Parliament meets for Kosovo session

I have to agree with the Serbian poster: ICJ did not give an answer on the legality of Independence, they ignored that question. Serbia has every right to ask the UN again to submit another question to the ICJ. Expedite it so by 2015 is answered.
(Bekim, 26 July 2010 10:34)

The ICJ didn't ignore the question, Serbia didn't explicitly ask for an advisory opinion on the legality of Kosovo's interdependence. Serbia submitted to the ICJ "Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo (Request for Advisory Opinion)". Serbia has had their chance, they asked the ICJ a question and the ICJ answered it. If Serbia asked the wrong question or worded it wrong, then that is Serbia's fault not the UN's, ICJ's and the international community's fault. It is unfair of Serbia to waste more money and time of the UN, ICJ and all the countries who participated at the ICJ, just because Serbia made a mistake. If Serbia made a mistake then they are only to blame. Serbia has had their chance and if you think they have wasted it then too bad.

Lets say for argument's sake Serbia did ask the ICJ another question and the advisory opinion wasn't in their favour again, would you want Serbia to ask again and again until something rules in their favour? That is not fair on the ICJ, UN or the International Community. Serbia has had their chance and they blew it.

"negotiations that would lead to a lasting solution and historical reconciliation between Serbs and ethnic Albanians."

That's OK, but hang on there's only a small problem with that! It's only 1 Century too late!

The ICJ court answered the exact question that it was asked.

Serbia thought it was being smart by formulating such a specific and narrow question becuase they believe the court would rule that UDI declaration was illegal much easier than ruling that the secession / statehood of Kosovo is illegal.

They thought that by proving that the act of declaration itself was illegal, that would mean that all recognitions of independence would be illegal.

Don't blame others for your own failings.

Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić addressed MPs today to say that "55 countries are one step away from recognizing Kosovo", but that the government in Belgrade is "doing everything" to prevent that.


I think Vuk is ready to book flights to these 55 countries. I hope he enjoys his long vacation and ads mor frequent flyer milage.

I have to agree with the Serbian poster: ICJ did not give an answer on the legality of Independence, they ignored that question. Serbia has every right to ask the UN again to submit another question to the ICJ. Expedite it so by 2015 is answered.

The Serb government continues to claim that the ICJ did not answer the fundamental question. But the ICJ said:

1. 1244 which is an instrument of international law does not preclude independence; it only states that at the "time of its adoption" Kosovo was under the sovereignty of Yugoslavia, and that ultimately the 'status' of Kosovo would be solved through negotiations.

2. The ICJ recognized Marti Ahtisaaris role in those negotiations and a couple of sentences in the ICJ’s decision can actually be interpreted as endorsing Ahtisaaris proposal.

3. The ICJ said that the Helsinki Convention only applies to the protection of one state’s sovereignty against another state.

4. In its decision, the ICJ refers to “remedial secession”. Which would have almost certainly been invoked by the judges that voted for the legality of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, had the question been formulated differently by Serbia. In saying this I am taking into account the number of judges that voted ‘for’ the legality of Kosovo’s independence. Even if not all 10 judges that voted ‘for’ would not have invoked ‘remedial secession’ certainly a good number of them would have. This concept would have probably been too difficult to accept by the Brazilian and Mexican judges, due to the secessionist movements in their own countries, but that still leaves 8 judges who would have used this argument.

This essentially means that even if Serbia would have formulated the question differently, such as “is Kosovo’s statehood legal” the answer from the court would have been negative for Serbia. This is simply because there are no instruments of international law that determine a State’s legality or not.

Alternatively, Serbia could have asked whether the “recognitions of Kosovo” are legal under the Montevidio convention. In which case the court would have had to go through each criteria under the Montevidio convention to determine whether the states that have recognized Kosovo have met those criteria. Again the result of this exercise would have been too close to call and the court would have answered that this is a political matter to be decided by each state individually.

The ICJ court answered the exact question that it was asked.

Serbia thought it was being smart by formulating such a specific and narrow question becuase they believe the court would rule that UDI declaration was illegal much easier than ruling that the secession / statehood of Kosovo is illegal.

They thought that by proving that the act of declaration itself was illegal, that would mean that all recognitions of independence would be illegal.

Don't blame others for your own failings.
(nikshala, 26 July 2010 14:59)

Again, you are very correct Nick.

As a matter of fact the right of secession for K. has also been discussed here multiple times considering the historical events that took place that lead to UDI. When these facts were brought up, the Serbs have argued that this is not what ICJ was about, but rather ICJ was about the act of declaration itself. It is ultimately given that if Serbia had asked whether K. had the right of secession from Serbia, given the numerous facts of ethnic cleansing and attrocities, the ICJ would have sided again with K. Serbia's attempt has back-fired. Jeremic and Tadic were playing with secessionist fears around the world and all they have achieved in this quest they have made more enemies than before. The gap between Serbia and the West has widened and Serbia will pay high concessions for this as every day goes by. It should be worrisome for Serb intelligent elite to see their country's politics navigate in a complete fog. Many understand (including many Albanians ) the pain that K. departure causes to Serbia but deal with it. Albanians lost it too a century ago, and we dealt with it. If you are so keen on getting it back, you ain't going to do it now and certainly not with your resolutions.

"He stressed that the government has sent its draft resolution to the Serbian parliament in order to confirm that policy, so that a peaceful, lasting and sustainable solution is reached, that will be in line with the Serbian Constitution, which should enable for a "historic reconciliation of the Serb and Albanian peoples, and peace and stability in the region".

--And Serbs keep wondering why their foreign policy keeps failing. Here you heard it from the horse's mouth, Jeremic itself. For as long as SERBIA DICTATES that the HISTORIC RECONCILIATION OF THE SERB AND ALBANIAN PEOPLES HAS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SERBIAN CONSTITUTION you will keep on failing miserably. That is simply because of the fact that the other side which you want to reconcile with views the SERB CONSTITUTION as its mortal enemy, and as its greatest threat to their survival and existence in Kosova. Until someone in Serbia gets that, things will continue to go downhill for Serbia because the West has embraced the fact that SERBIA's CONSTITUTION IS THE ENEMY OF PEACE BETWEEN OUR TWO PEOPLES. So not only you have the other side that considers Serbia's mantra the poison of peace in Europe but you have half the world that supports them. As a result not only there is never going to be a HISTORIC RECONCILIATION OF OUR TWO PEOPLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT SERB CONSTITUTION, but there will continually be a HISTORIC ANTAGONISM BETWEEN SERBIA AND HALF OF THE WORLD THAT SUPPORTS US. So with that attitude Serbia can go to the UN, to the EU, to the ICJ, to the UNSC and every time it tries it will continue to fail miserably, because nobody on this other side of the argument will stupidly fall for such naive politics; that is to solve things according to Serbia's will ( read Constitution). Not only because it makes no logical sense but because no powerful superpower will bend to Serbia's will simply because they have a status to maintain and falling for Serbia's will makes them a lesser power than Serbia and such thing will not be allowed. It is not only Serbia and the Serbs who follow inat. There are other much powerful countries out there that do not like being told what to do by someone or someplace they consider insignificant. I believe with its policies Serbia is everyday coming closer and closer to being the insignificant place that is trying to order the west to bend to Serbia's will. (For reference see Cuba today). Continuous antagonism towards them does that.

I do not wish to sound cynical but I would not mind betting that the opposition will make sure it rains on this parade.

To me, serbian government's efforts are becoming so desperate that very soon even the "hardest" of their supporters will become disillusioned - if they are not already.

Stop clinging to your chairs gospodo, and do not give your people false hopes anymore.

God bless ...

Yet another J S

The majority of your arguements do not hold, here is why:

“This is because these matters are under the Jurisdiction of Domestic Laws, and this is why the National Parliament could pass a Law making such matters Illegal.”

In most countries, the law that makes such matters illegal is the Constitution, which usually contains provisions on the inviolability and territorial integrity of the state. In Serbia’s case those provisions essentially ceased to apply as far as Kosovo is concerned, the moment the first NATO soldier stepped foot in Kosovo essentially occupying it.

Furthermore, the Serbian Constitution was a document drafted and approved without the participation or vote of the representatives of 2 million of Serbia’s citizens at the time.

“Time was not a determinant, because the first official though fake negotiations did not commence until seven years after the Peace Settlement UNSCR 1244 was signed.”

Calling something “fake” is very subjective. What may be ‘fake’ to you may not be ‘fake’ to me. The fact that negotiations were tried and failed in numerous attempts proves that a negotiated settlement was not possible. Let us also not forget that Serbia completely ignored a proposal (Ahtisaaris) prepared under the authority of the very institution that was responsible for sponsoring what you may consider as ‘non fake’ I negotiations. Ahtisaaris proposal was essentially a UN document.

”The only determinant was in finding a peaceful long term solution that was agreeable to both sides, and in accordance with International Law.”

Again, if all things are left to be agreed by both sides, we would be stuck in never-ending negociatings, during which ne party (Serbia) would continue to have what it wants (sovereignty). Also, haven’t we already moved passes international law? The ICJ which is the highest body to interpret international law says THERE IS NO INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE in this case; the fact that you do not understand this is mind boggling.

(Yet Another J S., 26 July 2010 14:44)
Some interesting thoughts in your posts.
1. I think most countries have a law or something that would make secession domestically illegal, the problem is if the new "country" has seceded then they are saying they are not subject to domestic law.
2. You are proposing an International Parliaments of the World. So basically you are saying the UN does not function to your will so just develop another group. The problem is how would taking all the members of a group and forming a new group be different?
3. You want Serbia and UNMIK to declare the DoI null and void. Serbia did so the day after remember? Do you really think that the 3 veto wielding countries that have recognized Kosovo and gave arguments it the ICJ which agreed with their arguments are going to suddenly declare the Declaration null and void?

Exactly, which means that the authors of the Declaration of Independence weren't violating international law, but the countries that recognised Kosovo were.
(Sam, UK, 26 July 2010 16:35)
Again, adding words to change a meaning to suit your purposes. The Helsinki agreement makes no reference to the recognition of states and no guarantee of borders only that one state will not claim areas in another state.

The draft states that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) did not answer the essential question of the legality of the Kosovo Albanian attempt to secede from Serbia.

Here we go again.The court didn't answer the ssential question. If the question was so essential why you Serbs were so affraid to ask it? The court answered the exact question that Serbia asked.

I think Vuk Jeremic is not fightig so that Serbia can have Kosovo, he is fighting for other countries that deal with seccesionist movements.

I think Vuk Jeremic is not fightig so that Serbia can have Kosovo, he is fighting for other countries that deal with seccesionist movements.
(jordan, 26 July 2010 13:53)

and here's poor old me thinking that Mr Jeremic is fighting for his own country only. if i only knew.

' The ICJ said that the Helsinki Convention only applies to the protection of one state’s sovereignty against another state. '

Exactly, which means that the authors of the Declaration of Independence weren't violating international law, but the countries that recognised Kosovo were.

The opposition need to steer well clear of the current DS Kosovo policy. Let Tadic and the US/EU make a mess of it themselves and let the Serbian voters make final judgement. It is going very well indeed.
(Zoran, 26 July 2010 16:45)

As an Albanian I have no opinion on this. When I see it from the angle of a "Serbian nationalist" I wonder what would be the value of the vote if by the time of the next elections, more than 100 countries have recognized Kosovo.

I guess the Milosevic regime could have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ if it was smarter. Because even if it doesn't say anything about recognition, it has a lot to say about the intervention.
(Sam, UK, 26 July 2010 20:21)

No the Milosevic regime couldn't have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ because the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wasn't a UN member whilst Milosevic was President. The Kostunica Government acquired UN membership for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on 1st November 2000. Only UN member states can ask the UN General Assembly to put forward a question to the ICJ.

Also if the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been a member of the UN during the Milosevic Presidency, do you think Milosevic would have been able to get the majority of the General Assembly to support him? I think not!

The International Court of Justice gave their that it is not against International Law if someone Unilaterally Declares Independence, but many disagree with that opinion.

This is because these matters are under the Jurisdiction of Domestic Laws, and this is why the National Parliament could pass a Law making such matters Illegal.

Many countries think that the United Nations was not set up to conquer territory, and they think that ICJ announcement was biased and not based on the United Nations Charter as they read it.

This is because the Provisional Kosovo Government was neither the Sole Authority which is Serbia, nor was it the Exercising Authority which is the United Nations by means of UMNIK.

The proper thing to do now is for Serbia, and for the United Nations by means of UMNIK to make the Unilateral Declaration of Independence null and void, and to restart the peace process as called for in UNSCR 1244.

The Provisional Kosovo Government was and is a Temporary Institution, and was put in place until a compromise solution based on real and proper negotiations could be reached.

Time was not a determinant, because the first official though fake negotiations did not commence until seven years after the Peace Settlement UNSCR 1244 was signed.

The only determinant was in finding a peaceful long term solution that was agreeable to both sides, and in accordance with International Law.

All countries of the world should pass a Law in their country making it a crime to Unilaterally and Illegally Declare Independence.

That Law, like many Man Made Laws can be abused, and that is why a Legal way of seeking Independence should be added to that Law making Declarations of Independence Illegal.

The National Parliaments of the World should also declare under what circumstances Independence may be granted.

Those circumstances would involve real and proper negotiations, and with no Unilateral Moves by either side during the entire unspecified period of negotiations.

It would have to be presided over a panel of impartial mediators appointed by the Government, and they may recommend Independence or Autonomy as the Solution.

There are those who think that this is unfair, but, International Law is for very good reasons biased toward Territorial Integrity and Sovereignty of Nations, because there are over 5,000 ethnic groups, and less than 200 countries in the World.

'Here we go again.The court didn't answer the ssential question. If the question was so essential why you Serbs were so affraid to ask it? The court answered the exact question that Serbia asked.'

Actually it didn't. The question was Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo.

They answered Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence of Kosovo.

Since they deemed that the Declaration of Independence wasn't made by the PISG then surely what they should have done is refused to rule since the Declaration of Independence made by the PISG doesn't exist.

I don't see how they can basically say the General Assembly was too stupid to know what question it asked and proceed to answer a different one.

In any case it wouldn't make that much difference because a refusal to rule wouldn't have helped Serbia much more than this ruling did.

The opposition need to steer well clear of the current DS Kosovo policy. Let Tadic and the US/EU make a mess of it themselves and let the Serbian voters make final judgement. It is going very well indeed.

Again, adding words to change a meaning to suit your purposes. The Helsinki agreement makes no reference to the recognition of states and no guarantee of borders only that one state will not claim areas in another state.
(pss, 26 July 2010 17:39)

I guess the Milosevic regime could have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ if it was smarter. Because even if it doesn't say anything about recognition, it has a lot to say about the intervention.

Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić addressed MPs today to say that "55 countries are one step away from recognizing Kosovo", but that the government in Belgrade is "doing everything" to prevent that.

Rubbish. If this was true no Jeremic can stop this. Jeremic is alarming this due to the fear for his position after debacle in ICJ. He is trying to tell parlament that if he gets fired, there will be nobody to prevent the recognitions from happening and this is not good time for Serbia to change ministers.

Regardless how many meetings the Serbian parliament has, What US, EU, or Kosovo government think, the only solution that will ever yield peace is exchanging territories. North of Kosovo for Presevo walleye. Serbia should bring this on the table and persist until is done. Serbia knows and history itself tells that once Americans build a military base in a foreign land, they never leave. Examples: (Ramstein, Okinawa, just to name few) Surely, Serbs can somehow bring Russians there too, but knowing Serbian will and how they value their statehood and independence, that’s quite unlikely to happen. So, partition or exchange whatever one may call it, it’s the best if not the only solution that could bring Albanian side to the discussion table. Nothing else.

And as far as Yeremich is concerned, he should definitely be given the boot! He not only shot himself on the foot with his silly question to ICJ court, but the entire Serbia as well. It’s not that Serbia deserved a defeat, It’s rather the Yeremich´s plan that cheated them into a defeat

The question should have been, ¨Do Albanians, as a minority in the state of Serbia have right to unilaterally secede?

The opposition need to steer well clear of the current DS Kosovo policy. Let Tadic and the US/EU make a mess of it themselves and let the Serbian voters make final judgement. It is going very well indeed.

I have to agree with the Serbian poster: ICJ did not give an answer on the legality of Independence, they ignored that question. Serbia has every right to ask the UN again to submit another question to the ICJ. Expedite it so by 2015 is answered.

I think Vuk Jeremic is not fightig so that Serbia can have Kosovo, he is fighting for other countries that deal with seccesionist movements.

' The ICJ said that the Helsinki Convention only applies to the protection of one state’s sovereignty against another state. '

Exactly, which means that the authors of the Declaration of Independence weren't violating international law, but the countries that recognised Kosovo were.

I think Vuk Jeremic is not fightig so that Serbia can have Kosovo, he is fighting for other countries that deal with seccesionist movements.
(jordan, 26 July 2010 13:53)

and here's poor old me thinking that Mr Jeremic is fighting for his own country only. if i only knew.

The International Court of Justice gave their that it is not against International Law if someone Unilaterally Declares Independence, but many disagree with that opinion.

This is because these matters are under the Jurisdiction of Domestic Laws, and this is why the National Parliament could pass a Law making such matters Illegal.

Many countries think that the United Nations was not set up to conquer territory, and they think that ICJ announcement was biased and not based on the United Nations Charter as they read it.

This is because the Provisional Kosovo Government was neither the Sole Authority which is Serbia, nor was it the Exercising Authority which is the United Nations by means of UMNIK.

The proper thing to do now is for Serbia, and for the United Nations by means of UMNIK to make the Unilateral Declaration of Independence null and void, and to restart the peace process as called for in UNSCR 1244.

The Provisional Kosovo Government was and is a Temporary Institution, and was put in place until a compromise solution based on real and proper negotiations could be reached.

Time was not a determinant, because the first official though fake negotiations did not commence until seven years after the Peace Settlement UNSCR 1244 was signed.

The only determinant was in finding a peaceful long term solution that was agreeable to both sides, and in accordance with International Law.

All countries of the world should pass a Law in their country making it a crime to Unilaterally and Illegally Declare Independence.

That Law, like many Man Made Laws can be abused, and that is why a Legal way of seeking Independence should be added to that Law making Declarations of Independence Illegal.

The National Parliaments of the World should also declare under what circumstances Independence may be granted.

Those circumstances would involve real and proper negotiations, and with no Unilateral Moves by either side during the entire unspecified period of negotiations.

It would have to be presided over a panel of impartial mediators appointed by the Government, and they may recommend Independence or Autonomy as the Solution.

There are those who think that this is unfair, but, International Law is for very good reasons biased toward Territorial Integrity and Sovereignty of Nations, because there are over 5,000 ethnic groups, and less than 200 countries in the World.

"negotiations that would lead to a lasting solution and historical reconciliation between Serbs and ethnic Albanians."

That's OK, but hang on there's only a small problem with that! It's only 1 Century too late!

Yet another J S

The majority of your arguements do not hold, here is why:

“This is because these matters are under the Jurisdiction of Domestic Laws, and this is why the National Parliament could pass a Law making such matters Illegal.”

In most countries, the law that makes such matters illegal is the Constitution, which usually contains provisions on the inviolability and territorial integrity of the state. In Serbia’s case those provisions essentially ceased to apply as far as Kosovo is concerned, the moment the first NATO soldier stepped foot in Kosovo essentially occupying it.

Furthermore, the Serbian Constitution was a document drafted and approved without the participation or vote of the representatives of 2 million of Serbia’s citizens at the time.

“Time was not a determinant, because the first official though fake negotiations did not commence until seven years after the Peace Settlement UNSCR 1244 was signed.”

Calling something “fake” is very subjective. What may be ‘fake’ to you may not be ‘fake’ to me. The fact that negotiations were tried and failed in numerous attempts proves that a negotiated settlement was not possible. Let us also not forget that Serbia completely ignored a proposal (Ahtisaaris) prepared under the authority of the very institution that was responsible for sponsoring what you may consider as ‘non fake’ I negotiations. Ahtisaaris proposal was essentially a UN document.

”The only determinant was in finding a peaceful long term solution that was agreeable to both sides, and in accordance with International Law.”

Again, if all things are left to be agreed by both sides, we would be stuck in never-ending negociatings, during which ne party (Serbia) would continue to have what it wants (sovereignty). Also, haven’t we already moved passes international law? The ICJ which is the highest body to interpret international law says THERE IS NO INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE in this case; the fact that you do not understand this is mind boggling.

I do not wish to sound cynical but I would not mind betting that the opposition will make sure it rains on this parade.

To me, serbian government's efforts are becoming so desperate that very soon even the "hardest" of their supporters will become disillusioned - if they are not already.

Stop clinging to your chairs gospodo, and do not give your people false hopes anymore.

God bless ...

I have to agree with the Serbian poster: ICJ did not give an answer on the legality of Independence, they ignored that question. Serbia has every right to ask the UN again to submit another question to the ICJ. Expedite it so by 2015 is answered.
(Bekim, 26 July 2010 10:34)

The ICJ didn't ignore the question, Serbia didn't explicitly ask for an advisory opinion on the legality of Kosovo's interdependence. Serbia submitted to the ICJ "Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo (Request for Advisory Opinion)". Serbia has had their chance, they asked the ICJ a question and the ICJ answered it. If Serbia asked the wrong question or worded it wrong, then that is Serbia's fault not the UN's, ICJ's and the international community's fault. It is unfair of Serbia to waste more money and time of the UN, ICJ and all the countries who participated at the ICJ, just because Serbia made a mistake. If Serbia made a mistake then they are only to blame. Serbia has had their chance and if you think they have wasted it then too bad.

Lets say for argument's sake Serbia did ask the ICJ another question and the advisory opinion wasn't in their favour again, would you want Serbia to ask again and again until something rules in their favour? That is not fair on the ICJ, UN or the International Community. Serbia has had their chance and they blew it.

Again, adding words to change a meaning to suit your purposes. The Helsinki agreement makes no reference to the recognition of states and no guarantee of borders only that one state will not claim areas in another state.
(pss, 26 July 2010 17:39)

I guess the Milosevic regime could have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ if it was smarter. Because even if it doesn't say anything about recognition, it has a lot to say about the intervention.

The Serb government continues to claim that the ICJ did not answer the fundamental question. But the ICJ said:

1. 1244 which is an instrument of international law does not preclude independence; it only states that at the "time of its adoption" Kosovo was under the sovereignty of Yugoslavia, and that ultimately the 'status' of Kosovo would be solved through negotiations.

2. The ICJ recognized Marti Ahtisaaris role in those negotiations and a couple of sentences in the ICJ’s decision can actually be interpreted as endorsing Ahtisaaris proposal.

3. The ICJ said that the Helsinki Convention only applies to the protection of one state’s sovereignty against another state.

4. In its decision, the ICJ refers to “remedial secession”. Which would have almost certainly been invoked by the judges that voted for the legality of Kosovo’s declaration of independence, had the question been formulated differently by Serbia. In saying this I am taking into account the number of judges that voted ‘for’ the legality of Kosovo’s independence. Even if not all 10 judges that voted ‘for’ would not have invoked ‘remedial secession’ certainly a good number of them would have. This concept would have probably been too difficult to accept by the Brazilian and Mexican judges, due to the secessionist movements in their own countries, but that still leaves 8 judges who would have used this argument.

This essentially means that even if Serbia would have formulated the question differently, such as “is Kosovo’s statehood legal” the answer from the court would have been negative for Serbia. This is simply because there are no instruments of international law that determine a State’s legality or not.

Alternatively, Serbia could have asked whether the “recognitions of Kosovo” are legal under the Montevidio convention. In which case the court would have had to go through each criteria under the Montevidio convention to determine whether the states that have recognized Kosovo have met those criteria. Again the result of this exercise would have been too close to call and the court would have answered that this is a political matter to be decided by each state individually.

The ICJ court answered the exact question that it was asked.

Serbia thought it was being smart by formulating such a specific and narrow question becuase they believe the court would rule that UDI declaration was illegal much easier than ruling that the secession / statehood of Kosovo is illegal.

They thought that by proving that the act of declaration itself was illegal, that would mean that all recognitions of independence would be illegal.

Don't blame others for your own failings.

Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić addressed MPs today to say that "55 countries are one step away from recognizing Kosovo", but that the government in Belgrade is "doing everything" to prevent that.


I think Vuk is ready to book flights to these 55 countries. I hope he enjoys his long vacation and ads mor frequent flyer milage.

The ICJ court answered the exact question that it was asked.

Serbia thought it was being smart by formulating such a specific and narrow question becuase they believe the court would rule that UDI declaration was illegal much easier than ruling that the secession / statehood of Kosovo is illegal.

They thought that by proving that the act of declaration itself was illegal, that would mean that all recognitions of independence would be illegal.

Don't blame others for your own failings.
(nikshala, 26 July 2010 14:59)

Again, you are very correct Nick.

As a matter of fact the right of secession for K. has also been discussed here multiple times considering the historical events that took place that lead to UDI. When these facts were brought up, the Serbs have argued that this is not what ICJ was about, but rather ICJ was about the act of declaration itself. It is ultimately given that if Serbia had asked whether K. had the right of secession from Serbia, given the numerous facts of ethnic cleansing and attrocities, the ICJ would have sided again with K. Serbia's attempt has back-fired. Jeremic and Tadic were playing with secessionist fears around the world and all they have achieved in this quest they have made more enemies than before. The gap between Serbia and the West has widened and Serbia will pay high concessions for this as every day goes by. It should be worrisome for Serb intelligent elite to see their country's politics navigate in a complete fog. Many understand (including many Albanians ) the pain that K. departure causes to Serbia but deal with it. Albanians lost it too a century ago, and we dealt with it. If you are so keen on getting it back, you ain't going to do it now and certainly not with your resolutions.

'Here we go again.The court didn't answer the ssential question. If the question was so essential why you Serbs were so affraid to ask it? The court answered the exact question that Serbia asked.'

Actually it didn't. The question was Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo.

They answered Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence of Kosovo.

Since they deemed that the Declaration of Independence wasn't made by the PISG then surely what they should have done is refused to rule since the Declaration of Independence made by the PISG doesn't exist.

I don't see how they can basically say the General Assembly was too stupid to know what question it asked and proceed to answer a different one.

In any case it wouldn't make that much difference because a refusal to rule wouldn't have helped Serbia much more than this ruling did.

The opposition need to steer well clear of the current DS Kosovo policy. Let Tadic and the US/EU make a mess of it themselves and let the Serbian voters make final judgement. It is going very well indeed.
(Zoran, 26 July 2010 16:45)

As an Albanian I have no opinion on this. When I see it from the angle of a "Serbian nationalist" I wonder what would be the value of the vote if by the time of the next elections, more than 100 countries have recognized Kosovo.

(Yet Another J S., 26 July 2010 14:44)
Some interesting thoughts in your posts.
1. I think most countries have a law or something that would make secession domestically illegal, the problem is if the new "country" has seceded then they are saying they are not subject to domestic law.
2. You are proposing an International Parliaments of the World. So basically you are saying the UN does not function to your will so just develop another group. The problem is how would taking all the members of a group and forming a new group be different?
3. You want Serbia and UNMIK to declare the DoI null and void. Serbia did so the day after remember? Do you really think that the 3 veto wielding countries that have recognized Kosovo and gave arguments it the ICJ which agreed with their arguments are going to suddenly declare the Declaration null and void?

Exactly, which means that the authors of the Declaration of Independence weren't violating international law, but the countries that recognised Kosovo were.
(Sam, UK, 26 July 2010 16:35)
Again, adding words to change a meaning to suit your purposes. The Helsinki agreement makes no reference to the recognition of states and no guarantee of borders only that one state will not claim areas in another state.

The draft states that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) did not answer the essential question of the legality of the Kosovo Albanian attempt to secede from Serbia.

Here we go again.The court didn't answer the ssential question. If the question was so essential why you Serbs were so affraid to ask it? The court answered the exact question that Serbia asked.

"He stressed that the government has sent its draft resolution to the Serbian parliament in order to confirm that policy, so that a peaceful, lasting and sustainable solution is reached, that will be in line with the Serbian Constitution, which should enable for a "historic reconciliation of the Serb and Albanian peoples, and peace and stability in the region".

--And Serbs keep wondering why their foreign policy keeps failing. Here you heard it from the horse's mouth, Jeremic itself. For as long as SERBIA DICTATES that the HISTORIC RECONCILIATION OF THE SERB AND ALBANIAN PEOPLES HAS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SERBIAN CONSTITUTION you will keep on failing miserably. That is simply because of the fact that the other side which you want to reconcile with views the SERB CONSTITUTION as its mortal enemy, and as its greatest threat to their survival and existence in Kosova. Until someone in Serbia gets that, things will continue to go downhill for Serbia because the West has embraced the fact that SERBIA's CONSTITUTION IS THE ENEMY OF PEACE BETWEEN OUR TWO PEOPLES. So not only you have the other side that considers Serbia's mantra the poison of peace in Europe but you have half the world that supports them. As a result not only there is never going to be a HISTORIC RECONCILIATION OF OUR TWO PEOPLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT SERB CONSTITUTION, but there will continually be a HISTORIC ANTAGONISM BETWEEN SERBIA AND HALF OF THE WORLD THAT SUPPORTS US. So with that attitude Serbia can go to the UN, to the EU, to the ICJ, to the UNSC and every time it tries it will continue to fail miserably, because nobody on this other side of the argument will stupidly fall for such naive politics; that is to solve things according to Serbia's will ( read Constitution). Not only because it makes no logical sense but because no powerful superpower will bend to Serbia's will simply because they have a status to maintain and falling for Serbia's will makes them a lesser power than Serbia and such thing will not be allowed. It is not only Serbia and the Serbs who follow inat. There are other much powerful countries out there that do not like being told what to do by someone or someplace they consider insignificant. I believe with its policies Serbia is everyday coming closer and closer to being the insignificant place that is trying to order the west to bend to Serbia's will. (For reference see Cuba today). Continuous antagonism towards them does that.

I guess the Milosevic regime could have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ if it was smarter. Because even if it doesn't say anything about recognition, it has a lot to say about the intervention.
(Sam, UK, 26 July 2010 20:21)

No the Milosevic regime couldn't have taken the NATO intervention to the ICJ because the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wasn't a UN member whilst Milosevic was President. The Kostunica Government acquired UN membership for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on 1st November 2000. Only UN member states can ask the UN General Assembly to put forward a question to the ICJ.

Also if the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been a member of the UN during the Milosevic Presidency, do you think Milosevic would have been able to get the majority of the General Assembly to support him? I think not!

Regardless how many meetings the Serbian parliament has, What US, EU, or Kosovo government think, the only solution that will ever yield peace is exchanging territories. North of Kosovo for Presevo walleye. Serbia should bring this on the table and persist until is done. Serbia knows and history itself tells that once Americans build a military base in a foreign land, they never leave. Examples: (Ramstein, Okinawa, just to name few) Surely, Serbs can somehow bring Russians there too, but knowing Serbian will and how they value their statehood and independence, that’s quite unlikely to happen. So, partition or exchange whatever one may call it, it’s the best if not the only solution that could bring Albanian side to the discussion table. Nothing else.

And as far as Yeremich is concerned, he should definitely be given the boot! He not only shot himself on the foot with his silly question to ICJ court, but the entire Serbia as well. It’s not that Serbia deserved a defeat, It’s rather the Yeremich´s plan that cheated them into a defeat

The question should have been, ¨Do Albanians, as a minority in the state of Serbia have right to unilaterally secede?

Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremić addressed MPs today to say that "55 countries are one step away from recognizing Kosovo", but that the government in Belgrade is "doing everything" to prevent that.

Rubbish. If this was true no Jeremic can stop this. Jeremic is alarming this due to the fear for his position after debacle in ICJ. He is trying to tell parlament that if he gets fired, there will be nobody to prevent the recognitions from happening and this is not good time for Serbia to change ministers.