Tadić: Hyseni’s statements direct threat

6000 voters out of a population of 100000 is not 6%. If all 100000 were eligable to vote then yes. But I doubt that all 100000 are above the voting age, have necessary resident ID, able to vote, not pressured not to vote, willing to vote, and present in Kosovo at the time; then and only then is 6%.

If Tadic claims all Kosovo residents to be Serbia's citizens and to avoid a humanitarian disaster by supplying energy to the north only, then why he does not do the same for all residents of Kosovo whose electricity has been cut off due to unpaid bills?

Since Kosovo UDI we haven't seen any large scale problems in Kosovo nor the region, may that be inter-ethnic or any sort.

It is strange to see Tadic condemn the elections (held by and in Kosovo) because they were not called nor held by UNMIK. Have you forgot your own words Mr Tadic? you are the one who proclaimed all elections in Kosovo illegal even the ones called and held by UNMIK.

You mentioned the church in Gjakovo. Answer about the mosque in central Belgrade burned by your youth only a few years ago.

You ask for negotiations. Don't you realize it is to late?

Mr President, if Kosovo MFA Hyseni's statement is a direct threat to the peace and stability in the region, your government actions are not to be underestimated. The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.

Tadics comment very vague and immature and for local serbian consumption.

Threat? Because what Hyseni said is the truth? You want to start balkan war for some criminals in north who dont have to obey laws, neigher Serbian nor Kosovo's and can continue smuggle drugs and weapons. Get your grip together befor you make the same misstake Milosevic did. Who's next to be calling the threat, Montenegro, Bulgaria?

I don't think there is anything immature about wanting to negotiate. The immaturity comes from those that oppose negotiations. I have always supported negotiations on Kosovo, long before UDI. My position has not changed just because I believe I have the upper hand.

Imagine the following view represented - that because there is relative peace in Kosovo, no negotiations need to be had. The message to the other side - ensure that there is no peace in Kosovo and then we will give you negotiations. No?

Oh I see, the stability argument is a lie. Whether a third world war came from kosovo or milk and honey there will be no negotiations right? So much for Hyseni's concern for stability.

Lets look at the stability argument, and not from a selfish insular Kosovo view. Lets look at it from a regional perspective. We all know what is going on in Bosnia, we all know how this is poisoning relations between Serbia and Croatia. We all know how Bosnia is paralysed. We all know the situation in Montenegro, we all know how this situation is poisoning Serbian - Montenegrin relations. OK, say the Albanians, you see this is a Serbian problem, we can't help that. Well it is only a Serbian problem at the moment. Imagine if Montenegro rescinded recognition of Kosovo. Would that be a Serbian problem?

No, this is a regional issue and it is causing instability regionally. This can only be solved at the negotiating table.

So I say back to the negotiation table, as I always did and that if you don't support that you don't support peace or stability. And I believe that in your hearts you know I'm right.

The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.
(DuplexClick, 23 January 2010 13:38)
--
It's time to open your eyes and to accept the true reality. The only path to lasting peace is through the negotiating table.

Those citizens loyal to Serbia reside on 35-40% of the territory while legitimate Serbian institutions are formed in those areas.

The biggest danger to regional stability is to force something against the will of the people.

We have already accepted ethnic Albanian self-rule so it is only natural for those areas loyal to Serbia to be ruled by Serbia.

Follow the path to peace my friends.

Živeli!

"Hyseni answered Tadić's comments, saying that Kosovo “is the last country in the world that wants to destabilize the Balkans,” and repeated that the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence has contributed to peace and security."

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.

We're not exactly talking about the brightest bulb in the pack. "Peace and security" can only be achieved if both sides refrain from hostile actions, and right now it seems Pristina is more eager to destabilize the region than Belgrade.

Zoran, those serb illegal institution are operating now only in N.mitrovica and will not survive the year 2010. Kosovo goverment,Eulex and ICO with Kfor will make sure they don't survive. They cause instability and that is why in Zannier's rapport only the north of Kosovo was unstable. If K.serbs wants to live and have a good future they have to have good relations with the K.albanians because they are your closest neighbour. You cannot have bad relations with your closest neighbour and still live peacefully in the neighbourhood. In Kosovo the serbs can still rule them self while working with their neighbours the albanians. If serbian institutions would survive in Kosovo this would never happend and it would only cause an Berlin-wall in Mitrovica. That is not what albanians want and that is not what Eu wants. Serb instituions in Kosovo is clearly out of the question.





Bganon, Kosovo and Serbia negotiated for 2 years and wasen't even close to a compromise on almost nothing. We albanians have understand clearly that Serbia wants to give us an type of autonomy but we dont want that and we dont need that. What is it more to negotiate about when it comes to the status when Kosovo wants only independence and Serbia can only offer some sort of autonomy ? We albanians have a new reality in our new state and the reality is that we are loyal to the goverment in Prishtina and consider our state to be Kosovo. We will never back down from that and Serbia can only negotiate with us when Serbia consider us a country. In the end Serbia have no rule in Kosovo and will never have so the serbian offer just sounds stupid. There is nothing to negotiate about so why negotiate ?

bgdanon, Serbia's own Constitution prevents anyone that negotiates in the name of Serbia on anything else other than autonomy. No matter how much the Serb camp tries to hide this fact the rest of those who are involved on the issue know this. So demagogic statements coming from the Serb camp about negotiations and dialog are rightly ignored. Nobody will give credence to Serb demagogy just because the Serbs want to have the appearance of moderates. Serbia's own Constitution unequivocally reveals Serbia's falsities in its call for negotiations. Nobody is foolish enough to sit on a table with the Serbs to agree on what form of autonomy Serbia wants to give Kosova. So you go on with the usual demagogy coming from you leaders. Let's see how that works out for you.

Bganon, you are 100% right, the fact that the k-a wants to force the North to obey is insane, are they not the one who wanted to separate because of ethnicities! Real trouble makers, no surprise!

It's time to open your eyes and to accept the true reality. The only path to lasting peace is through the negotiating table.

Those citizens loyal to Serbia reside on 35-40% of the territory while legitimate Serbian institutions are formed in those areas.

The biggest danger to regional stability is to force something against the will of the people.

We have already accepted ethnic Albanian self-rule so it is only natural for those areas loyal to Serbia to be ruled by Serbia.

Follow the path to peace my friends.

Živeli!
(Zoran, 23 January 2010 14:58)

Yes Zoran. The negotiations have been held already. There was an understanding approved by Russian Federation as well that negotiations can not have unlimited time. However in the middle of negotiations Serbia approved the new constitution precluding the outcome. Therefore as one said constitution of Serbia does not authorize anyone representing Serbia to negotiate without violating it.

Tadic's accusation are stupid. Why should Kosovo/Albanians benefit from a destabilized Balkan? Albanians achieved what they want, independence. Now they need a peace so that everybody can see that the independent Kosovo is actually a stablizing factor. It is therefore quite obvious that it is only the Serbs who benefit from chaos, conflicts and war, no matter if we talk about Kosovo or Bosnia. Simple logics!

'Have you forgot your own words Mr Tadic? you are the one who proclaimed all elections in Kosovo illegal even the ones called and held by UNMIK. '

Yeah, even Inner City Press (a blog dealing with the UN, but with actual reporting) picked up on this. ICP tends to be automatically anti-U.S. and has in the past seemed to side with Serbia, but this time nobody from the Serbian side stopped to talk to them after the session, while Hyseni responded at least to their question on the elections: "Inner City Press asked about Tadic's statement that elections not called by the UN Mission, UNMIK, are illegal. Hyseni said that the authorities in Belgrade have also opposed any election called by UNMIK. Video here, from Minute 7:36."

(BTW, the "Grey Lady" mentioned is the NY Times.)

more of a promise than a threat.

Zoran:

I would take the same advice if I was in your place. How ave you concluded that "loyal citizens of Serbia" reside in 35-40 % of the territory. Would you cite that reference so that I could refer to the data, please.
Be definition, negotiations, have to be cooperative: it is an integrative process, aimed at reaching a solution. By this definition--emphasis on the "cooperative--negotiations with regards to Kosovo were taking place for 8 years prior to 2007.
Now, if your definition of negotiations has other antecedents which the research community has failed to account, you might consider producing some form of empirical study that would improve that concept and measure it with consistency,

N.Young

Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.

There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held.

Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes.

That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough.

Ok so the fall back excuse is that we have already had negotiations. When was that exactly and what kind of negotiations was it?

Neogtiations, as Albanian posters keep pointing out, come when two parties, considered equals sit down.

So, on the one hand you are saying we had negotiations and on the other you are saying that Serbia never negotiated with Albanians as equals. Those arguments are contradictory - if you accept (and anybody fair minded must surely accept) that those 'negotiations' were a case of one side being forced to accept terms from the other, under international supervision.

Those 'negotiations' were nothing of the kind, as you know. And now, knowing they were nothing of the kind you say that we already tried. We have not tried yet. Then you have the 'its too late' excuse. I mean how many excuses do you want to create. Isn't it uncomfortable telling these half lies.

Tell the truth, your position is the same as Serbia's in the 1990's. You don't want to negotiate simply because you have the upper hand. You don't care less about the Serbian minority in Kosovo, all you care about is hanging on to your land, at all costs.
Thats the selfish reality isn't it?

OK, so if we must negotiate in the only terms understood - that of holding land, then don't we have Mitrovica and Serb areas in Kosovo to negotiate about. Or are you hoping to sweep that issue under the carpet in the same way the Kosovo issue was not dealt with by Serbia? Newsflash, if you do that you will learn the same lesson Serbia is learning. Why not learn the lesson, negotiate and help all the people of Kosovo to progress.

Goodbye Serbia!!!!

Mr Tadicu:
NOWT ELSE TO DO, hm?

Think HAITI
10,000 buried in 1 day

"Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held."

--This is not about controversies. This is about falsities. The falsity here is the fact that Serbia's Constitution foresees autonomy as the only solution; hence when they speak about compromise they aren't speaking about compromise. They are speaking about autonomy because that's the most they can talk about under that Constitution. So while negotiations aren't forbidden under the Constitution they are to be held only under the condition that autonomy is the only solution. So while the demagogues in Belgrade talk about compromise they have already predetermined what the solution looks like. Nobody with even half a brain will sit on a table with you when you already have a predetermined solution that leaves no room for anything else since that is treachery under Serbia's laws. Enough with falsities. Enough with demagogies.



"Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes."

-- Several facts you do not mention. A constitution can indeed be changed. There's nobody that knows that better than Albanians. In fact we know that it can be changed without our votes. Not only that but without a popular vote from us, Constitutions in Serbia have been changed where autonomy was taken away from us. Keep this in mind. It is of paramount importance. Another fact that is of paramount importance is the adoption of the new Serb Constitution in the middle of a negotiating process (Albanians were denied the right to vote for the Constitution. This also is of great importance because while Serbia claimed Albanians were Serb citizens it denied them the right to vote. It is very telling what Serbia foresees for us); where Serbia sought to preempt and predetermine the final status in a unilateral fashion. Notice that until then although both sides were rigid in their positions, the Albanian side had not taken any steps or procedures that unilaterally predetermined status. This is of key importance. The first unilateral action was taken by the state of Serbia even though it had agreed that during negotiations no side would undertake unilateral steps that sought to predetermine status.
You say if a constitution proved to be a stumbling block. This is not about ifs. The constitution is a stumbling block. That is because if you preach compromise then you know for sure that nobody is going to compromise by submitting to your own terms. Since you've set such terms and conditions that predetermine status before status talks are even held then you really are not talking about compromise, you are talking about submission of the other side to the terms you have set in your Constitution. Since there is no talk whatsoever about changing the Constitution, then the population, following your own logic, is not pressuring the politicians. So the population like the politicians want the other side to take part in status talk where status is already predetermined by Serbia as written in Serbia's constitution. So like the Serb politicians the people also are engaging in demagogy. Disguising falsities under the label of compromise.

"That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough."

-- You seem to be confusing the matter here. You do not see my side cheaply using the word compromise day in and day out. As a matter of fact my side states that the status has been settled. There is no desperation on my side to try to convince the Serbs to sit on a table with us. Its the opposite. What I've been trying to say all along in this post is that while the Serbs use compromise to appear as moderate guys they also have a Constitution that states that they cannot sit on a table to negotiate with anyone if the other side does not agree that the status as written in the Constitution can only be autonomy. So they want the other side to submit to the perverse notion that the Serb idea of compromise is one where status is predetermined before status talks initiate, and that status is what the Serb constitution states, which the other side has agreed with the moment they decide to sit on that table. So the trick "your side" is trying to pull is to cover submission under the guise of a label that is positive sounding;such as compromise.
So while your belief is not a wrong one and not a bad one at all, Serbia here has a problem, not Albanians; we are quite happy with how things have been going so far. Serbia wants to resolve it but it lacks goodwill and creativity. It lacks goodwill because while it talks about compromise it means submission of the other side to Serbia's predetermined status. It lacks creativity because the Constitution as is written now leaves no room whatsoever for creativity; in fact it can't be any more rigid than it is. You can put any epithet, symbol, or metaphor you want to autonomy but what it is and remains in the end is autonomy.

The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.
(DuplexClick, 23 January 2010 13:38)
Abkhazia and Ossetia are from 17 years de-facto detacged from Georgia. Same Karabakh - from 17 years de facto detached from Azerbaijan, same Transnistria is de facto independent from Moldova from 18 years.

So?? Why USA and other Western countries described Ossetia, Abkhazia, Karabakh and Transnistria as integral parts of Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova??

Mr .Tadic we albanains try to negotitate with serbs even when millosevic forces was killing inoscent people,where have you been that time probobly going to demonstrate with jeremic on behalf of millosevic to send more troops in KOSOVO AND KILL PEOPLE AND NOW YOU want to negociate again, what make you think 2 and half million albanian want to go back under serbia REGIME and you know very well how albanians went throuhg hell and suffer for years to get this freedom,THE CASE IS CLOSE have nice day everyone,,,,

Bganon, one question sums it all. Do you wrelly think Serbia would give up on ,more than autonomy and less than independence if we had negotiations ?

Or the other way aurond, do you think now K.albanians would give up it's independence and all they have worked for to build up for the past 11 years ?


Negotiations would not lead anyway. No side is ready to give up on this points and it is a dead end. Albanians cannot live in a limbo for years of negotiations.

Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.

There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held.

Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes.

That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough.
(bganon, 24 January 2010 00:10)


The Constitution can only be changed by a referendum in which Albanians were and are not able to participate due to the "offer" gave by Serb delegation. Go find out on what they offered in the first place, and then discuss. So the Constitution was approved and enacted without any Albanian consent, and it "decided" the outcome of the "negotiations" in which it stated that Kosovo IS a province of Serbia. That was the real unilateral declaration. Since the Constitution can only be changed by a Serb referendum, what guarantees Albanians have for the future of the "autonomy"? Maybe a future downgrade or revoke, because we know what happened last time. Mostly Serbian voters voted on the referendum, minorities refrained or not able to vote. What would the outcome be if K-Albanians were allowed to vote?

(John, 23 January 2010 20:16)
Simple logics from a simple man.
The Albanians don't want to stop. They want it all. They want more Serbs to leave Kosovo and I am sure they also want more of Macedonia and MNE.

To me it seems there's no better solution than to split Kosovo along the Ibar river into a north part belonging to Serbia and a south part being Albanian Kosovo.

The serbian enclaves in the south would have a similar status like the albanian villages in Presevo.

What will be happening now (implementing the socalled "rule of law" in the north against the will of the Serbian people living there) is very similar to Milosevic's policy, just with opposite roles. They justified their actions in the 90th with "implementing the law", too. In that case it was against Albanian people living in Kosovo.

Albanians didn't want to live in a serbian dominated state of Serbia, and now Serbs don't want to live in albanian dominated state of Kosovo. Maybe both is stupid, maybe both is natural.

You must be blind not to see the parallels.

Johnny I see a lot of words in your post but I'm struggling to see the point. Your entire first para is based upon the current constitution and yet you concede that the constitution can be changed.

I honestly don't see the problem. You are trying to create a stumbling block when one doesn't exist, before negotiations have even begun. What is the point in that?

Your other point is criticism of Serbian policy regarding to Kosovo with changing the constitution in the past. What is your point there? Say it clearly - are you saying that due to Serbian past policy on Kosovo there is a lack of trust among Kosovo Albanians. Yes, I know that, but that still isn't a reason to not negotiate. In all diplomatic disputes, and there have been many around the world, some more difficult than Kosovo, some less, there has been lack of trust, there has been bad blood, one of two sides has suffered more. Is it effective to focus on this? To what end? Is the aim to come up with as many reasons as possible to avoid negotiations?

Let me understand another point you are making - you think that Tadic's offer of negotiations is a lie? Then embarass him and call his bluff. If you are certain of this then why aren't you calling on Kosovo Albanian leaders to do this?

'the Albanian side had not taken any steps or procedures that unilaterally predetermined status. This is of key importance. The first unilateral action was taken by the state of Serbia even though it had agreed that during negotiations no side would undertake unilateral steps that sought to predetermine status.'

I have to say I have no idea which negotiations you are talking about and which constitutional changes. Are you talking about the recent changes in the constitution? Are you referring to 1989? Are you talking about rambouilet? I have so many problems with your analysis here but because I don't know which period you are talking about I can't answer you. Of course I will say that a unilateral decleration of indepedence is an obvious step to determine status - the most obvious one of all.

I think what we are talking about here is 'we are quite happy with how things have been going so far.' You are using the constitution as an excuse.

Mikel you talk about how Albanians didn't have a say in the constitution, as if Albanians would have voted, when we both know that they have not voted in Serbian elections for many years. No, I will not get bogged down in historical arguments and counterarguments to avoid discussing today and the future. Yes, Albanians, as Serbian citizens, should have had the right (and full rights in all other areas) to vote for / against the constitution. What else can I say? But its still not the point. The point is that we have a serious issue that is unresolved.

Demi 'Negotiations would not lead anyway.'. That is both a defeatist and wrong attitude. You simply don't know. Besides, if they would not lead anywhere, what is the harm in trying. Tell me that.
When people talk about negotiations leading nowhere, what they mean is that if they were leading those negotiations they would go nowhere.

Don't get me wrong the wrong men might get appointed to lead negotiations on both sides, in which case they could go nowhere. But it would at least be the beginning of the end of some of Kosovo's problems.

Do you think that the (knowing or unknowing) enemies of peace in Northern Ireland asked questions in similar terms to you?

Tell me if the republicans were utterly, utterly opposed to British rule and the Unionists were completely and wholly against anything other than British rule - how is it that there is peace in Northern Ireland?

Bganon, it was during the “Quintum negotiations” under Ahtisaari, that the Kostunica government changed the constitution. About the beginning in Vienna this interesting Spiegel-article: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,402188,00.html
About the constitution-change in Oct./Nov. 2006 and the Kosovo pre-amble: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Serbia).
In this way the negotiations were deadlocked. After two years came Ahtisaari with his solution of “guided independence”.

Bganon, North will be integrated by isolating the serb population from the illegal mechanism from Serbia wich wants to operate in Kosovo. The serbs will have no way to go but to agree with the majority. The serb will benifit much if they were to integrate into the Kosovar sociaty. The other choice is to move to Serbia because we albanians are not interested in building a wall down the ibar.


It is eazy to integrate the north.To make a story short just elect an K.serbian major working under the goverment in prishtina and if he does a good job the K.serbs will respect him and start following him. They will have no other choice because there will not be any other structur beside those of the goverment of Kosovo. Like in Strpce.



But negotiation of a status of somthing is out of the question. Kosovo status is independence and recognized by 65 countrys. It is settled as you see so we don't need to negotiate anymore. We negotiated for 2 years and wasen't even near an compromise. Albanians have made the decision not to waste time and power on unimportan issues like the status and put more effort on important things like the economy and the well being of the people of Kosovo let it be serbs or albanians.


There is nothing to negotiate about. Kosovo is already independent and it is nothing more but for Serbia to recognize it. Then maybee we can negotiate about importan issues.

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.
(Mike, 23 January 2010 17:33)

One would have to be out of his right mind to negotiate with the likes of Mike. From what I've read in the comments section on B92 his views are pretty widespread amongst the majority of Serbs than say of a Serb like Bganon whose views I highly respect despite not agreeing with him on most things.

It bogggles the mind to ask for negotiations with Prishtina while at the same time to hold such disparaging attitude towards the people you wanna sit in the negotiating table with.
Then you wonder why Prishtina doesn't wanna even think about sitting at the same table with you.

Bganon, you diden't answer my question. It is like you don't understand what i mean. It's as simple as Serbia wont never back down from autonomy for Kosovo and albanians will never back down from their independence, 65 recognition and their formed functional goverment and institutions. Autonomy withing Serbia is out oif the question for us albanians and as we all know independence is out of the question for you. What is it to negotiate when it comes to the status ? Nothing! Kosovo is already independent and are doing much better now having time to handle daily life problems as the economy and law&order.

"It is therefore quite obvious that it is only the Serbs who benefit from chaos, conflicts and war, no matter if we talk about Kosovo or Bosnia. Simple logics!"
(John, 23 January 2010 20:16)

I would say that Serbs didn't have any benefits from the previous chaos and wars - maybe they thought they would have them, but we all know the results in the end...

Johny, I am grateful for your clear and knowing comments, in which you show in what way this Serbian government tries to hide the shortcomings of the Serbian constitution in giving the way free for negotiations as was stated in the UNSC-declaration by Tadic. Everyone who has followed the discussions in the Serbian parliament around the status of the Vojvodina, knows how narrow the Serbian constitution is regulated. Aggravating is the notion that for a change of the constitution you need a two-third majority, which under the momentary balance of power in this parliament, no-one can expect. Even an often presented offer of more than autonomy and less than independence is a farce.
I think that the only honest positioning of the Serbian government is that they never will accept Kosova’s independence, even if the ICJ-ruling is in favour of that. That shows the decisive and restricting strength of this constitution.

Kosovo is THE TERRITORY OF SERBIA. If Kosovo get's independence, than so does Serb Republic of Bosnia, the Basque of Spain, Russian Provinces, Chinese Tiwan and Tibet, and the Palestinians will have a ligatamate precedent to declare independence from Israel.

Hopefully, the ICJ will declare it completely a violation of law.

Hyseni answered Tadić's comments, saying that Kosovo “is the last country in the world that wants to destabilize the Balkans,” and repeated that the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence has contributed to peace and security."

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.

We're not exactly talking about the brightest bulb in the pack. "Peace and security" can only be achieved if both sides refrain from hostile actions, and right now it seems Pristina is more eager to destabilize the region than Belgrade.
(Mike, 23 January 2010 17:33) Actually Huseni should tell to UN Kosovo it will hold Serbia accounted for supporting criminals and Government of Kosova it will do anything to CRUSH such of movements if even they come from any nationality including albanians too... THE RULE OF LAW should implied all over as every other country do ...Because if is no law out there human will be no different from a monkey..

(Zoti, 25 January 2010 19:17)
Kosovo is Serbia, Period

Was Bosnia Croatia, or Kosovo part of Albania during WWII, because one side said it was for long?

Kosovo is Serbia for ever. The sooner u respect that the better chances Albanians have of living in a prosperous Serbia.

Bgdanon said:
"Johnny I see a lot of words in your post but I'm struggling to see the point. Your entire first para is based upon the current constitution and yet you concede that the constitution can be changed."

--Ok since you didn't get it the first time I will try to explain it a second time in a simpler fashion.

1. The constitution can be changed.
2. Under the Serb Constitution the only way under which anyone on Serbia's team can sit on a table with Albanians is under a predetermined status; autonomy. So even before there is an initiation of status talks the Serb camp can only take part in these talks if autonomy is the final result.
3. Since under such condition autonomy is the final result the Serb side is simply using a placeholder or better yet a misnomer for the word autonomy by camouflaging it with the word compromise for propaganda and demagogy purposes. That is because compromise is not equal to autonomy, nor are they synonymous or interchangeable with each other. In fact they couldn't be further apart.
4. This is what is important, and maybe this is why you did not get it the first time. There is nothing now in Serbia, where at the moment they want talks, that says that the Constitution is about to change, or that it will change in the foreseeable future. The fact that Serbia does not want to change its Constitution means that Serbia does not want talks, or negotiations about status. What it means is that Serbia wants the other side to submit to a notion that autonomy is the only solution, because as long as that Constitution is place Serbia cannot talk about other possible solutions. So as long as that Constitution is in place Serbia is really screaming to the world that we do not want any other possible solutions but we want the other side to sit on the table and submit to the Serb constitution which sets autonomy as the only solution. Because the Constitution remains in place, because it has not changed or is not about to change in the foreseeable future Serbia is willfully renouncing any talks which foresee solutions other than autonomy as the final solution. When Serbia changes its Constitution then they will not be prohibited by the Constitution to take part in talks that foresee autonomy among many other solutions as the final status.


"I honestly don't see the problem. You are trying to create a stumbling block when one doesn't exist, before negotiations have even begun. What is the point in that?"

-- Again we are not trying to create a stumbling block because we are not trying to sit on a table with Serbia. As far as we are concerned there is no status issue hence no need to talk about it or even try to create stumbling blocks for hypothetical talks. As far as we are concerned we have no need to talk with Serbia about status. None whatsoever. Its the opposite. It is Serbia that wants to talk about status. Because of that Serbia has many factors that it needs to convince if talks are to be held. Serbia needs to convince she is being serious about talks. First and foremost it needs to convince the Albanians that Serbia is serious. Second it needs to convince the West that she is being serious. So with a Constitution that sees autonomy as the only solution Serbia is showing us Albanians that she is not being serious. It is also showing the West that she is not being serious about talks. The constitution that Serbia has in place puts her in the same predicament as the boy that cried wolf; where Serbia swears about a compromise but nobody believes her. So the way to go about this to show seriousness is to change the Constitution where it is stated that Kosova's status will be solved with negotiations with the Albanian side and the international community where among many possible solutions independence and autonomy are among such solutions. Only after the Constitution has changed Albanians and the West may consider thinking about Serbia's seriousness, and only after the change the Serbian side can use the words compromise and negotiations in a non perverse way. Until the current Constitution remains in place negotiations and compromise as defined under such Constitutions are just perversions as they simply mean please make the Albanians sit on a table with us and make them agree that autonomy is the choice we Serbs have picked for them and they have no other choices. Serbia has created a stumbling block for itself by adopting a Constitution that prohibits her from taking part in any talks that foresees solutions other than autonomy. What's the point in that?

Most Serb don't realize that Albanians are negotiating on a continuing basis with the powers that have a say in Kosova's fate and that is the EU, US and NATO. Albanians negotiated their state flag and anthem and gave up on joining Albania all with the understanding that the territorial integrity of Kosova would be honored.

The only card Serbia holds is that they'll withhold recognition of independence but that is not a very strong hand to play with when the all the Wetsern powers have recognized the new state.

Clearly Serbia wants the territory North of Ibar but why should Albanians give that up unless the Serbs are offering Presheva Valley.

One last question: Is any Serb willing to recognize Kosova's Independence under any circumstances?

cees Negotiations were not deadlocked 'in this way'. Do not be economical with the truth or put a spin on it.

The negotiations were anything but. It was a case of the supposed arbiter telling one side it must do something, something on behalf of the other side.

That cannot be called a negotiation by any standard (and I have studied a few conflict negotiations in the past) or even talks, as no talks between Serbs and Albanians were even held.

I repeat those 'negotiations' failed because two sides were not brought to the table to negotiate as equals. The change of the constitution was neither here nor there to either side.

Negotiations certainly have not failed because they haven't even begun. Whether maturity can be shown by all concerned to solve this problem is another question.

For now it appears that the side with the upper hand wants to hold onto its gains. Except what it won't tell its population is that it will lose the north in a creeping manner.

So Kos politicians think 'better to lose the north in a creeping manner than to negotiate them and risk being criticised'.

As I said it sounds similar to Serbian policy on Kosovo in the 90's - unwilling to deal with the real problems, so they allowed creeping indepdence of Kosovo, for example by not obstructing Kos Albanian institutions.

Now tell me this scenario is unfamiliar.

Johhny what you say in nonsensical, truly.

The similar argument of a Serbian scoundrel would be to state that as soon as Albanians declared UDI that means there is no point in negotiations. 'Kosovo is ours according to 1244 etc.' Its absurd to the point of comedy. I mean surely you have a better argument, because the constitution is a weak argument.

This (Serb and Albanian positions on Kosovo) is nothing more than a starting position for both sides. The fact that you have declared independence does not mean that you can't sit down with us and the fact we have enshrined Kosovo within our constitution does not mean we cannot sit down with you.

So lets just leave it at that. You might see the fact that we disagree as a small victory for you. I know its important for you to prove that we cannot agree, because it proves your point that there is no compromise.

Your true motive is revealled by contradictory positions like when you say 'It is Serbia that wants to talk about status', when you clearly stated this wasn't the case. And how can Serbia want status talks when you say the constitution doesn't allow it? (Now can I make another blah blah point about UDI, just to try to batter you into submission, as you did about the constitution?)
That obsession btw would win you points with our very own Vojislav Kostunica who shared a similar obsession.

However, you would not be leading negotiations. You would be the one outside outraged that negotiations were taking place, screaming blue murder and betrayal, possibly alongside some of my more radical fellow Serbs.

As I have stated before all we have here are two sides - one believes it has the upper hand, the other not. So the former tries everything in its power not to lose its position, dreaming up all kinds of arguments.

In the meantime wait and see. Perhaps the truth is that you don't mind losing Serbs majority areas in the North of Kosovo. It would be good if you could be honest enough to state this clearly so other Albanians realise that this is your position. I say this because surely you don't believe in the fantasy of KFOR / KPS moving into the North? I don't mean you personally, perhaps you do want that, but how likely is it?

'Aggravating is the notion that for a change of the constitution you need a two-third majority, which under the momentary balance of power in this parliament, no-one can expect.'

cees if you know follow Serbian politics on these issues tell me this - if a referendum was held and won by the Serbian government on a compromise for Kosovo, which political parties would fall into line and which would not, be honest.

I said a compromise by the way - we are not talking about a fantasy situation voted for in a referendum.

I will give you my answer - SRS and provided they are still in parliament DSS. The rest will fall into line and not dare to go against a referendum. Its not because they are good or anything, its because they are afraid to go against the will of the people.

Demi my answer to you is what do you think hardliners (such as yourself, as you are persuing an extreme no negotiation position) in Northern Ireland thought before negotiations begun on Northern Irelands future?

They were wrong, and so are you.

You still haven't told me how you will integrate N Kosovo into your new Kosovo. Or will you just lose that part by sweeping it under the carpet?
Don't kid yourself, it will hapeen.

Zoti,

Mike IS one of the most moderate posters on B92 (maybe you're thinking of Mike C).

Partition would clearly be acceptable to moderates on both sides. Only the radical extremists would pick up a gun to oppose it.
(Matthew, 25 January 2010 23:16)

I was responding to the poster "Mike" who called Kosova's FM Mr. Hysterical.

As I said before partition is fine as long as the Presheva valley is exchanged in return for North of Ibar. Once partition comes into play there's nothing stopping Kosova from joining Albania or RS from joining Serbia so am not sure if EU would allow such a thing to happen.


Kosovo is Serbia, Period
(Clooney, 25 January 2010 20:30)

You can keep repeating that until you're blue in the face but that won't change any of the facts in the ground. Also "Kosovo is Serbia's Jerusalem" while it could have some effect and is great PR for Western consumption in today's ever increasing Islamophobic Europe it doesn't change anything either.

Bear in mind that the seeds of the Albanian nation were sown in Prizren with the League of Prizren in 1878 and Kosova is much more important to our nation that it has eveb been or it'll ever be to Serbia and history has shown that to be true.

Kosovar Albanians are the most patriotic Albanians and they have proved it time and time again.

Zoti,

Mike IS one of the most moderate posters on B92 (maybe you're thinking of Mike C).

Partition would clearly be acceptable to moderates on both sides. Only the radical extremists would pick up a gun to oppose it.

Negotiations would not lead anyway. No side is ready to give up on this points and it is a dead end. Albanians cannot live in a limbo for years of negotiations.
(Demi, 24 January 2010 11:06)

Demi, negotiations can lead to a solution. Without negotiations you will live in limbo forever.
So, which one is better then?

Tadics comment very vague and immature and for local serbian consumption.

6000 voters out of a population of 100000 is not 6%. If all 100000 were eligable to vote then yes. But I doubt that all 100000 are above the voting age, have necessary resident ID, able to vote, not pressured not to vote, willing to vote, and present in Kosovo at the time; then and only then is 6%.

If Tadic claims all Kosovo residents to be Serbia's citizens and to avoid a humanitarian disaster by supplying energy to the north only, then why he does not do the same for all residents of Kosovo whose electricity has been cut off due to unpaid bills?

Since Kosovo UDI we haven't seen any large scale problems in Kosovo nor the region, may that be inter-ethnic or any sort.

It is strange to see Tadic condemn the elections (held by and in Kosovo) because they were not called nor held by UNMIK. Have you forgot your own words Mr Tadic? you are the one who proclaimed all elections in Kosovo illegal even the ones called and held by UNMIK.

You mentioned the church in Gjakovo. Answer about the mosque in central Belgrade burned by your youth only a few years ago.

You ask for negotiations. Don't you realize it is to late?

Mr President, if Kosovo MFA Hyseni's statement is a direct threat to the peace and stability in the region, your government actions are not to be underestimated. The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.

Threat? Because what Hyseni said is the truth? You want to start balkan war for some criminals in north who dont have to obey laws, neigher Serbian nor Kosovo's and can continue smuggle drugs and weapons. Get your grip together befor you make the same misstake Milosevic did. Who's next to be calling the threat, Montenegro, Bulgaria?

Zoran, those serb illegal institution are operating now only in N.mitrovica and will not survive the year 2010. Kosovo goverment,Eulex and ICO with Kfor will make sure they don't survive. They cause instability and that is why in Zannier's rapport only the north of Kosovo was unstable. If K.serbs wants to live and have a good future they have to have good relations with the K.albanians because they are your closest neighbour. You cannot have bad relations with your closest neighbour and still live peacefully in the neighbourhood. In Kosovo the serbs can still rule them self while working with their neighbours the albanians. If serbian institutions would survive in Kosovo this would never happend and it would only cause an Berlin-wall in Mitrovica. That is not what albanians want and that is not what Eu wants. Serb instituions in Kosovo is clearly out of the question.





Bganon, Kosovo and Serbia negotiated for 2 years and wasen't even close to a compromise on almost nothing. We albanians have understand clearly that Serbia wants to give us an type of autonomy but we dont want that and we dont need that. What is it more to negotiate about when it comes to the status when Kosovo wants only independence and Serbia can only offer some sort of autonomy ? We albanians have a new reality in our new state and the reality is that we are loyal to the goverment in Prishtina and consider our state to be Kosovo. We will never back down from that and Serbia can only negotiate with us when Serbia consider us a country. In the end Serbia have no rule in Kosovo and will never have so the serbian offer just sounds stupid. There is nothing to negotiate about so why negotiate ?

I don't think there is anything immature about wanting to negotiate. The immaturity comes from those that oppose negotiations. I have always supported negotiations on Kosovo, long before UDI. My position has not changed just because I believe I have the upper hand.

Imagine the following view represented - that because there is relative peace in Kosovo, no negotiations need to be had. The message to the other side - ensure that there is no peace in Kosovo and then we will give you negotiations. No?

Oh I see, the stability argument is a lie. Whether a third world war came from kosovo or milk and honey there will be no negotiations right? So much for Hyseni's concern for stability.

Lets look at the stability argument, and not from a selfish insular Kosovo view. Lets look at it from a regional perspective. We all know what is going on in Bosnia, we all know how this is poisoning relations between Serbia and Croatia. We all know how Bosnia is paralysed. We all know the situation in Montenegro, we all know how this situation is poisoning Serbian - Montenegrin relations. OK, say the Albanians, you see this is a Serbian problem, we can't help that. Well it is only a Serbian problem at the moment. Imagine if Montenegro rescinded recognition of Kosovo. Would that be a Serbian problem?

No, this is a regional issue and it is causing instability regionally. This can only be solved at the negotiating table.

So I say back to the negotiation table, as I always did and that if you don't support that you don't support peace or stability. And I believe that in your hearts you know I'm right.

The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.
(DuplexClick, 23 January 2010 13:38)
--
It's time to open your eyes and to accept the true reality. The only path to lasting peace is through the negotiating table.

Those citizens loyal to Serbia reside on 35-40% of the territory while legitimate Serbian institutions are formed in those areas.

The biggest danger to regional stability is to force something against the will of the people.

We have already accepted ethnic Albanian self-rule so it is only natural for those areas loyal to Serbia to be ruled by Serbia.

Follow the path to peace my friends.

Živeli!

Zoran:

I would take the same advice if I was in your place. How ave you concluded that "loyal citizens of Serbia" reside in 35-40 % of the territory. Would you cite that reference so that I could refer to the data, please.
Be definition, negotiations, have to be cooperative: it is an integrative process, aimed at reaching a solution. By this definition--emphasis on the "cooperative--negotiations with regards to Kosovo were taking place for 8 years prior to 2007.
Now, if your definition of negotiations has other antecedents which the research community has failed to account, you might consider producing some form of empirical study that would improve that concept and measure it with consistency,

N.Young

"Hyseni answered Tadić's comments, saying that Kosovo “is the last country in the world that wants to destabilize the Balkans,” and repeated that the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence has contributed to peace and security."

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.

We're not exactly talking about the brightest bulb in the pack. "Peace and security" can only be achieved if both sides refrain from hostile actions, and right now it seems Pristina is more eager to destabilize the region than Belgrade.

Bganon, you are 100% right, the fact that the k-a wants to force the North to obey is insane, are they not the one who wanted to separate because of ethnicities! Real trouble makers, no surprise!

more of a promise than a threat.

'Have you forgot your own words Mr Tadic? you are the one who proclaimed all elections in Kosovo illegal even the ones called and held by UNMIK. '

Yeah, even Inner City Press (a blog dealing with the UN, but with actual reporting) picked up on this. ICP tends to be automatically anti-U.S. and has in the past seemed to side with Serbia, but this time nobody from the Serbian side stopped to talk to them after the session, while Hyseni responded at least to their question on the elections: "Inner City Press asked about Tadic's statement that elections not called by the UN Mission, UNMIK, are illegal. Hyseni said that the authorities in Belgrade have also opposed any election called by UNMIK. Video here, from Minute 7:36."

(BTW, the "Grey Lady" mentioned is the NY Times.)

The REALITY for 11 years now is that Kosovo has been detached from Serbia de facto, and since 2 year de juro.
(DuplexClick, 23 January 2010 13:38)
Abkhazia and Ossetia are from 17 years de-facto detacged from Georgia. Same Karabakh - from 17 years de facto detached from Azerbaijan, same Transnistria is de facto independent from Moldova from 18 years.

So?? Why USA and other Western countries described Ossetia, Abkhazia, Karabakh and Transnistria as integral parts of Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova??

Ok so the fall back excuse is that we have already had negotiations. When was that exactly and what kind of negotiations was it?

Neogtiations, as Albanian posters keep pointing out, come when two parties, considered equals sit down.

So, on the one hand you are saying we had negotiations and on the other you are saying that Serbia never negotiated with Albanians as equals. Those arguments are contradictory - if you accept (and anybody fair minded must surely accept) that those 'negotiations' were a case of one side being forced to accept terms from the other, under international supervision.

Those 'negotiations' were nothing of the kind, as you know. And now, knowing they were nothing of the kind you say that we already tried. We have not tried yet. Then you have the 'its too late' excuse. I mean how many excuses do you want to create. Isn't it uncomfortable telling these half lies.

Tell the truth, your position is the same as Serbia's in the 1990's. You don't want to negotiate simply because you have the upper hand. You don't care less about the Serbian minority in Kosovo, all you care about is hanging on to your land, at all costs.
Thats the selfish reality isn't it?

OK, so if we must negotiate in the only terms understood - that of holding land, then don't we have Mitrovica and Serb areas in Kosovo to negotiate about. Or are you hoping to sweep that issue under the carpet in the same way the Kosovo issue was not dealt with by Serbia? Newsflash, if you do that you will learn the same lesson Serbia is learning. Why not learn the lesson, negotiate and help all the people of Kosovo to progress.

Tadic's accusation are stupid. Why should Kosovo/Albanians benefit from a destabilized Balkan? Albanians achieved what they want, independence. Now they need a peace so that everybody can see that the independent Kosovo is actually a stablizing factor. It is therefore quite obvious that it is only the Serbs who benefit from chaos, conflicts and war, no matter if we talk about Kosovo or Bosnia. Simple logics!

It's time to open your eyes and to accept the true reality. The only path to lasting peace is through the negotiating table.

Those citizens loyal to Serbia reside on 35-40% of the territory while legitimate Serbian institutions are formed in those areas.

The biggest danger to regional stability is to force something against the will of the people.

We have already accepted ethnic Albanian self-rule so it is only natural for those areas loyal to Serbia to be ruled by Serbia.

Follow the path to peace my friends.

Živeli!
(Zoran, 23 January 2010 14:58)

Yes Zoran. The negotiations have been held already. There was an understanding approved by Russian Federation as well that negotiations can not have unlimited time. However in the middle of negotiations Serbia approved the new constitution precluding the outcome. Therefore as one said constitution of Serbia does not authorize anyone representing Serbia to negotiate without violating it.

Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.

There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held.

Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes.

That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough.

Bganon, you diden't answer my question. It is like you don't understand what i mean. It's as simple as Serbia wont never back down from autonomy for Kosovo and albanians will never back down from their independence, 65 recognition and their formed functional goverment and institutions. Autonomy withing Serbia is out oif the question for us albanians and as we all know independence is out of the question for you. What is it to negotiate when it comes to the status ? Nothing! Kosovo is already independent and are doing much better now having time to handle daily life problems as the economy and law&order.

bgdanon, Serbia's own Constitution prevents anyone that negotiates in the name of Serbia on anything else other than autonomy. No matter how much the Serb camp tries to hide this fact the rest of those who are involved on the issue know this. So demagogic statements coming from the Serb camp about negotiations and dialog are rightly ignored. Nobody will give credence to Serb demagogy just because the Serbs want to have the appearance of moderates. Serbia's own Constitution unequivocally reveals Serbia's falsities in its call for negotiations. Nobody is foolish enough to sit on a table with the Serbs to agree on what form of autonomy Serbia wants to give Kosova. So you go on with the usual demagogy coming from you leaders. Let's see how that works out for you.

(John, 23 January 2010 20:16)
Simple logics from a simple man.
The Albanians don't want to stop. They want it all. They want more Serbs to leave Kosovo and I am sure they also want more of Macedonia and MNE.

Mr .Tadic we albanains try to negotitate with serbs even when millosevic forces was killing inoscent people,where have you been that time probobly going to demonstrate with jeremic on behalf of millosevic to send more troops in KOSOVO AND KILL PEOPLE AND NOW YOU want to negociate again, what make you think 2 and half million albanian want to go back under serbia REGIME and you know very well how albanians went throuhg hell and suffer for years to get this freedom,THE CASE IS CLOSE have nice day everyone,,,,

Kosovo is THE TERRITORY OF SERBIA. If Kosovo get's independence, than so does Serb Republic of Bosnia, the Basque of Spain, Russian Provinces, Chinese Tiwan and Tibet, and the Palestinians will have a ligatamate precedent to declare independence from Israel.

Hopefully, the ICJ will declare it completely a violation of law.

Bganon, one question sums it all. Do you wrelly think Serbia would give up on ,more than autonomy and less than independence if we had negotiations ?

Or the other way aurond, do you think now K.albanians would give up it's independence and all they have worked for to build up for the past 11 years ?


Negotiations would not lead anyway. No side is ready to give up on this points and it is a dead end. Albanians cannot live in a limbo for years of negotiations.

Most Serb don't realize that Albanians are negotiating on a continuing basis with the powers that have a say in Kosova's fate and that is the EU, US and NATO. Albanians negotiated their state flag and anthem and gave up on joining Albania all with the understanding that the territorial integrity of Kosova would be honored.

The only card Serbia holds is that they'll withhold recognition of independence but that is not a very strong hand to play with when the all the Wetsern powers have recognized the new state.

Clearly Serbia wants the territory North of Ibar but why should Albanians give that up unless the Serbs are offering Presheva Valley.

One last question: Is any Serb willing to recognize Kosova's Independence under any circumstances?

Johnny I see a lot of words in your post but I'm struggling to see the point. Your entire first para is based upon the current constitution and yet you concede that the constitution can be changed.

I honestly don't see the problem. You are trying to create a stumbling block when one doesn't exist, before negotiations have even begun. What is the point in that?

Your other point is criticism of Serbian policy regarding to Kosovo with changing the constitution in the past. What is your point there? Say it clearly - are you saying that due to Serbian past policy on Kosovo there is a lack of trust among Kosovo Albanians. Yes, I know that, but that still isn't a reason to not negotiate. In all diplomatic disputes, and there have been many around the world, some more difficult than Kosovo, some less, there has been lack of trust, there has been bad blood, one of two sides has suffered more. Is it effective to focus on this? To what end? Is the aim to come up with as many reasons as possible to avoid negotiations?

Let me understand another point you are making - you think that Tadic's offer of negotiations is a lie? Then embarass him and call his bluff. If you are certain of this then why aren't you calling on Kosovo Albanian leaders to do this?

'the Albanian side had not taken any steps or procedures that unilaterally predetermined status. This is of key importance. The first unilateral action was taken by the state of Serbia even though it had agreed that during negotiations no side would undertake unilateral steps that sought to predetermine status.'

I have to say I have no idea which negotiations you are talking about and which constitutional changes. Are you talking about the recent changes in the constitution? Are you referring to 1989? Are you talking about rambouilet? I have so many problems with your analysis here but because I don't know which period you are talking about I can't answer you. Of course I will say that a unilateral decleration of indepedence is an obvious step to determine status - the most obvious one of all.

I think what we are talking about here is 'we are quite happy with how things have been going so far.' You are using the constitution as an excuse.

Mikel you talk about how Albanians didn't have a say in the constitution, as if Albanians would have voted, when we both know that they have not voted in Serbian elections for many years. No, I will not get bogged down in historical arguments and counterarguments to avoid discussing today and the future. Yes, Albanians, as Serbian citizens, should have had the right (and full rights in all other areas) to vote for / against the constitution. What else can I say? But its still not the point. The point is that we have a serious issue that is unresolved.

Demi 'Negotiations would not lead anyway.'. That is both a defeatist and wrong attitude. You simply don't know. Besides, if they would not lead anywhere, what is the harm in trying. Tell me that.
When people talk about negotiations leading nowhere, what they mean is that if they were leading those negotiations they would go nowhere.

Don't get me wrong the wrong men might get appointed to lead negotiations on both sides, in which case they could go nowhere. But it would at least be the beginning of the end of some of Kosovo's problems.

Do you think that the (knowing or unknowing) enemies of peace in Northern Ireland asked questions in similar terms to you?

Tell me if the republicans were utterly, utterly opposed to British rule and the Unionists were completely and wholly against anything other than British rule - how is it that there is peace in Northern Ireland?

Bganon, North will be integrated by isolating the serb population from the illegal mechanism from Serbia wich wants to operate in Kosovo. The serbs will have no way to go but to agree with the majority. The serb will benifit much if they were to integrate into the Kosovar sociaty. The other choice is to move to Serbia because we albanians are not interested in building a wall down the ibar.


It is eazy to integrate the north.To make a story short just elect an K.serbian major working under the goverment in prishtina and if he does a good job the K.serbs will respect him and start following him. They will have no other choice because there will not be any other structur beside those of the goverment of Kosovo. Like in Strpce.



But negotiation of a status of somthing is out of the question. Kosovo status is independence and recognized by 65 countrys. It is settled as you see so we don't need to negotiate anymore. We negotiated for 2 years and wasen't even near an compromise. Albanians have made the decision not to waste time and power on unimportan issues like the status and put more effort on important things like the economy and the well being of the people of Kosovo let it be serbs or albanians.


There is nothing to negotiate about. Kosovo is already independent and it is nothing more but for Serbia to recognize it. Then maybee we can negotiate about importan issues.

cees Negotiations were not deadlocked 'in this way'. Do not be economical with the truth or put a spin on it.

The negotiations were anything but. It was a case of the supposed arbiter telling one side it must do something, something on behalf of the other side.

That cannot be called a negotiation by any standard (and I have studied a few conflict negotiations in the past) or even talks, as no talks between Serbs and Albanians were even held.

I repeat those 'negotiations' failed because two sides were not brought to the table to negotiate as equals. The change of the constitution was neither here nor there to either side.

Negotiations certainly have not failed because they haven't even begun. Whether maturity can be shown by all concerned to solve this problem is another question.

For now it appears that the side with the upper hand wants to hold onto its gains. Except what it won't tell its population is that it will lose the north in a creeping manner.

So Kos politicians think 'better to lose the north in a creeping manner than to negotiate them and risk being criticised'.

As I said it sounds similar to Serbian policy on Kosovo in the 90's - unwilling to deal with the real problems, so they allowed creeping indepdence of Kosovo, for example by not obstructing Kos Albanian institutions.

Now tell me this scenario is unfamiliar.

Mr Tadicu:
NOWT ELSE TO DO, hm?

Think HAITI
10,000 buried in 1 day

'Aggravating is the notion that for a change of the constitution you need a two-third majority, which under the momentary balance of power in this parliament, no-one can expect.'

cees if you know follow Serbian politics on these issues tell me this - if a referendum was held and won by the Serbian government on a compromise for Kosovo, which political parties would fall into line and which would not, be honest.

I said a compromise by the way - we are not talking about a fantasy situation voted for in a referendum.

I will give you my answer - SRS and provided they are still in parliament DSS. The rest will fall into line and not dare to go against a referendum. Its not because they are good or anything, its because they are afraid to go against the will of the people.

Demi my answer to you is what do you think hardliners (such as yourself, as you are persuing an extreme no negotiation position) in Northern Ireland thought before negotiations begun on Northern Irelands future?

They were wrong, and so are you.

You still haven't told me how you will integrate N Kosovo into your new Kosovo. Or will you just lose that part by sweeping it under the carpet?
Don't kid yourself, it will hapeen.

Goodbye Serbia!!!!

(Zoti, 25 January 2010 19:17)
Kosovo is Serbia, Period

Was Bosnia Croatia, or Kosovo part of Albania during WWII, because one side said it was for long?

Kosovo is Serbia for ever. The sooner u respect that the better chances Albanians have of living in a prosperous Serbia.

Bganon, it was during the “Quintum negotiations” under Ahtisaari, that the Kostunica government changed the constitution. About the beginning in Vienna this interesting Spiegel-article: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,402188,00.html
About the constitution-change in Oct./Nov. 2006 and the Kosovo pre-amble: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Serbia).
In this way the negotiations were deadlocked. After two years came Ahtisaari with his solution of “guided independence”.

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.
(Mike, 23 January 2010 17:33)

One would have to be out of his right mind to negotiate with the likes of Mike. From what I've read in the comments section on B92 his views are pretty widespread amongst the majority of Serbs than say of a Serb like Bganon whose views I highly respect despite not agreeing with him on most things.

It bogggles the mind to ask for negotiations with Prishtina while at the same time to hold such disparaging attitude towards the people you wanna sit in the negotiating table with.
Then you wonder why Prishtina doesn't wanna even think about sitting at the same table with you.

"Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held."

--This is not about controversies. This is about falsities. The falsity here is the fact that Serbia's Constitution foresees autonomy as the only solution; hence when they speak about compromise they aren't speaking about compromise. They are speaking about autonomy because that's the most they can talk about under that Constitution. So while negotiations aren't forbidden under the Constitution they are to be held only under the condition that autonomy is the only solution. So while the demagogues in Belgrade talk about compromise they have already predetermined what the solution looks like. Nobody with even half a brain will sit on a table with you when you already have a predetermined solution that leaves no room for anything else since that is treachery under Serbia's laws. Enough with falsities. Enough with demagogies.



"Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes."

-- Several facts you do not mention. A constitution can indeed be changed. There's nobody that knows that better than Albanians. In fact we know that it can be changed without our votes. Not only that but without a popular vote from us, Constitutions in Serbia have been changed where autonomy was taken away from us. Keep this in mind. It is of paramount importance. Another fact that is of paramount importance is the adoption of the new Serb Constitution in the middle of a negotiating process (Albanians were denied the right to vote for the Constitution. This also is of great importance because while Serbia claimed Albanians were Serb citizens it denied them the right to vote. It is very telling what Serbia foresees for us); where Serbia sought to preempt and predetermine the final status in a unilateral fashion. Notice that until then although both sides were rigid in their positions, the Albanian side had not taken any steps or procedures that unilaterally predetermined status. This is of key importance. The first unilateral action was taken by the state of Serbia even though it had agreed that during negotiations no side would undertake unilateral steps that sought to predetermine status.
You say if a constitution proved to be a stumbling block. This is not about ifs. The constitution is a stumbling block. That is because if you preach compromise then you know for sure that nobody is going to compromise by submitting to your own terms. Since you've set such terms and conditions that predetermine status before status talks are even held then you really are not talking about compromise, you are talking about submission of the other side to the terms you have set in your Constitution. Since there is no talk whatsoever about changing the Constitution, then the population, following your own logic, is not pressuring the politicians. So the population like the politicians want the other side to take part in status talk where status is already predetermined by Serbia as written in Serbia's constitution. So like the Serb politicians the people also are engaging in demagogy. Disguising falsities under the label of compromise.

"That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough."

-- You seem to be confusing the matter here. You do not see my side cheaply using the word compromise day in and day out. As a matter of fact my side states that the status has been settled. There is no desperation on my side to try to convince the Serbs to sit on a table with us. Its the opposite. What I've been trying to say all along in this post is that while the Serbs use compromise to appear as moderate guys they also have a Constitution that states that they cannot sit on a table to negotiate with anyone if the other side does not agree that the status as written in the Constitution can only be autonomy. So they want the other side to submit to the perverse notion that the Serb idea of compromise is one where status is predetermined before status talks initiate, and that status is what the Serb constitution states, which the other side has agreed with the moment they decide to sit on that table. So the trick "your side" is trying to pull is to cover submission under the guise of a label that is positive sounding;such as compromise.
So while your belief is not a wrong one and not a bad one at all, Serbia here has a problem, not Albanians; we are quite happy with how things have been going so far. Serbia wants to resolve it but it lacks goodwill and creativity. It lacks goodwill because while it talks about compromise it means submission of the other side to Serbia's predetermined status. It lacks creativity because the Constitution as is written now leaves no room whatsoever for creativity; in fact it can't be any more rigid than it is. You can put any epithet, symbol, or metaphor you want to autonomy but what it is and remains in the end is autonomy.

Johhny Serbia's constitution affirms that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia yes.
There is nothing controversial about that.

There is also nothing in the constitution that states that negotiations with Albanians on status can't be held.

Now, a constitution is not written in stone, it can be changed. I am not suggesting that this will happen, but it is a fact. And I will tell you something else, if a deal was reached between Serbs and Albanians and the constitution proved a stumbling block for Serbia you can be certain that the government in charge would put a referendum to the people. Legally and politically speaking if the people supported a compromise politicians would be forced to amend the constitution according to their wishes.

That was a good one, but its still just your 'side' searching desperately for obstacles.

By the way, this isn't about me trying at all costs to impose a Serbian agenda. This is about my fundamental belief that when one has a problem, there is almost always a way to resolve it if you have the goodwill and are creative enough.
(bganon, 24 January 2010 00:10)


The Constitution can only be changed by a referendum in which Albanians were and are not able to participate due to the "offer" gave by Serb delegation. Go find out on what they offered in the first place, and then discuss. So the Constitution was approved and enacted without any Albanian consent, and it "decided" the outcome of the "negotiations" in which it stated that Kosovo IS a province of Serbia. That was the real unilateral declaration. Since the Constitution can only be changed by a Serb referendum, what guarantees Albanians have for the future of the "autonomy"? Maybe a future downgrade or revoke, because we know what happened last time. Mostly Serbian voters voted on the referendum, minorities refrained or not able to vote. What would the outcome be if K-Albanians were allowed to vote?

"It is therefore quite obvious that it is only the Serbs who benefit from chaos, conflicts and war, no matter if we talk about Kosovo or Bosnia. Simple logics!"
(John, 23 January 2010 20:16)

I would say that Serbs didn't have any benefits from the previous chaos and wars - maybe they thought they would have them, but we all know the results in the end...

Johny, I am grateful for your clear and knowing comments, in which you show in what way this Serbian government tries to hide the shortcomings of the Serbian constitution in giving the way free for negotiations as was stated in the UNSC-declaration by Tadic. Everyone who has followed the discussions in the Serbian parliament around the status of the Vojvodina, knows how narrow the Serbian constitution is regulated. Aggravating is the notion that for a change of the constitution you need a two-third majority, which under the momentary balance of power in this parliament, no-one can expect. Even an often presented offer of more than autonomy and less than independence is a farce.
I think that the only honest positioning of the Serbian government is that they never will accept Kosova’s independence, even if the ICJ-ruling is in favour of that. That shows the decisive and restricting strength of this constitution.

Bgdanon said:
"Johnny I see a lot of words in your post but I'm struggling to see the point. Your entire first para is based upon the current constitution and yet you concede that the constitution can be changed."

--Ok since you didn't get it the first time I will try to explain it a second time in a simpler fashion.

1. The constitution can be changed.
2. Under the Serb Constitution the only way under which anyone on Serbia's team can sit on a table with Albanians is under a predetermined status; autonomy. So even before there is an initiation of status talks the Serb camp can only take part in these talks if autonomy is the final result.
3. Since under such condition autonomy is the final result the Serb side is simply using a placeholder or better yet a misnomer for the word autonomy by camouflaging it with the word compromise for propaganda and demagogy purposes. That is because compromise is not equal to autonomy, nor are they synonymous or interchangeable with each other. In fact they couldn't be further apart.
4. This is what is important, and maybe this is why you did not get it the first time. There is nothing now in Serbia, where at the moment they want talks, that says that the Constitution is about to change, or that it will change in the foreseeable future. The fact that Serbia does not want to change its Constitution means that Serbia does not want talks, or negotiations about status. What it means is that Serbia wants the other side to submit to a notion that autonomy is the only solution, because as long as that Constitution is place Serbia cannot talk about other possible solutions. So as long as that Constitution is in place Serbia is really screaming to the world that we do not want any other possible solutions but we want the other side to sit on the table and submit to the Serb constitution which sets autonomy as the only solution. Because the Constitution remains in place, because it has not changed or is not about to change in the foreseeable future Serbia is willfully renouncing any talks which foresee solutions other than autonomy as the final solution. When Serbia changes its Constitution then they will not be prohibited by the Constitution to take part in talks that foresee autonomy among many other solutions as the final status.


"I honestly don't see the problem. You are trying to create a stumbling block when one doesn't exist, before negotiations have even begun. What is the point in that?"

-- Again we are not trying to create a stumbling block because we are not trying to sit on a table with Serbia. As far as we are concerned there is no status issue hence no need to talk about it or even try to create stumbling blocks for hypothetical talks. As far as we are concerned we have no need to talk with Serbia about status. None whatsoever. Its the opposite. It is Serbia that wants to talk about status. Because of that Serbia has many factors that it needs to convince if talks are to be held. Serbia needs to convince she is being serious about talks. First and foremost it needs to convince the Albanians that Serbia is serious. Second it needs to convince the West that she is being serious. So with a Constitution that sees autonomy as the only solution Serbia is showing us Albanians that she is not being serious. It is also showing the West that she is not being serious about talks. The constitution that Serbia has in place puts her in the same predicament as the boy that cried wolf; where Serbia swears about a compromise but nobody believes her. So the way to go about this to show seriousness is to change the Constitution where it is stated that Kosova's status will be solved with negotiations with the Albanian side and the international community where among many possible solutions independence and autonomy are among such solutions. Only after the Constitution has changed Albanians and the West may consider thinking about Serbia's seriousness, and only after the change the Serbian side can use the words compromise and negotiations in a non perverse way. Until the current Constitution remains in place negotiations and compromise as defined under such Constitutions are just perversions as they simply mean please make the Albanians sit on a table with us and make them agree that autonomy is the choice we Serbs have picked for them and they have no other choices. Serbia has created a stumbling block for itself by adopting a Constitution that prohibits her from taking part in any talks that foresees solutions other than autonomy. What's the point in that?

Johhny what you say in nonsensical, truly.

The similar argument of a Serbian scoundrel would be to state that as soon as Albanians declared UDI that means there is no point in negotiations. 'Kosovo is ours according to 1244 etc.' Its absurd to the point of comedy. I mean surely you have a better argument, because the constitution is a weak argument.

This (Serb and Albanian positions on Kosovo) is nothing more than a starting position for both sides. The fact that you have declared independence does not mean that you can't sit down with us and the fact we have enshrined Kosovo within our constitution does not mean we cannot sit down with you.

So lets just leave it at that. You might see the fact that we disagree as a small victory for you. I know its important for you to prove that we cannot agree, because it proves your point that there is no compromise.

Your true motive is revealled by contradictory positions like when you say 'It is Serbia that wants to talk about status', when you clearly stated this wasn't the case. And how can Serbia want status talks when you say the constitution doesn't allow it? (Now can I make another blah blah point about UDI, just to try to batter you into submission, as you did about the constitution?)
That obsession btw would win you points with our very own Vojislav Kostunica who shared a similar obsession.

However, you would not be leading negotiations. You would be the one outside outraged that negotiations were taking place, screaming blue murder and betrayal, possibly alongside some of my more radical fellow Serbs.

As I have stated before all we have here are two sides - one believes it has the upper hand, the other not. So the former tries everything in its power not to lose its position, dreaming up all kinds of arguments.

In the meantime wait and see. Perhaps the truth is that you don't mind losing Serbs majority areas in the North of Kosovo. It would be good if you could be honest enough to state this clearly so other Albanians realise that this is your position. I say this because surely you don't believe in the fantasy of KFOR / KPS moving into the North? I don't mean you personally, perhaps you do want that, but how likely is it?

Zoti,

Mike IS one of the most moderate posters on B92 (maybe you're thinking of Mike C).

Partition would clearly be acceptable to moderates on both sides. Only the radical extremists would pick up a gun to oppose it.
(Matthew, 25 January 2010 23:16)

I was responding to the poster "Mike" who called Kosova's FM Mr. Hysterical.

As I said before partition is fine as long as the Presheva valley is exchanged in return for North of Ibar. Once partition comes into play there's nothing stopping Kosova from joining Albania or RS from joining Serbia so am not sure if EU would allow such a thing to happen.


Kosovo is Serbia, Period
(Clooney, 25 January 2010 20:30)

You can keep repeating that until you're blue in the face but that won't change any of the facts in the ground. Also "Kosovo is Serbia's Jerusalem" while it could have some effect and is great PR for Western consumption in today's ever increasing Islamophobic Europe it doesn't change anything either.

Bear in mind that the seeds of the Albanian nation were sown in Prizren with the League of Prizren in 1878 and Kosova is much more important to our nation that it has eveb been or it'll ever be to Serbia and history has shown that to be true.

Kosovar Albanians are the most patriotic Albanians and they have proved it time and time again.

Hyseni answered Tadić's comments, saying that Kosovo “is the last country in the world that wants to destabilize the Balkans,” and repeated that the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence has contributed to peace and security."

-- If that were the case, then Mr. Hysterical needs to remind his more radical-minded clansmen in Pristina to cease all efforts at trying to expand into areas where it's authority is neither valid, nor wanted.

We're not exactly talking about the brightest bulb in the pack. "Peace and security" can only be achieved if both sides refrain from hostile actions, and right now it seems Pristina is more eager to destabilize the region than Belgrade.
(Mike, 23 January 2010 17:33) Actually Huseni should tell to UN Kosovo it will hold Serbia accounted for supporting criminals and Government of Kosova it will do anything to CRUSH such of movements if even they come from any nationality including albanians too... THE RULE OF LAW should implied all over as every other country do ...Because if is no law out there human will be no different from a monkey..

To me it seems there's no better solution than to split Kosovo along the Ibar river into a north part belonging to Serbia and a south part being Albanian Kosovo.

The serbian enclaves in the south would have a similar status like the albanian villages in Presevo.

What will be happening now (implementing the socalled "rule of law" in the north against the will of the Serbian people living there) is very similar to Milosevic's policy, just with opposite roles. They justified their actions in the 90th with "implementing the law", too. In that case it was against Albanian people living in Kosovo.

Albanians didn't want to live in a serbian dominated state of Serbia, and now Serbs don't want to live in albanian dominated state of Kosovo. Maybe both is stupid, maybe both is natural.

You must be blind not to see the parallels.

Zoti,

Mike IS one of the most moderate posters on B92 (maybe you're thinking of Mike C).

Partition would clearly be acceptable to moderates on both sides. Only the radical extremists would pick up a gun to oppose it.

Negotiations would not lead anyway. No side is ready to give up on this points and it is a dead end. Albanians cannot live in a limbo for years of negotiations.
(Demi, 24 January 2010 11:06)

Demi, negotiations can lead to a solution. Without negotiations you will live in limbo forever.
So, which one is better then?