and yes I would love to see the Bush Cheneys and co behind bars
and am sure that am not the only one!
I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...and this isn't a fairy tale but based on facts!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!
I was rather happy to read lately some more objective K-A posters telling what is really happening in Kosovo and can only encourage them to post more to share with us a more balanced view!
pre 14 godina
Dean Van der ...
Facts are often scenarios for someone else. After all freedom of speech and democracy should be respected.
Using capital letters(i.e.FACTS)is considered offending in modern web culture.
English is not my mother tongue, it is a fact, you are right. Until now all of my posts were readable and understandable. However, thank you for bringing that to light and I will take your advice.
Abyhow, your facts are scenarions for me, at least.
pre 14 godina
Well let's see...
"right of nations to self-determination,"
-- Well, K Albanians were pursuing this as early as 1981, if not sooner, long before any concepts of state repression set in to counter the separatism.
"Kosovo as a sui generis case,"
-- Oh please. Every case is a sui generis case.
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"
-- A "free for all" disintegration of collective concensus of identity that had been losing legitimacy before even 1974.
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence",
-- This may be the only argument worth considering but if it is, then it raises a whole new issue regarding the legitimacy of sovereingty that the will of the people which cannot be denied to other areas in both the former-YU (Bosnia anyone?) and around the world. If the leaders of the world wish to truly entertain this idea, the good people at Rand McNally are going to be very busy in the coming years.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors,"
-- Not really. Just the ones that a) tacitly supported them, and b) gave the hint that such a unilateral act would have little to no repercussions.
"and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari".
-- I don't recall the UN approving the AP, nor do I recall the UNSC replacing 1244 with anything new.
If independence is supposed to be this open and shut case as we've been hearing, these arguments have lots of interpretive holes in them.
pre 14 godina
Kate,Ataman
I am not Legal Expert or anything alike.
Kosovos claim sound as reasonalbe to me.
Internaitonal law was breached and ammended so many times till now. I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now.
pre 14 godina
@@@ by Olf
“...dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
(Olf, 13 July 2009 13:56)...”
Let me help you out: I did not present any scenarios, I illustrated FACTS !
And additionally: kindly do not contribute comments on the English B92 comments site if your English is not adequate and good enough to be understood OR also possible, as an option, that “language translator” you are using to translate your comments from “? Language” to English is just useless. Your comment is simply not readable.
pre 14 godina
What is the "new argument"? Squatters' rights? Frankly, I think that is the only argument. I wonder how the US would act if Mexicans crossed the border into California until they reached a point where they were a majority in San Diego and then decided to declare themselves an independent country. Would Obama recognize them or call out the National Guard?
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that. For regional co operation it is Serbia that leaves conferences.
20 years ago there were 154 UN countries 50 years ago less than 70.
Were were all the int. lawyers in here than?
Nobody wants any piece of Serbia, Serbia wants a piece of Kosovo but that wont happen as another RS is just plain evil.
Does anybody remember that the international aid that was flown to Kosovo in 99, nobody asked Serbia for any aprooval incl Islarel and Spain. Well they still dont ask Serbia and they will never again ask them in relations to Kosovo.
pre 14 godina
Olf, please will you not refer to me as a "Serbian regime supporter".
Firstly, as far as I am aware, the Serbian govt of today is no more a 'regime' than many others in Europe - probably less so in some cases.
Secondly, my concern lies purely in the injustice served against Serbia by those who claim to be 'morally' right.
If bully boy tactics can force away large chunks of European nations which are then handed as a reward to a single ethnic group, then who knows which of our countries will be next?
I am on the side of preserving international law and sanity, and not having 'Wag the Dog' wars composed by a few, suffered by many, and supported by a so-called free media.
All societies have good and bad in them, and I have nothing whatsoever against any people.
pre 14 godina
Kate,
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia,
NO, Kosova became UN protectorate. After three years a referendum supose to be held for the future of Kosova status, which never took place.
therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
You never know what ICJ will say, till the fat lady sings.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
Since when UN can declare a country an Independent or a province or territory. It is up to individual countries to decide on that matter, and if you get 2/3 majority in UN Assembly you become a UN member.
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
Wrong again. Ahtisari was appointed by UNSC and just becouse Russia did not like the results, the UN went through even the Fact Finding Mission, which inluded all UNSC Ambassador and the results were the same according to Ahtisari plan, but Russia threatened to veto so the plan never went for a vote.
In the end CDI happened and Russia could not do anything just watch from sideline.
pre 14 godina
dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
I object this vehemently. I am not supporting any "regime".
In the fact, I am highly critical of "fat cats" of any kind.
I cannot tell, what ICJ decision will be because I am not trusting courts either. (How you spell "O. J. Simpson"?)
But just in case if ICJ is in favor of Serbia, things can look for the countries recognizing Kosovo pretty ugly.
As for Kosovo itself - it deserves a better "government" than what it has.
Unlike me - you can be called "Kosovo regime supporter". This does a disservice and given their criminal background a disgrace. But it is up to you.
I have no problem and in the fact I am very happy to see people who honestly support Albanian cause but despise the Drenica-clan. With Drenica-fanboyz there is no argument possible.
"Visa liberalization" is a separate story. How it will be done and how it can be enforced is more than a question. Serbia will continue to issue the passports, it is up to EU. I find it amusing, some of "Drenica fanboyz" managed to find anything supporting their cause in the news. All I see, EU showing them a middle finger, but keeps smiling. With "friends" like these who needs enemies.
If EUSA kicks the Drenica-fanboyz in the head with a smile, instead of protesting they will say "thanks for supporting Kosova", bow and kiss their behind...
pre 14 godina
“...The newspaper reminds that among the Kosovo Albanian arguments are...”
"...right of nations to self-determination...”
ANSWER: as long as my knowledge on geography does not cheat on me, Albanians do have their own state and it is called Albania, just that hundreds of thousands of their citizens illegally crossed and intruded the Serbia’s proper throughout the decades and particularly in the “communist time” with the “secret blessing and blind eye” by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders of that time. Easy as that and as per the bright notice of the author of one BBC article for illustration: I was thinking that one Albania is more than enough for the Europe!
“.. Kosovo as a sui generis case, context of Yugoslavia's disintegration...”
ANSWER: “sui genesis” cases do exist only if someone wants to create them, in this case, powerful and bullying USA and EU. The rules of Yugoslavia’s disintegration were defined by Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on the Former Yugoslavia known also as Badinter Commission, but then the base principles of that rulings were violated by the ””powerful and bullying, read USA and EU” in the case of Serbia!
“...loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence...”
ANSWER: systematic state violence in Kosovo, and I guess relevant in Milosevic time, NEVER EXISTED. That was confirmed by Nato top Commander who was in the permanent observation mission in the time of ex-Yu wars on the territory of Kosovo in the years 1991 to 1998. He did mentioned that Kosovo is under stricked police control by Belgrade, but he also underlines that effect of that was “positive” in the sense that Province was literally free of violence and direct conflicts between ethnical groups. Violence indeed started just when USA and EU decided to legitimise, till then illegal and top-100 wanted terrorist group with direct contacts with Al Qaida, UCK – so called “Kosovo Liberation Army!
In that context and in contrary, Kosovo experienced systematic State Violence, and against Serbian and non-Albanian population, in the time of 1945-1980 when Kosovo was ruled by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders who ignored and purposely neglected 50 000 legal cases of violence, rape and murders committed by Kosovo Albanians and against Serbian and non-Albanian population!
“...proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors...”
ANSWER: Well this is ridiculous argument. That “international factors” were clearly not neutral, but one side in the War, so as such irrelevant to be called “international factors”! In contrary they were invaders of independent Country and abusers of International Laws by their decision to bomb Independent State without UN Resolution approval!
“...and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari...".
ANSWER: “Work” of Martti Ahtisaari can be connected with above context. He was working in clear coordination with above mentioned abusers of International Laws in the time of Nato bombing of Serbia, namely USA and EU, so as per such his work should be legally irrelevant. Apart of that he “came out” with his suggestion for the future status of Province in the time of active negotiations of both sides concerning the case-status, which is clear and determined violation of the process and legal bully. As per such his work is legally NIHIL.
What I can only hope is, that Serbia is gathering best legal team available and that they are doing the good job in preparing the case? Facts are more than easy on our side. Hit them with the facts and hit them legally hardest you can!
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
pre 14 godina
What is great about this is that no matter how many heavyweights are wheeled in or money spent, nobody can circumvent the law. I just hope that the ICJ does its job and doesn't come up with a fudged politically influenced finding designed not to upset.
On the surface of it these last minute points look a little shaky:
"right of nations to self-determination"... Kosovo is legally a province and not a nation;
"Kosovo as a sui generis case"... it has already been established that it is not;
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia, therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence"... again as above, plus the change of government, attitudes and actions (as well as improved dealings with the 'international community') over the last decade;
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009 10:44)
This is precisely about money and a lot of it. ICJ is the first step. If the decision will favor Serbia in the next step Serbia could sue Maldives (or similar "important" country) for a minor sum and easily win.
The third step could be a more important country with major assets (like "US Steel") in Serbia and the amount will be more.
That country is of course morally corrupt. "Morale" won't force them to any negotiation table - but if it is about a lot of little green papers with "$" signs, an average US government official doesn't mind to sell his mother and firstborn child.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009, 10:44)
I couldnt agree more Xythi. The Helsinki Agreement and UN Resolution 1244 will attest to that.
pre 14 godina
interesting, really interesting!
..well, given that those who support that little stillborn freak-creation on southern serbian territory have so little moral weight - remember they bombed Serbia for 78 days without any international resolution that would have allowed that naked aggression - the narco-criminal elites in Priština seem to feel that they are losing ground...
but don´t worry, kids! instead of vegetating in a blackhole without history, culture or the rule of law, you will enjoy Serbian statehood anyway.
...since it is Serbia, you are living in. everything will be fine, except for the criminals who will finally end up behind bars.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009, 10:44)
I couldnt agree more Xythi. The Helsinki Agreement and UN Resolution 1244 will attest to that.
pre 14 godina
“...The newspaper reminds that among the Kosovo Albanian arguments are...”
"...right of nations to self-determination...”
ANSWER: as long as my knowledge on geography does not cheat on me, Albanians do have their own state and it is called Albania, just that hundreds of thousands of their citizens illegally crossed and intruded the Serbia’s proper throughout the decades and particularly in the “communist time” with the “secret blessing and blind eye” by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders of that time. Easy as that and as per the bright notice of the author of one BBC article for illustration: I was thinking that one Albania is more than enough for the Europe!
“.. Kosovo as a sui generis case, context of Yugoslavia's disintegration...”
ANSWER: “sui genesis” cases do exist only if someone wants to create them, in this case, powerful and bullying USA and EU. The rules of Yugoslavia’s disintegration were defined by Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on the Former Yugoslavia known also as Badinter Commission, but then the base principles of that rulings were violated by the ””powerful and bullying, read USA and EU” in the case of Serbia!
“...loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence...”
ANSWER: systematic state violence in Kosovo, and I guess relevant in Milosevic time, NEVER EXISTED. That was confirmed by Nato top Commander who was in the permanent observation mission in the time of ex-Yu wars on the territory of Kosovo in the years 1991 to 1998. He did mentioned that Kosovo is under stricked police control by Belgrade, but he also underlines that effect of that was “positive” in the sense that Province was literally free of violence and direct conflicts between ethnical groups. Violence indeed started just when USA and EU decided to legitimise, till then illegal and top-100 wanted terrorist group with direct contacts with Al Qaida, UCK – so called “Kosovo Liberation Army!
In that context and in contrary, Kosovo experienced systematic State Violence, and against Serbian and non-Albanian population, in the time of 1945-1980 when Kosovo was ruled by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders who ignored and purposely neglected 50 000 legal cases of violence, rape and murders committed by Kosovo Albanians and against Serbian and non-Albanian population!
“...proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors...”
ANSWER: Well this is ridiculous argument. That “international factors” were clearly not neutral, but one side in the War, so as such irrelevant to be called “international factors”! In contrary they were invaders of independent Country and abusers of International Laws by their decision to bomb Independent State without UN Resolution approval!
“...and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari...".
ANSWER: “Work” of Martti Ahtisaari can be connected with above context. He was working in clear coordination with above mentioned abusers of International Laws in the time of Nato bombing of Serbia, namely USA and EU, so as per such his work should be legally irrelevant. Apart of that he “came out” with his suggestion for the future status of Province in the time of active negotiations of both sides concerning the case-status, which is clear and determined violation of the process and legal bully. As per such his work is legally NIHIL.
What I can only hope is, that Serbia is gathering best legal team available and that they are doing the good job in preparing the case? Facts are more than easy on our side. Hit them with the facts and hit them legally hardest you can!
pre 14 godina
What is great about this is that no matter how many heavyweights are wheeled in or money spent, nobody can circumvent the law. I just hope that the ICJ does its job and doesn't come up with a fudged politically influenced finding designed not to upset.
On the surface of it these last minute points look a little shaky:
"right of nations to self-determination"... Kosovo is legally a province and not a nation;
"Kosovo as a sui generis case"... it has already been established that it is not;
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia, therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence"... again as above, plus the change of government, attitudes and actions (as well as improved dealings with the 'international community') over the last decade;
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
pre 14 godina
Olf, please will you not refer to me as a "Serbian regime supporter".
Firstly, as far as I am aware, the Serbian govt of today is no more a 'regime' than many others in Europe - probably less so in some cases.
Secondly, my concern lies purely in the injustice served against Serbia by those who claim to be 'morally' right.
If bully boy tactics can force away large chunks of European nations which are then handed as a reward to a single ethnic group, then who knows which of our countries will be next?
I am on the side of preserving international law and sanity, and not having 'Wag the Dog' wars composed by a few, suffered by many, and supported by a so-called free media.
All societies have good and bad in them, and I have nothing whatsoever against any people.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009 10:44)
This is precisely about money and a lot of it. ICJ is the first step. If the decision will favor Serbia in the next step Serbia could sue Maldives (or similar "important" country) for a minor sum and easily win.
The third step could be a more important country with major assets (like "US Steel") in Serbia and the amount will be more.
That country is of course morally corrupt. "Morale" won't force them to any negotiation table - but if it is about a lot of little green papers with "$" signs, an average US government official doesn't mind to sell his mother and firstborn child.
pre 14 godina
interesting, really interesting!
..well, given that those who support that little stillborn freak-creation on southern serbian territory have so little moral weight - remember they bombed Serbia for 78 days without any international resolution that would have allowed that naked aggression - the narco-criminal elites in Priština seem to feel that they are losing ground...
but don´t worry, kids! instead of vegetating in a blackhole without history, culture or the rule of law, you will enjoy Serbian statehood anyway.
...since it is Serbia, you are living in. everything will be fine, except for the criminals who will finally end up behind bars.
pre 14 godina
What is the "new argument"? Squatters' rights? Frankly, I think that is the only argument. I wonder how the US would act if Mexicans crossed the border into California until they reached a point where they were a majority in San Diego and then decided to declare themselves an independent country. Would Obama recognize them or call out the National Guard?
pre 14 godina
Well let's see...
"right of nations to self-determination,"
-- Well, K Albanians were pursuing this as early as 1981, if not sooner, long before any concepts of state repression set in to counter the separatism.
"Kosovo as a sui generis case,"
-- Oh please. Every case is a sui generis case.
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"
-- A "free for all" disintegration of collective concensus of identity that had been losing legitimacy before even 1974.
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence",
-- This may be the only argument worth considering but if it is, then it raises a whole new issue regarding the legitimacy of sovereingty that the will of the people which cannot be denied to other areas in both the former-YU (Bosnia anyone?) and around the world. If the leaders of the world wish to truly entertain this idea, the good people at Rand McNally are going to be very busy in the coming years.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors,"
-- Not really. Just the ones that a) tacitly supported them, and b) gave the hint that such a unilateral act would have little to no repercussions.
"and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari".
-- I don't recall the UN approving the AP, nor do I recall the UNSC replacing 1244 with anything new.
If independence is supposed to be this open and shut case as we've been hearing, these arguments have lots of interpretive holes in them.
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
pre 14 godina
@@@ by Olf
“...dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
(Olf, 13 July 2009 13:56)...”
Let me help you out: I did not present any scenarios, I illustrated FACTS !
And additionally: kindly do not contribute comments on the English B92 comments site if your English is not adequate and good enough to be understood OR also possible, as an option, that “language translator” you are using to translate your comments from “? Language” to English is just useless. Your comment is simply not readable.
pre 14 godina
Olf: "I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now."
Following WWII many international laws were revamped with the formation of the UN and it is by these that countries must abide today.
Under the Helsinki Agreement, the UN Charter and UN Resolution 1244 international laws have been breached by the Unilateral Declaration of Independence declared by the province of Kosovo and the support of various countries does not alter this fact.
If the ICJ finds in favour of Serbia then many countries may choose to reverse recognition rather than be party to a proven illegality.
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
I object this vehemently. I am not supporting any "regime".
In the fact, I am highly critical of "fat cats" of any kind.
I cannot tell, what ICJ decision will be because I am not trusting courts either. (How you spell "O. J. Simpson"?)
But just in case if ICJ is in favor of Serbia, things can look for the countries recognizing Kosovo pretty ugly.
As for Kosovo itself - it deserves a better "government" than what it has.
Unlike me - you can be called "Kosovo regime supporter". This does a disservice and given their criminal background a disgrace. But it is up to you.
I have no problem and in the fact I am very happy to see people who honestly support Albanian cause but despise the Drenica-clan. With Drenica-fanboyz there is no argument possible.
"Visa liberalization" is a separate story. How it will be done and how it can be enforced is more than a question. Serbia will continue to issue the passports, it is up to EU. I find it amusing, some of "Drenica fanboyz" managed to find anything supporting their cause in the news. All I see, EU showing them a middle finger, but keeps smiling. With "friends" like these who needs enemies.
If EUSA kicks the Drenica-fanboyz in the head with a smile, instead of protesting they will say "thanks for supporting Kosova", bow and kiss their behind...
pre 14 godina
I would have to disappoint many readers here who believe that Serbia can sue any country based on the ICJ ruling. They forget some very obvious facts:
1. ICJ ruling will be advisory in nature, or simply a response to a question, and is not legally binding to anyone, let alone third parties. Therefore you can not use such a ruling in any court of law, to sue anybody. It was Serbia who chose to ask for an advisory opinion, and not a legally binding one. Therefore Serbia can not change the nature of the ruling after the ruling has been made.
2. The question that was asked was simply "was Kosova's declaration of independence in line with the international law". So the court will deal simply with the act of declaration, and can't issue a ruling on whether the recognition of Kosova by other countries, is legal or not. In fact, there is no clause anywhere in the International Law that prevents or obliges a country, to recognize another country, or government. That falls squarely within the sovereign rights of that country.
You can't sue Maldives for the act of declaration of independence of Kosova, because the independence of Kosova was not declared by Maldives, but by the Parliament of Kosova, expressing the will of the people. And you can't sue Maldives for recognizing the independence of Kosova, based on the ICJ ruling, because ICJ will not deal with the act of recognitions, in addition to it being advisory in nature.
Regarding the Ahtisaari Plan. If Serbs has any objections, as to the format of the negotiations, or the choice of the UN envoy, they should have made those objections known before the negotiations started. They should have not entered the negotiations at all, nobody forced them. They could have pulled out of the negotiations if they didn't agree with the process that was being followed.
Same with Russia. They had the power to block the appointment of the UN envoy, or the format being followed. Everything was done with the active participation of Russia, that was an active member of the Contact Group. If Russia's condition was that the result of the negotiations had to be within 100% of the Serbia's demands, they should have put that condition before the negotiations started, not after the envoy presented the plan. You can't negotiate for two years, go along with process and at the end say that you didn't like the negotiations, because you didn't like the results. If you want to be considered a serious state, you can not act like a teenage drama queen.
pre 14 godina
dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that.
(Drink Water, 13 July 2009 14:59)
--
What hope do you have of convincing international judges when you can't even get your basic facts correct?
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Sooner or later our southern citizens (mainly of Albanian ethnicity) will realise that negotiations are the only path to lasting peace.
All these myths and lies will only delay the prosperity and well being of the province. It's time to face reality and to work towards a future for all - based on understanding and compromise.
pre 14 godina
Kate,
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia,
NO, Kosova became UN protectorate. After three years a referendum supose to be held for the future of Kosova status, which never took place.
therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
You never know what ICJ will say, till the fat lady sings.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
Since when UN can declare a country an Independent or a province or territory. It is up to individual countries to decide on that matter, and if you get 2/3 majority in UN Assembly you become a UN member.
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
Wrong again. Ahtisari was appointed by UNSC and just becouse Russia did not like the results, the UN went through even the Fact Finding Mission, which inluded all UNSC Ambassador and the results were the same according to Ahtisari plan, but Russia threatened to veto so the plan never went for a vote.
In the end CDI happened and Russia could not do anything just watch from sideline.
pre 14 godina
It is simple: just check the Yugoslave constitution!
Kosovo is province, not a republic!
Stop wasting time and money and start building up this province!
pre 14 godina
Denis's comment to The Swiss: "It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives."
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism? Nothing at all!
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that. For regional co operation it is Serbia that leaves conferences.
20 years ago there were 154 UN countries 50 years ago less than 70.
Were were all the int. lawyers in here than?
Nobody wants any piece of Serbia, Serbia wants a piece of Kosovo but that wont happen as another RS is just plain evil.
Does anybody remember that the international aid that was flown to Kosovo in 99, nobody asked Serbia for any aprooval incl Islarel and Spain. Well they still dont ask Serbia and they will never again ask them in relations to Kosovo.
pre 14 godina
Kate,Ataman
I am not Legal Expert or anything alike.
Kosovos claim sound as reasonalbe to me.
Internaitonal law was breached and ammended so many times till now. I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now.
pre 14 godina
"temporary authorities of Kosovo"
They are temporary, new elections will have to be held every 4 years. Is that what B92 meant?
pre 14 godina
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
As far as I can remember you are a foreigner leaving in Kosovo, (or maybe you just pretented it) therefore I believe that you could "neutraly" contribute to a lot of B92 articles by sharing your outsider eye!
However I have realized that you are unfortunately more interested to continiousely critize whatever good news might be siding with what you call "the serbian regime supporters".
You might have your own reasons which I will then be very interested to share!
A lot of posters are certainly neither pro-serbian nor pro-kosovo but simply interested to have the international laws finally respected again irrespective of which side it at the end helps, and am one of those posters!
There is not one single day passing where you can not read the dirty UK/USA tricks used all around the world to cover the mess they created the last 10 years and yes I would love to see the Bush Cheneys and co behind bars
and am sure that am not the only one!
I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...and this isn't a fairy tale but based on facts!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!
I was rather happy to read lately some more objective K-A posters telling what is really happening in Kosovo and can only encourage them to post more to share with us a more balanced view!
pre 14 godina
I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
(Kosova-USA, 13 July 2009 20:09)
--
Turkey is not a neighbour but if we are considering non-neighbours then lets include China and India, who strongly support Serbia.
pre 14 godina
Dean Van der ...
Facts are often scenarios for someone else. After all freedom of speech and democracy should be respected.
Using capital letters(i.e.FACTS)is considered offending in modern web culture.
English is not my mother tongue, it is a fact, you are right. Until now all of my posts were readable and understandable. However, thank you for bringing that to light and I will take your advice.
Abyhow, your facts are scenarions for me, at least.
pre 14 godina
There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 18:48)
--
These are the kind of myths and lies I am referring to. Taken from the US State Department site:
"After October 5, 2000, foreign embassies, including that of the U.S., reopened and Serbia, as the successor state to the F.R.Y., regained its seat in such international organizations as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the UN, and is actively participating in International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank projects." Check http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.htm
So just as Russia became the successor state to the USSR so did Serbia become the successor state to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Now come my southern Serbian citizens, please try to get your facts right. How do you expect to win an international court case if you can't even get the basics right?
pre 14 godina
The Kosovar albanians have a big advantage, a golf-style handicap in the ICJ. The handicap consists of support from the criminals that launched the attack on Yugoslavia 1999. But even with this handicap they will face problems because ICJ should make decisions based on the rule of law, not on the rule of criminals. The law is on the side of Serbia and the Albanians have the criminals. So the question is if the criminals or if justice will prevail in the International Court of Justice.
pre 14 godina
To the Swiss,
It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives. As a swiss you should stick with what you do best, be neutral, and enjoy the wealth that this brings to you. Leave the others to care about the world conflicts and affairs.
Now when it comes to ICJ ruling I must say that many of the countries that are nowadays sovereign 'appeared' on the world's political map long before there was any 'international law' or even the UN. So to suggest that Kosovo's independence cannot be legitimate given UN objections (which are only partly so) is to take a naive interpretation of how international relations function. Int'l law is an array of interests (simplistically said, of course) which, when there's no convergence, it is 'violated' repeatedly.
Kosovo's claim to statehood, amongst many valid claims, should be primarily anchored on the 'moral argument' of state-sponsored killings which made Serbia's continued claim to sovereignty over Kosovo an untenable position. Note that the US's declaration of independence, long before there was any modern-day int'l law or an int'l org like the UN was based primarily on the idea of UK's colonial, repressive policy.
But, speaking of int'l law: how come Serbia consistently claims coverage by int'l law over its Kosovo sovereignty claim, when this same law was repeatedly violated through the commission of state-sponsored war crimes? What part of int'l law sanctions this kind of behavior?
Also Serbian side does not have a reasonable argument when it comes to explain how 1244 applies to Serbia's soverengity, as 1244 mentions only Yugoslavia. There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
pre 14 godina
(Adrian Gashi, 13 July 2009 17:45) Where to begin.....
You are correct. Any opinion that the ICJ renders is just that, an opinion. However, it may justify the use of force should Serbian choose that road. There is no court to sue in and Kosovo's leaders would not likely follow a court decision anyway. The whole point of sending to the ICJ is simply to get an international consensus. If the court renders a decision in Serbia's favor and Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it. Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. Of course if a decision is against them the end is near. But, either way this is a win/win for Serbia. Either they win the decision and take back Kosova or they lose and can tell the people "we tried".
pre 14 godina
roberto said..."give that elitism a rest."
Really, roberto?
Practice what you preach.
pre 14 godina
Kate for each Nations constitution there is an atached high court that interprets that. Let alone any such thing as 1244 and Helsinki.
I am sure you are speculating as any of us in this site, what ICJ might rule or "advice". But according to Serbias neighbours, all interpreted both the UN and Helsinki and countless other relative treaties as above sufficient for the Kosovo independence.
Now if neighbours see it as that is the best result knowing Serbia deeper than anyone in Spain or India, the ICJ has the obligation for stabilising the region.
pre 14 godina
We serbs lost legal and moral and whathaveyou right to our own land, kosovo? :) darlings, you lost your minds. try as hard as you like but facts are facts. facts: kosovo is serbian land. separatists and their supporters formed joint criminal enterprise trying to steal it. they cant. its a frozen conflict and limbo. that is all there is.
pre 14 godina
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 21:37)
Thanks for your rather confusing book about the way we should look at the different aspect of law and it's interpretation....
Believe it or not I have a totally opposite view and you can write another book it will not change my opinion!
As to my extremisms/bigotry, you made me laugh because you apparently have so little clue about what Switzerland is composed off and moreover the region where am coming from is certainly the most coloured in terms of well integrated nationalities.
My parents neighbours are wounderfull K-A and I don't want to open a polemic here by repeating what they are saying about the current K leadership! You would certainly call them traitors!
You also certainly know that less than 1% of K-A leaving in Switzerland had even the desire to return, guess why!
I would stress one more time the word "integrated' because we are certainly an example of integration of multi-nationalities, however most of the K-A welcomed in Switzerland during the war have not only never integrated but are causing a lot of problems and you certainly know in which field their are active... You might well look yourself at the statistics!!
Now if giving facts is a sign of bigotry and ignorance, then let me be ignorant, if not agreeing with the UDI is a a sign of supporting the serbian regime, then let me be a supporter and finally if believing in a "straight" international law is a funny thing nowadays, then let me dream of a better world order!
Last but not least if I would be the represented of bla bla bla, then Switzerland would have not recognized this UDI, not because of their inhabitants but because of the way if was done, simply illegaly.
Unfortunately, likewise so many other countries, we were forced to do it for various reasons...
Since you seem to be a well educated and smart person I would love to hear your interpretation of law regarding another dozen of regions that have been fighting for decades to have a well deserved country. I believe I do not have to list them, they are certainly know to you!
Cheers
pre 14 godina
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Thanks Kate, J-C would have said "forgive them because they don't know what they are doing..."
And what this gentlemen do not know is that during our last election our strongest and % leading right wing party, including his leader, were fortunately wiped out because of too extreme views...
Should I call it "ignorance", maybe better "not well informed!"
Salutations de M. le Suisse :)
pre 14 godina
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Zoran,
In this case since you mentioned Romania, I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
pre 14 godina
I just want to stress out one fact that was never mentioned in the previous posts.
Namely, the question Serbia sent to the ICJ was: "Was the UNILATERAL declaration of independence in accordance to the Intl.Law."
That word: UNILATERAL - is the key word.
I won't spare my words arguing what will happen if ICJ rule in favor of Serbia. Many posters have elaborated that theme in detail. I would like to say just a few words about the case ICJ come up with the ruling in favor of K-Albanian's UNILATERAL declaration of independence.
In that case every single separation movement in the would get an open invitation to UNILATERALLY proclaim its independence from central government. There will be no low that could stop them to do that. They could claim to have moral rights to secession since Government oppress them, they have legal right to secession since they follower self-determination. They could say they don't care if they should become UN member since the recognition of their UNILATERAL proclamation of independence is the act that any single state could wage on their behalf, etc...
As you can see, in that case world will be on the brink of chaos.
First that come to my mind is the Kurd minority in Turkey which suffered much worse state terror and for much longer time then K-Albanians. Why should they won't be allowed to UNILATERALLY declare their independence from Turkey? And after that we could imagine Basks, Corsicans, Flamans, Laponians, Uigurs, etc... And not to mention Africa.
So one could draw its own conclusion from that.
pre 14 godina
I doubt they sent any arguments on their own. The story should read, Western European and US lawyers sent new arguments. I doubt seriously that Kosovo's albanian lawyers could have crafted any meaningful arguments without the help of good Western lawyers
pre 14 godina
so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
(robertoruss, 13 July 2009 22:01)
--
Credibility? LOL!!!!
pre 14 godina
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism?
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Kate with all due respect allow me to quote……
“I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!”
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
pre 14 godina
"Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it."
Patrik, international community already has troops in Kosova, ever heard of KFOR? If you think that Serbia can use the ICJ to get an international consensus to start a war, than all I can say is "good luck"! In any case Serbia vs NATO is like a cat hissing at a tiger.
pre 14 godina
It is true that the upcoming ICJ ruling is non-binding. i was not in favor of the blgd regime taking this route, because it was clear all along that this would just be used as just another piece of ammunition, more fodder in the "non-violent" war against kosovo/a. nevertheless, they were able to trick/pressure/coerce enough members of the UNGA (as, apparently, according to their rules) to endorse the move. before the vote was even complete, the blgd regime announced (and has since oft repeated)that it would NEVER accept a ruling contrary to their particular legal opinion. in other words, the context for this whole ruling is questionable, to say the least, and blg's credibility low-low-low.
as to the spec's of the arguments of Kosovo/a, as provided in this article, i believe that they are absolutely reasonable and sound. i will not write a thesis paper right now defending each of them -- they have all been argued, many times, by myself and many other capable persons here.
ok, it is true that i am not an international legal expert. i personally know only one, and she would probably not be classifed as a "world expert" altho she is an intl law professor here in CAL, and is, shall we say, sympathetic to our side. as are many others. so, i am not an official "expert" but then, neither is anyone else writing here. and i am not impressed by the so-called arguments from the other side. At all.
i have said many times that the icj will NEVER rule in serbia's side in this case, and i stand by my word (unlike so many others who assured us that kosovo/a would never rec. more than 5, 10, 15 recognitions -- they'd all be taken back, bla bla bla.) so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
i have said that it will probably be some kind of mishy mashy ruling, as they are known for -- as in: yes, somehow serbia was responsible for not stopping the genocide of srebrenica, but not ACTually responsible (therefore supposedly don't need to pay reparations or feel too bad...) that should have made any legal expert wince, or cry, and many did, but the world has gone on, oft badly. for the morally impaired icj, it is biz as usual...
cheers!
roberto
frisco
ps we don't need any comments from people about the "substandard" use of the english language. first, because i could easily take a red pen to 90% of the postings here and be utterly justified. second, because my own use of english grammar, puntuation, etc. here is oft lazy and um creative, substandard, though i think sufficient for the circumstances. and third, because we are encouraging a variety of ideas and opinions here, even if some contributors are still in the process of learning or mastering english. if i had to compose these messages in serbo-croatian-bosnian, much less albanian, (hungarian??!) or even in german i would come up painfully short, as would most persons here! give that elitism a rest.
pre 14 godina
'Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. '
This is only an advisory ruling.
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
pre 14 godina
Kate,
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia,
NO, Kosova became UN protectorate. After three years a referendum supose to be held for the future of Kosova status, which never took place.
therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
You never know what ICJ will say, till the fat lady sings.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
Since when UN can declare a country an Independent or a province or territory. It is up to individual countries to decide on that matter, and if you get 2/3 majority in UN Assembly you become a UN member.
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
Wrong again. Ahtisari was appointed by UNSC and just becouse Russia did not like the results, the UN went through even the Fact Finding Mission, which inluded all UNSC Ambassador and the results were the same according to Ahtisari plan, but Russia threatened to veto so the plan never went for a vote.
In the end CDI happened and Russia could not do anything just watch from sideline.
pre 14 godina
Kate,Ataman
I am not Legal Expert or anything alike.
Kosovos claim sound as reasonalbe to me.
Internaitonal law was breached and ammended so many times till now. I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now.
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that. For regional co operation it is Serbia that leaves conferences.
20 years ago there were 154 UN countries 50 years ago less than 70.
Were were all the int. lawyers in here than?
Nobody wants any piece of Serbia, Serbia wants a piece of Kosovo but that wont happen as another RS is just plain evil.
Does anybody remember that the international aid that was flown to Kosovo in 99, nobody asked Serbia for any aprooval incl Islarel and Spain. Well they still dont ask Serbia and they will never again ask them in relations to Kosovo.
pre 14 godina
interesting, really interesting!
..well, given that those who support that little stillborn freak-creation on southern serbian territory have so little moral weight - remember they bombed Serbia for 78 days without any international resolution that would have allowed that naked aggression - the narco-criminal elites in Priština seem to feel that they are losing ground...
but don´t worry, kids! instead of vegetating in a blackhole without history, culture or the rule of law, you will enjoy Serbian statehood anyway.
...since it is Serbia, you are living in. everything will be fine, except for the criminals who will finally end up behind bars.
pre 14 godina
dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
pre 14 godina
“...The newspaper reminds that among the Kosovo Albanian arguments are...”
"...right of nations to self-determination...”
ANSWER: as long as my knowledge on geography does not cheat on me, Albanians do have their own state and it is called Albania, just that hundreds of thousands of their citizens illegally crossed and intruded the Serbia’s proper throughout the decades and particularly in the “communist time” with the “secret blessing and blind eye” by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders of that time. Easy as that and as per the bright notice of the author of one BBC article for illustration: I was thinking that one Albania is more than enough for the Europe!
“.. Kosovo as a sui generis case, context of Yugoslavia's disintegration...”
ANSWER: “sui genesis” cases do exist only if someone wants to create them, in this case, powerful and bullying USA and EU. The rules of Yugoslavia’s disintegration were defined by Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on the Former Yugoslavia known also as Badinter Commission, but then the base principles of that rulings were violated by the ””powerful and bullying, read USA and EU” in the case of Serbia!
“...loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence...”
ANSWER: systematic state violence in Kosovo, and I guess relevant in Milosevic time, NEVER EXISTED. That was confirmed by Nato top Commander who was in the permanent observation mission in the time of ex-Yu wars on the territory of Kosovo in the years 1991 to 1998. He did mentioned that Kosovo is under stricked police control by Belgrade, but he also underlines that effect of that was “positive” in the sense that Province was literally free of violence and direct conflicts between ethnical groups. Violence indeed started just when USA and EU decided to legitimise, till then illegal and top-100 wanted terrorist group with direct contacts with Al Qaida, UCK – so called “Kosovo Liberation Army!
In that context and in contrary, Kosovo experienced systematic State Violence, and against Serbian and non-Albanian population, in the time of 1945-1980 when Kosovo was ruled by Kosovo Albanians communist leaders who ignored and purposely neglected 50 000 legal cases of violence, rape and murders committed by Kosovo Albanians and against Serbian and non-Albanian population!
“...proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors...”
ANSWER: Well this is ridiculous argument. That “international factors” were clearly not neutral, but one side in the War, so as such irrelevant to be called “international factors”! In contrary they were invaders of independent Country and abusers of International Laws by their decision to bomb Independent State without UN Resolution approval!
“...and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari...".
ANSWER: “Work” of Martti Ahtisaari can be connected with above context. He was working in clear coordination with above mentioned abusers of International Laws in the time of Nato bombing of Serbia, namely USA and EU, so as per such his work should be legally irrelevant. Apart of that he “came out” with his suggestion for the future status of Province in the time of active negotiations of both sides concerning the case-status, which is clear and determined violation of the process and legal bully. As per such his work is legally NIHIL.
What I can only hope is, that Serbia is gathering best legal team available and that they are doing the good job in preparing the case? Facts are more than easy on our side. Hit them with the facts and hit them legally hardest you can!
pre 14 godina
What is great about this is that no matter how many heavyweights are wheeled in or money spent, nobody can circumvent the law. I just hope that the ICJ does its job and doesn't come up with a fudged politically influenced finding designed not to upset.
On the surface of it these last minute points look a little shaky:
"right of nations to self-determination"... Kosovo is legally a province and not a nation;
"Kosovo as a sui generis case"... it has already been established that it is not;
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"... after all of the wars, the UN agreed that Kosovo should remain a province of Serbia, therefore it's hardly likely that the ICJ will now say that this was wrong;
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence"... again as above, plus the change of government, attitudes and actions (as well as improved dealings with the 'international community') over the last decade;
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors"... individual countries are not international 'factors' - only the UN can follow due process and agree with the sovereign state the status of one of its provinces;
"inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari"... and the subsequent chucking out of said plan which has never been implemented and was never agreed as the bsis for anything! In fact, one proviso of allowing EULEX to deploy was that the A Plan was not implemented.
pre 14 godina
Dean Van der ...
Facts are often scenarios for someone else. After all freedom of speech and democracy should be respected.
Using capital letters(i.e.FACTS)is considered offending in modern web culture.
English is not my mother tongue, it is a fact, you are right. Until now all of my posts were readable and understandable. However, thank you for bringing that to light and I will take your advice.
Abyhow, your facts are scenarions for me, at least.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009 10:44)
This is precisely about money and a lot of it. ICJ is the first step. If the decision will favor Serbia in the next step Serbia could sue Maldives (or similar "important" country) for a minor sum and easily win.
The third step could be a more important country with major assets (like "US Steel") in Serbia and the amount will be more.
That country is of course morally corrupt. "Morale" won't force them to any negotiation table - but if it is about a lot of little green papers with "$" signs, an average US government official doesn't mind to sell his mother and firstborn child.
pre 14 godina
@@@ by Olf
“...dean van der serbia
I think that that your scenarios are a bit to impartial.
What if none of those happen.
Kosova is prepared to accept decisions against since owthing worst can happen, what about you, are you prepared to take decision contrary to what you think?
(Olf, 13 July 2009 13:56)...”
Let me help you out: I did not present any scenarios, I illustrated FACTS !
And additionally: kindly do not contribute comments on the English B92 comments site if your English is not adequate and good enough to be understood OR also possible, as an option, that “language translator” you are using to translate your comments from “? Language” to English is just useless. Your comment is simply not readable.
pre 14 godina
To the Swiss,
It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives. As a swiss you should stick with what you do best, be neutral, and enjoy the wealth that this brings to you. Leave the others to care about the world conflicts and affairs.
Now when it comes to ICJ ruling I must say that many of the countries that are nowadays sovereign 'appeared' on the world's political map long before there was any 'international law' or even the UN. So to suggest that Kosovo's independence cannot be legitimate given UN objections (which are only partly so) is to take a naive interpretation of how international relations function. Int'l law is an array of interests (simplistically said, of course) which, when there's no convergence, it is 'violated' repeatedly.
Kosovo's claim to statehood, amongst many valid claims, should be primarily anchored on the 'moral argument' of state-sponsored killings which made Serbia's continued claim to sovereignty over Kosovo an untenable position. Note that the US's declaration of independence, long before there was any modern-day int'l law or an int'l org like the UN was based primarily on the idea of UK's colonial, repressive policy.
But, speaking of int'l law: how come Serbia consistently claims coverage by int'l law over its Kosovo sovereignty claim, when this same law was repeatedly violated through the commission of state-sponsored war crimes? What part of int'l law sanctions this kind of behavior?
Also Serbian side does not have a reasonable argument when it comes to explain how 1244 applies to Serbia's soverengity, as 1244 mentions only Yugoslavia. There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
(Xythi, 13 July 2009, 10:44)
I couldnt agree more Xythi. The Helsinki Agreement and UN Resolution 1244 will attest to that.
pre 14 godina
Olf: "I am sure that 100 years ago International law was not the same as it is now."
Following WWII many international laws were revamped with the formation of the UN and it is by these that countries must abide today.
Under the Helsinki Agreement, the UN Charter and UN Resolution 1244 international laws have been breached by the Unilateral Declaration of Independence declared by the province of Kosovo and the support of various countries does not alter this fact.
If the ICJ finds in favour of Serbia then many countries may choose to reverse recognition rather than be party to a proven illegality.
pre 14 godina
I would have to disappoint many readers here who believe that Serbia can sue any country based on the ICJ ruling. They forget some very obvious facts:
1. ICJ ruling will be advisory in nature, or simply a response to a question, and is not legally binding to anyone, let alone third parties. Therefore you can not use such a ruling in any court of law, to sue anybody. It was Serbia who chose to ask for an advisory opinion, and not a legally binding one. Therefore Serbia can not change the nature of the ruling after the ruling has been made.
2. The question that was asked was simply "was Kosova's declaration of independence in line with the international law". So the court will deal simply with the act of declaration, and can't issue a ruling on whether the recognition of Kosova by other countries, is legal or not. In fact, there is no clause anywhere in the International Law that prevents or obliges a country, to recognize another country, or government. That falls squarely within the sovereign rights of that country.
You can't sue Maldives for the act of declaration of independence of Kosova, because the independence of Kosova was not declared by Maldives, but by the Parliament of Kosova, expressing the will of the people. And you can't sue Maldives for recognizing the independence of Kosova, based on the ICJ ruling, because ICJ will not deal with the act of recognitions, in addition to it being advisory in nature.
Regarding the Ahtisaari Plan. If Serbs has any objections, as to the format of the negotiations, or the choice of the UN envoy, they should have made those objections known before the negotiations started. They should have not entered the negotiations at all, nobody forced them. They could have pulled out of the negotiations if they didn't agree with the process that was being followed.
Same with Russia. They had the power to block the appointment of the UN envoy, or the format being followed. Everything was done with the active participation of Russia, that was an active member of the Contact Group. If Russia's condition was that the result of the negotiations had to be within 100% of the Serbia's demands, they should have put that condition before the negotiations started, not after the envoy presented the plan. You can't negotiate for two years, go along with process and at the end say that you didn't like the negotiations, because you didn't like the results. If you want to be considered a serious state, you can not act like a teenage drama queen.
pre 14 godina
What is the "new argument"? Squatters' rights? Frankly, I think that is the only argument. I wonder how the US would act if Mexicans crossed the border into California until they reached a point where they were a majority in San Diego and then decided to declare themselves an independent country. Would Obama recognize them or call out the National Guard?
pre 14 godina
Kate, Ataman and other Serbian regime supporters
Have you at all considered what could happen if the decision does not come Serbias way, since all indications can tell that.
What visa liberation story are you going to tell to people in Serbia.
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
I object this vehemently. I am not supporting any "regime".
In the fact, I am highly critical of "fat cats" of any kind.
I cannot tell, what ICJ decision will be because I am not trusting courts either. (How you spell "O. J. Simpson"?)
But just in case if ICJ is in favor of Serbia, things can look for the countries recognizing Kosovo pretty ugly.
As for Kosovo itself - it deserves a better "government" than what it has.
Unlike me - you can be called "Kosovo regime supporter". This does a disservice and given their criminal background a disgrace. But it is up to you.
I have no problem and in the fact I am very happy to see people who honestly support Albanian cause but despise the Drenica-clan. With Drenica-fanboyz there is no argument possible.
"Visa liberalization" is a separate story. How it will be done and how it can be enforced is more than a question. Serbia will continue to issue the passports, it is up to EU. I find it amusing, some of "Drenica fanboyz" managed to find anything supporting their cause in the news. All I see, EU showing them a middle finger, but keeps smiling. With "friends" like these who needs enemies.
If EUSA kicks the Drenica-fanboyz in the head with a smile, instead of protesting they will say "thanks for supporting Kosova", bow and kiss their behind...
pre 14 godina
It is simple: just check the Yugoslave constitution!
Kosovo is province, not a republic!
Stop wasting time and money and start building up this province!
pre 14 godina
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Zoran,
In this case since you mentioned Romania, I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
pre 14 godina
Olf, please will you not refer to me as a "Serbian regime supporter".
Firstly, as far as I am aware, the Serbian govt of today is no more a 'regime' than many others in Europe - probably less so in some cases.
Secondly, my concern lies purely in the injustice served against Serbia by those who claim to be 'morally' right.
If bully boy tactics can force away large chunks of European nations which are then handed as a reward to a single ethnic group, then who knows which of our countries will be next?
I am on the side of preserving international law and sanity, and not having 'Wag the Dog' wars composed by a few, suffered by many, and supported by a so-called free media.
All societies have good and bad in them, and I have nothing whatsoever against any people.
pre 14 godina
Kate for each Nations constitution there is an atached high court that interprets that. Let alone any such thing as 1244 and Helsinki.
I am sure you are speculating as any of us in this site, what ICJ might rule or "advice". But according to Serbias neighbours, all interpreted both the UN and Helsinki and countless other relative treaties as above sufficient for the Kosovo independence.
Now if neighbours see it as that is the best result knowing Serbia deeper than anyone in Spain or India, the ICJ has the obligation for stabilising the region.
pre 14 godina
I sugest you include Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey and try to figure out how many milions is?
(Kosova-USA, 13 July 2009 20:09)
--
Turkey is not a neighbour but if we are considering non-neighbours then lets include China and India, who strongly support Serbia.
pre 14 godina
It is true that the upcoming ICJ ruling is non-binding. i was not in favor of the blgd regime taking this route, because it was clear all along that this would just be used as just another piece of ammunition, more fodder in the "non-violent" war against kosovo/a. nevertheless, they were able to trick/pressure/coerce enough members of the UNGA (as, apparently, according to their rules) to endorse the move. before the vote was even complete, the blgd regime announced (and has since oft repeated)that it would NEVER accept a ruling contrary to their particular legal opinion. in other words, the context for this whole ruling is questionable, to say the least, and blg's credibility low-low-low.
as to the spec's of the arguments of Kosovo/a, as provided in this article, i believe that they are absolutely reasonable and sound. i will not write a thesis paper right now defending each of them -- they have all been argued, many times, by myself and many other capable persons here.
ok, it is true that i am not an international legal expert. i personally know only one, and she would probably not be classifed as a "world expert" altho she is an intl law professor here in CAL, and is, shall we say, sympathetic to our side. as are many others. so, i am not an official "expert" but then, neither is anyone else writing here. and i am not impressed by the so-called arguments from the other side. At all.
i have said many times that the icj will NEVER rule in serbia's side in this case, and i stand by my word (unlike so many others who assured us that kosovo/a would never rec. more than 5, 10, 15 recognitions -- they'd all be taken back, bla bla bla.) so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
i have said that it will probably be some kind of mishy mashy ruling, as they are known for -- as in: yes, somehow serbia was responsible for not stopping the genocide of srebrenica, but not ACTually responsible (therefore supposedly don't need to pay reparations or feel too bad...) that should have made any legal expert wince, or cry, and many did, but the world has gone on, oft badly. for the morally impaired icj, it is biz as usual...
cheers!
roberto
frisco
ps we don't need any comments from people about the "substandard" use of the english language. first, because i could easily take a red pen to 90% of the postings here and be utterly justified. second, because my own use of english grammar, puntuation, etc. here is oft lazy and um creative, substandard, though i think sufficient for the circumstances. and third, because we are encouraging a variety of ideas and opinions here, even if some contributors are still in the process of learning or mastering english. if i had to compose these messages in serbo-croatian-bosnian, much less albanian, (hungarian??!) or even in german i would come up painfully short, as would most persons here! give that elitism a rest.
pre 14 godina
"Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it."
Patrik, international community already has troops in Kosova, ever heard of KFOR? If you think that Serbia can use the ICJ to get an international consensus to start a war, than all I can say is "good luck"! In any case Serbia vs NATO is like a cat hissing at a tiger.
pre 14 godina
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism?
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Kate with all due respect allow me to quote……
“I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!”
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
pre 14 godina
Well let's see...
"right of nations to self-determination,"
-- Well, K Albanians were pursuing this as early as 1981, if not sooner, long before any concepts of state repression set in to counter the separatism.
"Kosovo as a sui generis case,"
-- Oh please. Every case is a sui generis case.
"context of Yugoslavia's disintegration"
-- A "free for all" disintegration of collective concensus of identity that had been losing legitimacy before even 1974.
"loss of Serbia's moral and legal right over Kosovo because of systematic state violence",
-- This may be the only argument worth considering but if it is, then it raises a whole new issue regarding the legitimacy of sovereingty that the will of the people which cannot be denied to other areas in both the former-YU (Bosnia anyone?) and around the world. If the leaders of the world wish to truly entertain this idea, the good people at Rand McNally are going to be very busy in the coming years.
"proclamation of independence in coordination with international factors,"
-- Not really. Just the ones that a) tacitly supported them, and b) gave the hint that such a unilateral act would have little to no repercussions.
"and inclusion of the UN in the process of defining a political status through its envoy Martti Ahtisaari".
-- I don't recall the UN approving the AP, nor do I recall the UNSC replacing 1244 with anything new.
If independence is supposed to be this open and shut case as we've been hearing, these arguments have lots of interpretive holes in them.
pre 14 godina
Or maybe, by the time the ICJ bring the decision people will forget about Kosova and Kosova could be regognised by 100 countries.
(Olf, 13 July 2009 12:17)
As far as I can remember you are a foreigner leaving in Kosovo, (or maybe you just pretented it) therefore I believe that you could "neutraly" contribute to a lot of B92 articles by sharing your outsider eye!
However I have realized that you are unfortunately more interested to continiousely critize whatever good news might be siding with what you call "the serbian regime supporters".
You might have your own reasons which I will then be very interested to share!
A lot of posters are certainly neither pro-serbian nor pro-kosovo but simply interested to have the international laws finally respected again irrespective of which side it at the end helps, and am one of those posters!
There is not one single day passing where you can not read the dirty UK/USA tricks used all around the world to cover the mess they created the last 10 years and yes I would love to see the Bush Cheneys and co behind bars
and am sure that am not the only one!
I can only share our experience with both Serbs (abt 280 thds) and K-A (abt 270 thds)leaving in Switzerland and I don't have to tell you which side we'll vote for if we had the choice to do so...and this isn't a fairy tale but based on facts!
Does it mean that K-A are worst people than Serbs, certainly not, we have also a lot of good examples with the older K-A generation, unfortunately a minority!
I was rather happy to read lately some more objective K-A posters telling what is really happening in Kosovo and can only encourage them to post more to share with us a more balanced view!
pre 14 godina
"temporary authorities of Kosovo"
They are temporary, new elections will have to be held every 4 years. Is that what B92 meant?
pre 14 godina
honestly i dont know why they bother!
this is waste of money and time
pre 14 godina
Dear Serbian camp Yugoslavia is gone, All the members of it support Kosovo. All Serbias neighbours confirmed that.
(Drink Water, 13 July 2009 14:59)
--
What hope do you have of convincing international judges when you can't even get your basic facts correct?
Both Serbia and BiH as former Yugoslav republics have not recognised Kosovo and this represents 14 million people compared to Montenegro, FYROM, Croatia and Slovenia's 9 million.
When it comes to neighbours you also forgot about Romania - an EU member with veto powers to ensure an independent Kosovo never gets in.
Sooner or later our southern citizens (mainly of Albanian ethnicity) will realise that negotiations are the only path to lasting peace.
All these myths and lies will only delay the prosperity and well being of the province. It's time to face reality and to work towards a future for all - based on understanding and compromise.
pre 14 godina
'Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. '
This is only an advisory ruling.
pre 14 godina
There is no legal argument or any int'l agreement that makes Serbia the legal decendant of Yugoslavia.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 18:48)
--
These are the kind of myths and lies I am referring to. Taken from the US State Department site:
"After October 5, 2000, foreign embassies, including that of the U.S., reopened and Serbia, as the successor state to the F.R.Y., regained its seat in such international organizations as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the UN, and is actively participating in International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank projects." Check http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.htm
So just as Russia became the successor state to the USSR so did Serbia become the successor state to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Now come my southern Serbian citizens, please try to get your facts right. How do you expect to win an international court case if you can't even get the basics right?
pre 14 godina
I think the bigotry is pretty clear. Generalization (i.e. most of Albanians are bad) is a virtue of ignorance. If you are a Serb you should know this by now, as Serbs have suffered from it as well.
Now the Swiss apparently is a representative of a nation which thrives on Western world order, rule and above all western protection.
(Denis, 13 July 2009 21:37)
Thanks for your rather confusing book about the way we should look at the different aspect of law and it's interpretation....
Believe it or not I have a totally opposite view and you can write another book it will not change my opinion!
As to my extremisms/bigotry, you made me laugh because you apparently have so little clue about what Switzerland is composed off and moreover the region where am coming from is certainly the most coloured in terms of well integrated nationalities.
My parents neighbours are wounderfull K-A and I don't want to open a polemic here by repeating what they are saying about the current K leadership! You would certainly call them traitors!
You also certainly know that less than 1% of K-A leaving in Switzerland had even the desire to return, guess why!
I would stress one more time the word "integrated' because we are certainly an example of integration of multi-nationalities, however most of the K-A welcomed in Switzerland during the war have not only never integrated but are causing a lot of problems and you certainly know in which field their are active... You might well look yourself at the statistics!!
Now if giving facts is a sign of bigotry and ignorance, then let me be ignorant, if not agreeing with the UDI is a a sign of supporting the serbian regime, then let me be a supporter and finally if believing in a "straight" international law is a funny thing nowadays, then let me dream of a better world order!
Last but not least if I would be the represented of bla bla bla, then Switzerland would have not recognized this UDI, not because of their inhabitants but because of the way if was done, simply illegaly.
Unfortunately, likewise so many other countries, we were forced to do it for various reasons...
Since you seem to be a well educated and smart person I would love to hear your interpretation of law regarding another dozen of regions that have been fighting for decades to have a well deserved country. I believe I do not have to list them, they are certainly know to you!
Cheers
pre 14 godina
The Kosovar albanians have a big advantage, a golf-style handicap in the ICJ. The handicap consists of support from the criminals that launched the attack on Yugoslavia 1999. But even with this handicap they will face problems because ICJ should make decisions based on the rule of law, not on the rule of criminals. The law is on the side of Serbia and the Albanians have the criminals. So the question is if the criminals or if justice will prevail in the International Court of Justice.
pre 14 godina
Denis's comment to The Swiss: "It is exactly opinions like yours which makes Europe a place where bigotry and extremism thrives."
What exactly did The Swiss say which reflected bigotry or extremism? Nothing at all!
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
pre 14 godina
I doubt they sent any arguments on their own. The story should read, Western European and US lawyers sent new arguments. I doubt seriously that Kosovo's albanian lawyers could have crafted any meaningful arguments without the help of good Western lawyers
pre 14 godina
(Adrian Gashi, 13 July 2009 17:45) Where to begin.....
You are correct. Any opinion that the ICJ renders is just that, an opinion. However, it may justify the use of force should Serbian choose that road. There is no court to sue in and Kosovo's leaders would not likely follow a court decision anyway. The whole point of sending to the ICJ is simply to get an international consensus. If the court renders a decision in Serbia's favor and Serbia then sends in troops (without the horror of what Milosovic did) the international community will not be able to send in troops to stop it. Think man, there is a point to this whole process. Serbia is free to protect it's borders if they get a positive ruling. Of course if a decision is against them the end is near. But, either way this is a win/win for Serbia. Either they win the decision and take back Kosova or they lose and can tell the people "we tried".
pre 14 godina
We serbs lost legal and moral and whathaveyou right to our own land, kosovo? :) darlings, you lost your minds. try as hard as you like but facts are facts. facts: kosovo is serbian land. separatists and their supporters formed joint criminal enterprise trying to steal it. they cant. its a frozen conflict and limbo. that is all there is.
pre 14 godina
It is an old, over-used and poor tactic to try to brush aside quite reasonable opinion against Kosovo's independence by branding it 'extremism' or 'bigotry'.
The Swiss was speaking of defending international laws and speaking honestly about his/ her views. Absolutely nothing unreasonable in their comment, although they must have hit a sore point with you.
(kate, 13 July 2009 19:49)
Thanks Kate, J-C would have said "forgive them because they don't know what they are doing..."
And what this gentlemen do not know is that during our last election our strongest and % leading right wing party, including his leader, were fortunately wiped out because of too extreme views...
Should I call it "ignorance", maybe better "not well informed!"
Salutations de M. le Suisse :)
pre 14 godina
I just want to stress out one fact that was never mentioned in the previous posts.
Namely, the question Serbia sent to the ICJ was: "Was the UNILATERAL declaration of independence in accordance to the Intl.Law."
That word: UNILATERAL - is the key word.
I won't spare my words arguing what will happen if ICJ rule in favor of Serbia. Many posters have elaborated that theme in detail. I would like to say just a few words about the case ICJ come up with the ruling in favor of K-Albanian's UNILATERAL declaration of independence.
In that case every single separation movement in the would get an open invitation to UNILATERALLY proclaim its independence from central government. There will be no low that could stop them to do that. They could claim to have moral rights to secession since Government oppress them, they have legal right to secession since they follower self-determination. They could say they don't care if they should become UN member since the recognition of their UNILATERAL proclamation of independence is the act that any single state could wage on their behalf, etc...
As you can see, in that case world will be on the brink of chaos.
First that come to my mind is the Kurd minority in Turkey which suffered much worse state terror and for much longer time then K-Albanians. Why should they won't be allowed to UNILATERALLY declare their independence from Turkey? And after that we could imagine Basks, Corsicans, Flamans, Laponians, Uigurs, etc... And not to mention Africa.
So one could draw its own conclusion from that.
pre 14 godina
so yes, my credibility is on the line, and that's ok.
(robertoruss, 13 July 2009 22:01)
--
Credibility? LOL!!!!
pre 14 godina
roberto said..."give that elitism a rest."
Really, roberto?
Practice what you preach.
42 Komentari
Sortiraj po: