Yes, the Woodrow Wilson Center is a respected think tank and has actually assisted developing policies for the US govt.
I disagree somewhat with where you believe Sletzinger's sympathies lie, from what I understand Sletzinger realised that US foreign policy from Clinton to Bush lost it's way and was without balance or a historical perspective. The fears of this opinion are reflected, when observing negative impressions for the US increasing from traditional allies and the world in general. The world has seen the US clearly take a bias and exclude opposing opinions and facts in relation to it's foreign policy and conflict resolution. Coupled with the corruptability of some of it's officials and lobby groups to sway leadership so the US military to do it's bidding and we begin to understand why a majority perceive the US to be hypocritical and disingenuous. Changing that, I believe is where his sympathy and motivation lies, perhaps when gaining an unfiltered understanding of the Kosovo conflict in his studies, receiving all the facts he has developed a sympathy for the Serbian arguement, particully in Kosovo. His works reflect far from being labelled as a well known pro Serb expert, as opposed too and more correctly, an expert armed with detailed knowledge of the Kosovo situation. I really don't see where you think he is pro Serb or wishes certain things for Serbs. I repeat Sletzinger brought the Serb veiw to the Kosovo debate in US academic circles because it has been an absent piece in the puzzle for the US to understand this issue.
Can explain in a concise manner, what makes Kosovo's "declaration" such a unique case?
(Matmud, 31 July 2010 23:11)
The ICJ said that, I quote, “the declaration of independence of Kosovo adopted on 17 February 2008 did not violate international law” (see par. 123 of the Opinion).
So it is about the declaration of independence of a specific entity (Kosovo) declared on a specific date (17/2/2008).
If the ICJ had decided that "declarations of independence do not violate international law", than Kosovo's case was no longer specific.
"Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this, "
Nobody said he was a well-known "paid lobbyist" - he is the director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a respected Washington think-tank. His sympathies obviously lie with the Serbs, and there's no reason they shouldn't. It's almost impossible in politics to be entirely disinterested, so it helps to be aware of where a speaker on a subject is coming from. For example, if Mr. Sletzinger had been defending the Albanian position all along, then his saying the "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" would hardly be news, and certainly wouldn't be reported by B92. The fact that he wishes Serbia well and undoubtedly wishes facts were different is the reason this is news, a warning to his Serbian friends that he believes things do not look well for them, that they should not get their hopes up. It's hardly an ad hominem attack. Serbs should feel relieved that there are people in responsible positions in the U.S. who view the Serb position sympathetically, based on their personal history and life experience.
I cant help but think about the centuries spent and millions of live sacrificed by the Serbs to defend their right to exist freely without the interference of outside powers, and now in 15 years a motley bunch of suspicious characters are attempting to undo all that. I know life is unfair, but this is ridiculous.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.)
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Part of understanding the entire situation is to get the other side of the story, in this case sitting with Serbs and attaining imformation, not just taking one sides word as gospel as the US has done till now with Albanians.
Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this,
Heres a little example of why you shouldn't throw rocks in your glasshouse.
http://balkanblog.org/2007/11/03/1563/
--------------------------
So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Your trying to mis-interpret what he is trying to say, what he said was Serbia cannot keep Kosovo and get in Eu, probably due to the fact that the EU does not want a replication of the Cyprus situation in with Serbia. Dodik, yes he is waiting for this precident.
"Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future. "
Kosovo took over its share of the IMF debt when it became a member.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.) So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
I'm entirely in agreement with 'Top' on whether the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
I've spent some time working in Brussels and most of the people I know there and in other EU member states aren't particularly favourable to Serbia, Kosovo etc being admitted to the EU. They were unhappy enough when Romania and Bulgaria were let in. Serbia on the other hand they consider to be a country filled with racist, genocidal maniacs - mainly as a result of poor reporting by the media. Now I'm in the region, I know this not to be (entirely) true, although I wonder sometimes reading some posters' comments.
However, those that argue Serbia is relevant are quite right - it is, although not for particularly positive reasons. The apparently endemic delusion of a Greater Serbia are in part responsible for World War One and also for sucking the rest of Europe into various other costly and unnecessary wars.
If Serbia could turn one tenth of its talent for disrupting the region (and continent) toward peacebuilding and constructive causes then it might find itself being recognised as 'great', albeit not geographically.
@ RUBEN -- going to the ICJ was preferable to Brussels than Serbia suing each EU country directly for recognizing the UDI. As I said, no new recognitions after the verdict make it meaningless for Albanians.
Hmmm funny the US and NATO partners seem to think changing Kosovo's borders wouldn't be such a good idea but didn't hesitate in doing that to Serbia as a whole, and still they call us friends????
@ Doodah -- When you get those those 30-50 recognitions you haven't been able to get already THEN CALL ME NAIVE. Becase US-UK-EU are failing economically, bogged down & overstretched militarily whereas RUS & BRIC are ascending and have no need to let the corrupt neutered West prevail and what happens in the Balkans reflects this bigger picture. We went to ICJ to please the EU, not bc it was best tactic because Tadic's entire career autistically depends on EU integration even HE knows wont happen
Wow. That is the second sensible piece written by and american in as many days. I'm in shock.
Top,
For such a small and insignificant country such as Serbia, the 'EU' seems to be spending a huge amount of time and energy in trying to convince Serbia to join the EU.
The only real and substantive technical holdout they have against Serbia is handing over Mladic. The EU has already let in other states who have not ratified their borders with other states (Estonia for one) and have bent the so called rules of the acquis communautaire in to pretzels to let the Romanians and Bulgarians in, which I'm guessing is for strategic reasons.
But Serbia is not just another small country. It is the shortest trade route to Asia, hence the truckers preferred route when not being held up for hours at the border.
Serbia's centrality and stability in the Balkans, especially considering the dire state of its neighbors to the west, east and south is very important for the EU. It's major policy for the region, the 'Stability Pact' depends on Serbia. No Serbia, no stability pact.
Serbia is also central in cooperation to stop traffiking of narcotics, people and other products in to the EU precisely because of its location. Every other day there is a news story about how police cooperation with an EU country is so important (Serbia being most recently lauded by the german police).
EUROPOL's OCTA report for 2009 singles out Kosovo as the hub for traffiking in the Balkans (guess who). Without the cooperation of Serbia there is absolutely no hope of stemming the flood.
So why does Serbia need the EU and has to become a member? It has the SAA agreement. It can successfully attract investments from around the world and it has a skilled and educated population.
The west is being eclipsed by the new world and history is shifting again. The british prime minister is reported to be going to India with 'humility' (not to mention a massive trade delegation) and to win over more foreign investment.
The party in the west is finally over. It benefited from its empires, then it benefited from colonial links and easy access to former colonies to financial products and instruments, and finally it has destroyed its last credibility and last means of influence and control, its banks and financial 'expertize' (just look how the IMF has been forced to change and the irrelevance of an 'G7' which excludes China) in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Simply put, Serbia has other options to membership. Some EU countries aren't members of NATO, some don't want the Euro, some have the benefits without actually joining.
Sure, Europe will be Serbia's largest market by nature of geography, but it cuts both ways. Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future.
So no, I disagree, Serbia is not just another small, irrelevant country.
Serbs do not ask to keep KiM, they have offered the KiM Albanians autonomy, which Milosevic took away because the Albanians were assaulting the local Serbs. Seems like that is hard for the US, and its mouthpieces, to understand this. They are hell bent on pushing through a make-believe multi-ethnic society in Kosovo, that none of the locals want. The US is playing with the lives of local inhabitants, and the Albanians accept it. That is a wonder to me. Do they really think the US likes them, or gives a rat's behind about people in the Balkans?
Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible?
(highduke, 29 July 2010 14:29)
--
I found it a little strange that Jeremic would say "50 recognitions are one step away" and Tadic at the same time mentioned that he viewed Kosovo closer to independent than autonomous. It sounded like they were calling for recognitions and that again is less reason to trust them. They said this the day following the ICJ decision.
Lets see what the UN vote achieves. If it goes against Serbia then I think it's time to call new elections.
Oh the arrogance of the Amerikans !! just "where" do they think they are coming from ? However this shakes out, I still do not see the EU attraction for Srbija... why ? If this EU/US intervention continues we will be back to the centuries-long practice if underground subversive night fighting, black handing, and ugly Balkans stuff the last 650 years were made of.
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Who is being the obstacle to peace now? Like I said before, the us is the new Soviet Union which makes HATO the new Warsaw Pact.
highduke it is hard to believe you would use the word naive in reference to anyone except in self reflection. The 55 came from the B92 article on the 26th "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."
It cannot be counted as anyones failure except Serbia's because it is Serbia who wanted it, and Serbia who failed to get the verdict they wanted.
The predictions from the west was always that the verdict will not change the situation of course that was when you and all the other Serbian posters were constantly saying that the opinion would change everything another Serbian error.
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
(Zoran, 29 July 2010 11:30)
I would sooner catapault him to the forefront to replace Ahtisari's paper dribble.
http://www.b92.net/eng/news/in_focus.php?id=96&start=345&nav_id=64537&version=print
"Talks possible, Serbia can't keep Kosovo". As is Serbia is in control of Kosovo. B92 news, with this kind of headline are loosing the status of impariallity and looking less professional, what people love oabut B92. In fact, B92 is becoming part of the propaganda machine of Serbian regime.
Dodik already has stated it, that is reality. Yes their is a chance or a gamble that Serbia can get all of Kosovo, but what then. Pressure to feed them a disproportinate share of funds to keep them happy.
Keep our forces there in harms way like our mini Afghanistan. The opportunity is here, a save face for the US and to attain our interests.
Go in officially take the road corridor to Pec and Decani. Take a corridor through to Novo Brdo and Gracanica. Take Northern Kosovo. Get the Serbs of Strpce and the Gorani out too in a land swap, nothing new in the Balkans (Srebrenica/Vogosca), give them Presevo and Bujanovac. Give them equal autonomy as the RS gets then use that as a bargaining chip. Serb areas in the Balkans to Serbia Alb areas to Alb only then.
The remaining monastaries should be protected by agreement then with further dialogue.
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Probably the most intelligent observation I have seen come out of the west in a long time....
@ doodah -- Dont be naive, the ICJ verdict was likely known to Western diplomats whose countries provided the judges long before it was officially announced, so they had enough prep time. Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible? No new recognitions means ICJ verdict was ignored and represents another Albo-American failure.
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
(highduke, 29 July 2010 12:30)
If this were 6 months down the road, I think your question would be reasonable. But the facts are:
I doubt any country had its parliament sitting on hold to make a decision immediately after the verdict was announced.
The countries that have not made a decision at this point do not place a high priority on the subject.
Your own Jeremic has predicted up to 55 new recognitions(how he derived at this number I do not know), so it is a little early to do any chest thumping on the subject.
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
"the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU."
There it is again, the overestimation of their importance. Small countries like Serbia (and even more, the "country" of Kosovo) are more or less irrelevant for the EU, unless these states create new trouble in Europe and flood the neighbouring countries with refugees - that's the reason they should be embedded in European structures.
What is the huge gain the EU would have with Serbia as a member? What is the loss for Serbia not being an EU member, on the other hand?
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
do those eurocrats in Brussels really think that joining the EU is worth giving up own territory?
seems like they still do not get it.
the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
and that´s something these eurocrats will realize sooner or later.
actually, they should know it for a long time, but it seems like they still hope that Serbia gives in.
if the choice is EU or Serbia´s territorial integrity...
it´s a clear cut case: no EU!
let´s just see what future brings...
in the meantime our dear k-albanian friends are free to continue deceiving themselves with the illusion that the "advisory opinion" on a technical question has brought them the slightes bit of legitimacy.
personally, I think one must be very naive to believe that at all.
"If Kosovo is a unique case and not a precedent for any other separatist movement, why is anyone against border changes?"
(American Eagle, 29 July 2010 10:30)
Border changes would destroy the illusion of being able to create an "multiethnic Kosovo", because the new borders would be drawn along ethnic lines - though this is obviously the only way it can work in this region, where neither Serbs nor Albanians want to live in a "multiethnic" state.
And if the "precedent" argument against border changes would be valid, then what is the legitimacy of Kosovo, which was being created by border changes (of Serbia)?
"If Kosovo is a unique case and not a precedent for any other separatist movement, why is anyone against border changes?"
(American Eagle, 29 July 2010 10:30)
Border changes would destroy the illusion of being able to create an "multiethnic Kosovo", because the new borders would be drawn along ethnic lines - though this is obviously the only way it can work in this region, where neither Serbs nor Albanians want to live in a "multiethnic" state.
And if the "precedent" argument against border changes would be valid, then what is the legitimacy of Kosovo, which was being created by border changes (of Serbia)?
"the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU."
There it is again, the overestimation of their importance. Small countries like Serbia (and even more, the "country" of Kosovo) are more or less irrelevant for the EU, unless these states create new trouble in Europe and flood the neighbouring countries with refugees - that's the reason they should be embedded in European structures.
What is the huge gain the EU would have with Serbia as a member? What is the loss for Serbia not being an EU member, on the other hand?
I'm entirely in agreement with 'Top' on whether the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
I've spent some time working in Brussels and most of the people I know there and in other EU member states aren't particularly favourable to Serbia, Kosovo etc being admitted to the EU. They were unhappy enough when Romania and Bulgaria were let in. Serbia on the other hand they consider to be a country filled with racist, genocidal maniacs - mainly as a result of poor reporting by the media. Now I'm in the region, I know this not to be (entirely) true, although I wonder sometimes reading some posters' comments.
However, those that argue Serbia is relevant are quite right - it is, although not for particularly positive reasons. The apparently endemic delusion of a Greater Serbia are in part responsible for World War One and also for sucking the rest of Europe into various other costly and unnecessary wars.
If Serbia could turn one tenth of its talent for disrupting the region (and continent) toward peacebuilding and constructive causes then it might find itself being recognised as 'great', albeit not geographically.
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
Wow. That is the second sensible piece written by and american in as many days. I'm in shock.
Top,
For such a small and insignificant country such as Serbia, the 'EU' seems to be spending a huge amount of time and energy in trying to convince Serbia to join the EU.
The only real and substantive technical holdout they have against Serbia is handing over Mladic. The EU has already let in other states who have not ratified their borders with other states (Estonia for one) and have bent the so called rules of the acquis communautaire in to pretzels to let the Romanians and Bulgarians in, which I'm guessing is for strategic reasons.
But Serbia is not just another small country. It is the shortest trade route to Asia, hence the truckers preferred route when not being held up for hours at the border.
Serbia's centrality and stability in the Balkans, especially considering the dire state of its neighbors to the west, east and south is very important for the EU. It's major policy for the region, the 'Stability Pact' depends on Serbia. No Serbia, no stability pact.
Serbia is also central in cooperation to stop traffiking of narcotics, people and other products in to the EU precisely because of its location. Every other day there is a news story about how police cooperation with an EU country is so important (Serbia being most recently lauded by the german police).
EUROPOL's OCTA report for 2009 singles out Kosovo as the hub for traffiking in the Balkans (guess who). Without the cooperation of Serbia there is absolutely no hope of stemming the flood.
So why does Serbia need the EU and has to become a member? It has the SAA agreement. It can successfully attract investments from around the world and it has a skilled and educated population.
The west is being eclipsed by the new world and history is shifting again. The british prime minister is reported to be going to India with 'humility' (not to mention a massive trade delegation) and to win over more foreign investment.
The party in the west is finally over. It benefited from its empires, then it benefited from colonial links and easy access to former colonies to financial products and instruments, and finally it has destroyed its last credibility and last means of influence and control, its banks and financial 'expertize' (just look how the IMF has been forced to change and the irrelevance of an 'G7' which excludes China) in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Simply put, Serbia has other options to membership. Some EU countries aren't members of NATO, some don't want the Euro, some have the benefits without actually joining.
Sure, Europe will be Serbia's largest market by nature of geography, but it cuts both ways. Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future.
So no, I disagree, Serbia is not just another small, irrelevant country.
do those eurocrats in Brussels really think that joining the EU is worth giving up own territory?
seems like they still do not get it.
the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
and that´s something these eurocrats will realize sooner or later.
actually, they should know it for a long time, but it seems like they still hope that Serbia gives in.
if the choice is EU or Serbia´s territorial integrity...
it´s a clear cut case: no EU!
let´s just see what future brings...
in the meantime our dear k-albanian friends are free to continue deceiving themselves with the illusion that the "advisory opinion" on a technical question has brought them the slightes bit of legitimacy.
personally, I think one must be very naive to believe that at all.
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
@ doodah -- Dont be naive, the ICJ verdict was likely known to Western diplomats whose countries provided the judges long before it was officially announced, so they had enough prep time. Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible? No new recognitions means ICJ verdict was ignored and represents another Albo-American failure.
"Talks possible, Serbia can't keep Kosovo". As is Serbia is in control of Kosovo. B92 news, with this kind of headline are loosing the status of impariallity and looking less professional, what people love oabut B92. In fact, B92 is becoming part of the propaganda machine of Serbian regime.
Serbs do not ask to keep KiM, they have offered the KiM Albanians autonomy, which Milosevic took away because the Albanians were assaulting the local Serbs. Seems like that is hard for the US, and its mouthpieces, to understand this. They are hell bent on pushing through a make-believe multi-ethnic society in Kosovo, that none of the locals want. The US is playing with the lives of local inhabitants, and the Albanians accept it. That is a wonder to me. Do they really think the US likes them, or gives a rat's behind about people in the Balkans?
Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible?
(highduke, 29 July 2010 14:29)
--
I found it a little strange that Jeremic would say "50 recognitions are one step away" and Tadic at the same time mentioned that he viewed Kosovo closer to independent than autonomous. It sounded like they were calling for recognitions and that again is less reason to trust them. They said this the day following the ICJ decision.
Lets see what the UN vote achieves. If it goes against Serbia then I think it's time to call new elections.
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
(highduke, 29 July 2010 12:30)
If this were 6 months down the road, I think your question would be reasonable. But the facts are:
I doubt any country had its parliament sitting on hold to make a decision immediately after the verdict was announced.
The countries that have not made a decision at this point do not place a high priority on the subject.
Your own Jeremic has predicted up to 55 new recognitions(how he derived at this number I do not know), so it is a little early to do any chest thumping on the subject.
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Probably the most intelligent observation I have seen come out of the west in a long time....
@ Doodah -- When you get those those 30-50 recognitions you haven't been able to get already THEN CALL ME NAIVE. Becase US-UK-EU are failing economically, bogged down & overstretched militarily whereas RUS & BRIC are ascending and have no need to let the corrupt neutered West prevail and what happens in the Balkans reflects this bigger picture. We went to ICJ to please the EU, not bc it was best tactic because Tadic's entire career autistically depends on EU integration even HE knows wont happen
highduke it is hard to believe you would use the word naive in reference to anyone except in self reflection. The 55 came from the B92 article on the 26th "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."
It cannot be counted as anyones failure except Serbia's because it is Serbia who wanted it, and Serbia who failed to get the verdict they wanted.
The predictions from the west was always that the verdict will not change the situation of course that was when you and all the other Serbian posters were constantly saying that the opinion would change everything another Serbian error.
Dodik already has stated it, that is reality. Yes their is a chance or a gamble that Serbia can get all of Kosovo, but what then. Pressure to feed them a disproportinate share of funds to keep them happy.
Keep our forces there in harms way like our mini Afghanistan. The opportunity is here, a save face for the US and to attain our interests.
Go in officially take the road corridor to Pec and Decani. Take a corridor through to Novo Brdo and Gracanica. Take Northern Kosovo. Get the Serbs of Strpce and the Gorani out too in a land swap, nothing new in the Balkans (Srebrenica/Vogosca), give them Presevo and Bujanovac. Give them equal autonomy as the RS gets then use that as a bargaining chip. Serb areas in the Balkans to Serbia Alb areas to Alb only then.
The remaining monastaries should be protected by agreement then with further dialogue.
Oh the arrogance of the Amerikans !! just "where" do they think they are coming from ? However this shakes out, I still do not see the EU attraction for Srbija... why ? If this EU/US intervention continues we will be back to the centuries-long practice if underground subversive night fighting, black handing, and ugly Balkans stuff the last 650 years were made of.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.) So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Who is being the obstacle to peace now? Like I said before, the us is the new Soviet Union which makes HATO the new Warsaw Pact.
Hmmm funny the US and NATO partners seem to think changing Kosovo's borders wouldn't be such a good idea but didn't hesitate in doing that to Serbia as a whole, and still they call us friends????
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
(Zoran, 29 July 2010 11:30)
I would sooner catapault him to the forefront to replace Ahtisari's paper dribble.
http://www.b92.net/eng/news/in_focus.php?id=96&start=345&nav_id=64537&version=print
I cant help but think about the centuries spent and millions of live sacrificed by the Serbs to defend their right to exist freely without the interference of outside powers, and now in 15 years a motley bunch of suspicious characters are attempting to undo all that. I know life is unfair, but this is ridiculous.
"Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this, "
Nobody said he was a well-known "paid lobbyist" - he is the director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a respected Washington think-tank. His sympathies obviously lie with the Serbs, and there's no reason they shouldn't. It's almost impossible in politics to be entirely disinterested, so it helps to be aware of where a speaker on a subject is coming from. For example, if Mr. Sletzinger had been defending the Albanian position all along, then his saying the "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" would hardly be news, and certainly wouldn't be reported by B92. The fact that he wishes Serbia well and undoubtedly wishes facts were different is the reason this is news, a warning to his Serbian friends that he believes things do not look well for them, that they should not get their hopes up. It's hardly an ad hominem attack. Serbs should feel relieved that there are people in responsible positions in the U.S. who view the Serb position sympathetically, based on their personal history and life experience.
@ RUBEN -- going to the ICJ was preferable to Brussels than Serbia suing each EU country directly for recognizing the UDI. As I said, no new recognitions after the verdict make it meaningless for Albanians.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.)
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Part of understanding the entire situation is to get the other side of the story, in this case sitting with Serbs and attaining imformation, not just taking one sides word as gospel as the US has done till now with Albanians.
Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this,
Heres a little example of why you shouldn't throw rocks in your glasshouse.
http://balkanblog.org/2007/11/03/1563/
--------------------------
So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Your trying to mis-interpret what he is trying to say, what he said was Serbia cannot keep Kosovo and get in Eu, probably due to the fact that the EU does not want a replication of the Cyprus situation in with Serbia. Dodik, yes he is waiting for this precident.
Yes, the Woodrow Wilson Center is a respected think tank and has actually assisted developing policies for the US govt.
I disagree somewhat with where you believe Sletzinger's sympathies lie, from what I understand Sletzinger realised that US foreign policy from Clinton to Bush lost it's way and was without balance or a historical perspective. The fears of this opinion are reflected, when observing negative impressions for the US increasing from traditional allies and the world in general. The world has seen the US clearly take a bias and exclude opposing opinions and facts in relation to it's foreign policy and conflict resolution. Coupled with the corruptability of some of it's officials and lobby groups to sway leadership so the US military to do it's bidding and we begin to understand why a majority perceive the US to be hypocritical and disingenuous. Changing that, I believe is where his sympathy and motivation lies, perhaps when gaining an unfiltered understanding of the Kosovo conflict in his studies, receiving all the facts he has developed a sympathy for the Serbian arguement, particully in Kosovo. His works reflect far from being labelled as a well known pro Serb expert, as opposed too and more correctly, an expert armed with detailed knowledge of the Kosovo situation. I really don't see where you think he is pro Serb or wishes certain things for Serbs. I repeat Sletzinger brought the Serb veiw to the Kosovo debate in US academic circles because it has been an absent piece in the puzzle for the US to understand this issue.
"Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future. "
Kosovo took over its share of the IMF debt when it became a member.
Can explain in a concise manner, what makes Kosovo's "declaration" such a unique case?
(Matmud, 31 July 2010 23:11)
The ICJ said that, I quote, “the declaration of independence of Kosovo adopted on 17 February 2008 did not violate international law” (see par. 123 of the Opinion).
So it is about the declaration of independence of a specific entity (Kosovo) declared on a specific date (17/2/2008).
If the ICJ had decided that "declarations of independence do not violate international law", than Kosovo's case was no longer specific.
do those eurocrats in Brussels really think that joining the EU is worth giving up own territory?
seems like they still do not get it.
the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
and that´s something these eurocrats will realize sooner or later.
actually, they should know it for a long time, but it seems like they still hope that Serbia gives in.
if the choice is EU or Serbia´s territorial integrity...
it´s a clear cut case: no EU!
let´s just see what future brings...
in the meantime our dear k-albanian friends are free to continue deceiving themselves with the illusion that the "advisory opinion" on a technical question has brought them the slightes bit of legitimacy.
personally, I think one must be very naive to believe that at all.
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
@ doodah -- Dont be naive, the ICJ verdict was likely known to Western diplomats whose countries provided the judges long before it was officially announced, so they had enough prep time. Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible? No new recognitions means ICJ verdict was ignored and represents another Albo-American failure.
@ Doodah -- When you get those those 30-50 recognitions you haven't been able to get already THEN CALL ME NAIVE. Becase US-UK-EU are failing economically, bogged down & overstretched militarily whereas RUS & BRIC are ascending and have no need to let the corrupt neutered West prevail and what happens in the Balkans reflects this bigger picture. We went to ICJ to please the EU, not bc it was best tactic because Tadic's entire career autistically depends on EU integration even HE knows wont happen
Serbs do not ask to keep KiM, they have offered the KiM Albanians autonomy, which Milosevic took away because the Albanians were assaulting the local Serbs. Seems like that is hard for the US, and its mouthpieces, to understand this. They are hell bent on pushing through a make-believe multi-ethnic society in Kosovo, that none of the locals want. The US is playing with the lives of local inhabitants, and the Albanians accept it. That is a wonder to me. Do they really think the US likes them, or gives a rat's behind about people in the Balkans?
Where are new recognitions the ICJ verdict was supposed to bring? As long as they're missing from the picture then nothing has changed concretely. Serbia will keep KiM and solve the Albanian problem when we no longer have this autistic 'Europe or death' policy of the 90s & 2000s that keeps us from dealing with terrorists with the only methods they understand.
(highduke, 29 July 2010 12:30)
If this were 6 months down the road, I think your question would be reasonable. But the facts are:
I doubt any country had its parliament sitting on hold to make a decision immediately after the verdict was announced.
The countries that have not made a decision at this point do not place a high priority on the subject.
Your own Jeremic has predicted up to 55 new recognitions(how he derived at this number I do not know), so it is a little early to do any chest thumping on the subject.
"If Kosovo is a unique case and not a precedent for any other separatist movement, why is anyone against border changes?"
(American Eagle, 29 July 2010 10:30)
Border changes would destroy the illusion of being able to create an "multiethnic Kosovo", because the new borders would be drawn along ethnic lines - though this is obviously the only way it can work in this region, where neither Serbs nor Albanians want to live in a "multiethnic" state.
And if the "precedent" argument against border changes would be valid, then what is the legitimacy of Kosovo, which was being created by border changes (of Serbia)?
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Who is being the obstacle to peace now? Like I said before, the us is the new Soviet Union which makes HATO the new Warsaw Pact.
"the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU."
There it is again, the overestimation of their importance. Small countries like Serbia (and even more, the "country" of Kosovo) are more or less irrelevant for the EU, unless these states create new trouble in Europe and flood the neighbouring countries with refugees - that's the reason they should be embedded in European structures.
What is the huge gain the EU would have with Serbia as a member? What is the loss for Serbia not being an EU member, on the other hand?
Wow. That is the second sensible piece written by and american in as many days. I'm in shock.
Top,
For such a small and insignificant country such as Serbia, the 'EU' seems to be spending a huge amount of time and energy in trying to convince Serbia to join the EU.
The only real and substantive technical holdout they have against Serbia is handing over Mladic. The EU has already let in other states who have not ratified their borders with other states (Estonia for one) and have bent the so called rules of the acquis communautaire in to pretzels to let the Romanians and Bulgarians in, which I'm guessing is for strategic reasons.
But Serbia is not just another small country. It is the shortest trade route to Asia, hence the truckers preferred route when not being held up for hours at the border.
Serbia's centrality and stability in the Balkans, especially considering the dire state of its neighbors to the west, east and south is very important for the EU. It's major policy for the region, the 'Stability Pact' depends on Serbia. No Serbia, no stability pact.
Serbia is also central in cooperation to stop traffiking of narcotics, people and other products in to the EU precisely because of its location. Every other day there is a news story about how police cooperation with an EU country is so important (Serbia being most recently lauded by the german police).
EUROPOL's OCTA report for 2009 singles out Kosovo as the hub for traffiking in the Balkans (guess who). Without the cooperation of Serbia there is absolutely no hope of stemming the flood.
So why does Serbia need the EU and has to become a member? It has the SAA agreement. It can successfully attract investments from around the world and it has a skilled and educated population.
The west is being eclipsed by the new world and history is shifting again. The british prime minister is reported to be going to India with 'humility' (not to mention a massive trade delegation) and to win over more foreign investment.
The party in the west is finally over. It benefited from its empires, then it benefited from colonial links and easy access to former colonies to financial products and instruments, and finally it has destroyed its last credibility and last means of influence and control, its banks and financial 'expertize' (just look how the IMF has been forced to change and the irrelevance of an 'G7' which excludes China) in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Simply put, Serbia has other options to membership. Some EU countries aren't members of NATO, some don't want the Euro, some have the benefits without actually joining.
Sure, Europe will be Serbia's largest market by nature of geography, but it cuts both ways. Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future.
So no, I disagree, Serbia is not just another small, irrelevant country.
I cant help but think about the centuries spent and millions of live sacrificed by the Serbs to defend their right to exist freely without the interference of outside powers, and now in 15 years a motley bunch of suspicious characters are attempting to undo all that. I know life is unfair, but this is ridiculous.
"Talks possible, Serbia can't keep Kosovo". As is Serbia is in control of Kosovo. B92 news, with this kind of headline are loosing the status of impariallity and looking less professional, what people love oabut B92. In fact, B92 is becoming part of the propaganda machine of Serbian regime.
Secondly, when and where did Jeremic predict 'over 50 new recognitions' when BBC even stated that the 30 recognitions needed would be next to impossible?
(highduke, 29 July 2010 14:29)
--
I found it a little strange that Jeremic would say "50 recognitions are one step away" and Tadic at the same time mentioned that he viewed Kosovo closer to independent than autonomous. It sounded like they were calling for recognitions and that again is less reason to trust them. They said this the day following the ICJ decision.
Lets see what the UN vote achieves. If it goes against Serbia then I think it's time to call new elections.
Oh the arrogance of the Amerikans !! just "where" do they think they are coming from ? However this shakes out, I still do not see the EU attraction for Srbija... why ? If this EU/US intervention continues we will be back to the centuries-long practice if underground subversive night fighting, black handing, and ugly Balkans stuff the last 650 years were made of.
Hmmm funny the US and NATO partners seem to think changing Kosovo's borders wouldn't be such a good idea but didn't hesitate in doing that to Serbia as a whole, and still they call us friends????
@ RUBEN -- going to the ICJ was preferable to Brussels than Serbia suing each EU country directly for recognizing the UDI. As I said, no new recognitions after the verdict make it meaningless for Albanians.
I'm entirely in agreement with 'Top' on whether the EU needs Serbia more than Serbia needs the EU.
I've spent some time working in Brussels and most of the people I know there and in other EU member states aren't particularly favourable to Serbia, Kosovo etc being admitted to the EU. They were unhappy enough when Romania and Bulgaria were let in. Serbia on the other hand they consider to be a country filled with racist, genocidal maniacs - mainly as a result of poor reporting by the media. Now I'm in the region, I know this not to be (entirely) true, although I wonder sometimes reading some posters' comments.
However, those that argue Serbia is relevant are quite right - it is, although not for particularly positive reasons. The apparently endemic delusion of a Greater Serbia are in part responsible for World War One and also for sucking the rest of Europe into various other costly and unnecessary wars.
If Serbia could turn one tenth of its talent for disrupting the region (and continent) toward peacebuilding and constructive causes then it might find itself being recognised as 'great', albeit not geographically.
highduke it is hard to believe you would use the word naive in reference to anyone except in self reflection. The 55 came from the B92 article on the 26th "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."
It cannot be counted as anyones failure except Serbia's because it is Serbia who wanted it, and Serbia who failed to get the verdict they wanted.
The predictions from the west was always that the verdict will not change the situation of course that was when you and all the other Serbian posters were constantly saying that the opinion would change everything another Serbian error.
Dodik already has stated it, that is reality. Yes their is a chance or a gamble that Serbia can get all of Kosovo, but what then. Pressure to feed them a disproportinate share of funds to keep them happy.
Keep our forces there in harms way like our mini Afghanistan. The opportunity is here, a save face for the US and to attain our interests.
Go in officially take the road corridor to Pec and Decani. Take a corridor through to Novo Brdo and Gracanica. Take Northern Kosovo. Get the Serbs of Strpce and the Gorani out too in a land swap, nothing new in the Balkans (Srebrenica/Vogosca), give them Presevo and Bujanovac. Give them equal autonomy as the RS gets then use that as a bargaining chip. Serb areas in the Balkans to Serbia Alb areas to Alb only then.
The remaining monastaries should be protected by agreement then with further dialogue.
"Touching on the subject of Kosovo's borders, Sletzinger said the U.S. and its NATO allies "continue to take the completely unhelpful and unrealistic position" that the borders of Kosovo cannot be changed because of the precedent that would hold for other countries."
Probably the most intelligent observation I have seen come out of the west in a long time....
The problem with most of these so-called experts is that they really don't have a clue. Serbia can quite easily join the EU without recognising Kosovo, however, if it was ever a condition Serbia simply will not join. I'm sure many, many Serbians will be quite happy with that situation. What benefits does the EU offer us that we don't already have?
(Zoran, 29 July 2010 11:30)
I would sooner catapault him to the forefront to replace Ahtisari's paper dribble.
http://www.b92.net/eng/news/in_focus.php?id=96&start=345&nav_id=64537&version=print
Yes, the Woodrow Wilson Center is a respected think tank and has actually assisted developing policies for the US govt.
I disagree somewhat with where you believe Sletzinger's sympathies lie, from what I understand Sletzinger realised that US foreign policy from Clinton to Bush lost it's way and was without balance or a historical perspective. The fears of this opinion are reflected, when observing negative impressions for the US increasing from traditional allies and the world in general. The world has seen the US clearly take a bias and exclude opposing opinions and facts in relation to it's foreign policy and conflict resolution. Coupled with the corruptability of some of it's officials and lobby groups to sway leadership so the US military to do it's bidding and we begin to understand why a majority perceive the US to be hypocritical and disingenuous. Changing that, I believe is where his sympathy and motivation lies, perhaps when gaining an unfiltered understanding of the Kosovo conflict in his studies, receiving all the facts he has developed a sympathy for the Serbian arguement, particully in Kosovo. His works reflect far from being labelled as a well known pro Serb expert, as opposed too and more correctly, an expert armed with detailed knowledge of the Kosovo situation. I really don't see where you think he is pro Serb or wishes certain things for Serbs. I repeat Sletzinger brought the Serb veiw to the Kosovo debate in US academic circles because it has been an absent piece in the puzzle for the US to understand this issue.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.) So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
"Serbia has not grown weaker since 1999, but stronger. Once it has paid off the last tranch of Kosovo debt to the IMF, it will no longer be subsidizing the kosovo albanians, that thankless task being taken over by the EU for the foreseeable future. "
Kosovo took over its share of the IMF debt when it became a member.
"Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this, "
Nobody said he was a well-known "paid lobbyist" - he is the director of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a respected Washington think-tank. His sympathies obviously lie with the Serbs, and there's no reason they shouldn't. It's almost impossible in politics to be entirely disinterested, so it helps to be aware of where a speaker on a subject is coming from. For example, if Mr. Sletzinger had been defending the Albanian position all along, then his saying the "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" would hardly be news, and certainly wouldn't be reported by B92. The fact that he wishes Serbia well and undoubtedly wishes facts were different is the reason this is news, a warning to his Serbian friends that he believes things do not look well for them, that they should not get their hopes up. It's hardly an ad hominem attack. Serbs should feel relieved that there are people in responsible positions in the U.S. who view the Serb position sympathetically, based on their personal history and life experience.
What's interesting about this opinion is not its content, but who expressed it - Martin Sletzinger is a well-known pro-Serb "U.S. expert for the Balkans." Although I don't see that he's written any books, he has interviews and comments given before Congress that are on the internet, their are reports of his speaking to Serbian-American groups, appearing on panels. He's the type who used to, at least, worry about plans for a "Greater Albania." (I seem to remember he was born in the Vojvodina, but I can't verify it - it would explain a lot.)
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Part of understanding the entire situation is to get the other side of the story, in this case sitting with Serbs and attaining imformation, not just taking one sides word as gospel as the US has done till now with Albanians.
Can you offer a link or "verify" without that failing recollection aka Clinton syndrome, relating to the claim Sletzinger is a "well known" paid lobbyist by Serbs or am I to think the "interesting" part to your post is this,
Heres a little example of why you shouldn't throw rocks in your glasshouse.
http://balkanblog.org/2007/11/03/1563/
--------------------------
So his saying that "Serbia can't keep Kosovo" is significant. As is Dodik's - who seems to be saying he supports Serbia, but can't wait to be able to use the argument of Kosovo's successful secession for his own purposes.
(Amer, 30 July 2010 16:10)
Your trying to mis-interpret what he is trying to say, what he said was Serbia cannot keep Kosovo and get in Eu, probably due to the fact that the EU does not want a replication of the Cyprus situation in with Serbia. Dodik, yes he is waiting for this precident.
Can explain in a concise manner, what makes Kosovo's "declaration" such a unique case?
(Matmud, 31 July 2010 23:11)
The ICJ said that, I quote, “the declaration of independence of Kosovo adopted on 17 February 2008 did not violate international law” (see par. 123 of the Opinion).
So it is about the declaration of independence of a specific entity (Kosovo) declared on a specific date (17/2/2008).
If the ICJ had decided that "declarations of independence do not violate international law", than Kosovo's case was no longer specific.
IMAGE SOURCE
34 Komentari
Sortiraj po: