UN offers to organize talks

This should be the shortest talks in the history of the Balkans!
The KLA government in Pristina will say "Serbs get out of our Kosovo" and good old fighting man Tadic will say - "No! Never..... Oh, alright then!"
Next time this happens, as it will happen again with Raska, Tadic and co should at least make it look like they are fighting for the existence of our lands instead of looking in the other direction to see if the EU door has opened yet!
My poor poor Serbia! What has she done to deserve this useless government?
Slobodan

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?
(Zoran, 11 September 2010 13:01)

There is no need to sell anything to people in Kosova/o, since everybody can read and understand what is written in EU resolution, that was approved by all UN members. I think some people need to go back and re-read it and study it to the fullest. Reality is that; Serbia de facto and de jure recognized Kosova/o as a sovereign state.
So much for the honesty of Serb politicians.

Serious talks will be only if Serbia recognises Kosovo independence. That will happen after when the majority of the UN countries have recognise Kosovo independence. Serbs might think that will never happen but let's wait and see!

I think getting the UN involved is a good move that should help Serbia as we have much stronger backing there than within the EU. I doubt status will ever be fully resolved (Kosovo will remain more than autonomous, less than independent) and so-called technical talks is a good start but I can't see how it won't include elements of status.

The sooner we come to an agreement the better for all. Serbia cannot recognise Kosovo so in that case neither will a strong part of the world.

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?

@Zoran

I'm not sure if you want to spin it or you just don't get it? There is nothing from the institutions in Prishtina to sell the always said they are ready to talk about anything but not the status because that's already solved and they achieved that with this new resolution, there is no mention of status plus the ICJ opinion is respected in this new resolution, what else do you want.

Why should anyone mediated technical discussions? If Serbia is wanting to prove to the union that it is willing to reconcile with its past for the sake of the future it should sit down with Pristina (shuttle diplomacy) and take care of its own problems

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?
(Zoran, 11 September 2010 13:01)

There is nothing to "sell". The UN voting was an Albanian victory which has been clearly stated on various media outlets all around the world. Moreover, it has been mention in numerous occasions that Pristina wants talks, but not those which Serbia was implying in its previous Resolution which was eventually never addressed at the UNGA but the one from the last Thursday. Technical talks were and are the aim of all which Pristina wanted and, finally, those technical talks have been announced. If the UN wants to be the mediator of technical talks, then so be it. No problems for the Albanian side.

If the Albanian temp inst enter negotiations without a UN majority, then all the ICJ-Resolution wars will be meaningless 'victories' for them that just strung them along into negotiations they've been avoiding since the first round of talks failed and all this turns into a lost race against time for them to get legitimacy before KFOR leaves.

The word "Status' has been removed for ever. Even UN does not mention that word, including Vuk in front of UNGA, the other day. Prishtina and Belgrade can talk as two good neighbors on equal footing.

@Aleks

if serbs still insist on that fantansy.

then follow it to the letter, we have the serb side per UN1244, the Kosovo side per UN1244.

who gets to represent the Yugoslav govt. as that is where kosovo kosovos position would have been negotiated per UN1244


that's what i thought. Do join the rest of us in reality.

"There is nothing from the institutions in Prishtina to sell the always said they are ready to talk about anything but not the status because that's already solved and they achieved that with this new resolution, there is no mention of status plus the ICJ opinion is respected in this new resolution, what else do you want."
(Mendo, 11 September 2010 18:36)

You said it, there's NO MENTION of status in the UN resolution. So how can some people interpret is as "the status is solved"? What a strange conclusion. Same goes for the ICJ opinion, there's NO MENTION about the legality of Kosovo as a state. And maybe keep in mind that there's a UN1244 which is still in force.

But everyone who can read knows that the ICJ and the new UN resolution simply AVOID to name the problems and to give a clear statement, everything is played down to a minimal consensus, so both sides can interpret it like they want to and celebrate their "victory".

Keep dreaming EA (Ethnic Albanian). Serbia will never recognize an independent Albanian Kosovo, maybe an Autonomous KiM, but never an independent entity ruled by Albanians. The separatist Albanians will not get their world recognition, so NO UN SEAT. Swallow it slowly, an independent Albanian Kosovo will NEVER HAPPEN without UN approval. The freedom loving countries of the world will not have it, regardless of the EU/US games, they see right through that. They made Serbia buckle, because of its EU drive, but the world hates what the so-called powers do - muscle their will upon the world. This MUST STOP!

" I think some people need to go back and re-read it and study it to the fullest. Reality is that; Serbia de facto and de jure recognized Kosova/o as a sovereign state.
So much for the honesty of Serb politicians.
(Kosova-USA, 11 September 2010 19:15) "

I read and re-read this resolution -- which is non-binding by the way -- and I just could not find anything about recognizing "Kosova". Was there some invisible ink in the resolution that can be seen only by the Albanians?

Aleks - don't know much about this stuff, do you. UN Secretaries-General have been organising talks between Greek and Turkish Cypriots for almost 50 years, even after the TRNC declared independence. The UN is there to foster international peace and security and promote dialogue between conflicting 'parties' - a term that not only refers to states (this was the word used in the GA resolution). This does not constitute any sort of recognition, contrary to what you and various KA posters here seem to believe.

@ Top

Ok Mr, then we wait and see if there is going to be status talk.

Keep dreaming EA (Ethnic Albanian). Serbia will never recognize an independent Albanian Kosovo, maybe an Autonomous KiM, but never an independent entity ruled by Albanians.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

That's fine for Kosovo. It appears all they care about is not to be ruled by Serbia. Whether Serbia recognizes their independence or not, that's not going to make or break anything.


The separatist Albanians will not get their world recognition, so NO UN SEAT. Swallow it slowly, an independent Albanian Kosovo will NEVER HAPPEN without UN approval.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

You have a contradiction with the first part when you say " maybe an Autonomous KiM". With that Kosovo will not get a UN seat anyway and will also give up the current 70 recognitions. So Kosovo, is much better now than what you suggest. So, I'm not sure why the Serbian side always mentions this thing about the "UN seat" since that does not have any leverage on Kosovo and the facts show that. To summarize again:

(a) Kosovo now (70 recognitions of independence and no UN seat)

(b) Autonomous KiM (no recognitions of independence and no UN seat)

Not sure if any sane mind would choose (b).


The freedom loving countries of the world will not have it, regardless of the EU/US games, they see right through that. They made Serbia buckle, because of its EU drive, but the world hates what the so-called powers do - muscle their will upon the world. This MUST STOP!
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

Freedom loving countries like Venezuela and Iran ?!

Venezuela's Ambassador and the UNGA was so ridiculous on Thursday when it appeared he was reading a statement from two years ago. He spent many minutes saying how Kosovo's declaration of independence violated 1244, obviously not aware that the ICJ had already made the interpretation to the contrary on that point and even Serbia does not say that anymore.

Ban noted the “importance of dialogue between the two sides as a method of achieving peace, security and stability”
-
Two sides, NOT two countries.

UN offers to organize talks.

'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244. Or has Serbia 'recognized' it whilst I was asleep? Tut tut mr moon (and sloppy thinking), if the UN stops dotting the i's and crossing the t's then it becomes even less relevant than it is today! Then again, it is amazing what UNSG will do for a second term (Boutros darling, I mean you).

Go to the CNN International site yourself, look at the stories concerning Kosovo, and you will see that many Albanian analysts are weary of the Serbian/EU UN resolution. They are now a team.

There is a need for preliminary talks to determine what the talks should involve. There seems to be alot of misunderstanding and little clarity made worse by the joint EU/Serbian resolution.

What the talks will be concentrated on will be Serbia's earlier offer that being, if Kosovo wants independence they must offer it to the Serb areas of KiM with quite possibly adjacent ethnic Albanian areas in Serbia thrown in the mix. The ball has been thrown in the Alb court now and they must show they are genuine. Should this process be adopted, it can easily lead to peace and be applied to alot of areas, ie Azeri-Armenian, Bosniak-Serb- Croat etc. Areas in the world which are plagued with historic ethnic rivalries which re-occur time and time again need to be dealt with in this fashion, every system put in place has failed leaving the only viable solution is to place each ethnic group under it's own umbrella, even if it means a monumental sacrifice from this generation in terms of organised and fair land swaps.

Jim,

You don't read very carefully, do you?

requote:

"'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244."

There already is an mechanism via UNMIK though not of course on 'status'. The UN is already involved. What does Ban bring but some presteige to himself?

Jim,

Wake up.

requote:

"'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244."

No one

There already is an mechanism via UNMIK (the 'UN') though not of course on 'status'. Ban is therefore useless and brings nothing unless it is to undermine UNMIK further than it is already.

AdamNYC dear boy,

If I understand you correctly, your point is that 'serbs' are not 'yugoslavs' as set out in UNSCR 1244?

If this is your point, then I will have to disappoint you. Under UN statutes (rules), the remaining part of a country that splits up automatically inherits the UN member seat of the country. Really, this is true. You can even check it yourself.

AdamNYC dear boy,

If I understand you correctly, your point is that 'serbs' are not 'yugoslavs' as set out in UNSCR 1244?

If this is your point, then I will have to disappoint you. Under UN statutes (rules), the remaining part of a country that splits up automatically inherits the UN member seat of the country. Really, this is true. You can even check it yourself.
(Aleks, 13 September 2010 16:32)
However, in the case of Yugoslavia, it was rejected that the Serbia Montenegro federation was the successor to the original Socialist Federal Yugoslavia and had to reapply for mission to the UN in 2000 as the FRY, later to become Serbia Montenego and then Serbia retained that seat (created in 2000) as Montenegro applied for their own seat.

http://www.un.org/en/members/index.shtml

Hmm. Does the puppet Moon mean the UN is actually going to do something or does he mean that he is going ignore his responsibility, while those created this mess (NATO et. al.) "sets up" meetings, like they did for the Thaci supporter-Ahtissari? There is however, plenty to talk about (minority security, refugee returns, equity in energy policy, etc., etc.) However, Ban has never shown any interest, except when America tells him that he is interested.

Go to the CNN International site yourself, look at the stories concerning Kosovo, and you will see that many Albanian analysts are weary of the Serbian/EU UN resolution. They are now a team.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:59
Of course they are a team, that is why country after country in the EU says that status talks are not an option. I just don't think they are playing in the game you want.

PSS,

Yes, thanks for correcting my error. Somehow it slipped my mind though the FRY did claimas successor the SFRY's seat which was blocked by the GA on recommendation of the UNSC (as per UNGAR A/RES/47/1).

Still, my point holds that Serbia is still relevant to UNSCR 1244 regardless of the text being FRY/Yugoslavia or whatever.

I think getting the UN involved is a good move that should help Serbia as we have much stronger backing there than within the EU. I doubt status will ever be fully resolved (Kosovo will remain more than autonomous, less than independent) and so-called technical talks is a good start but I can't see how it won't include elements of status.

The sooner we come to an agreement the better for all. Serbia cannot recognise Kosovo so in that case neither will a strong part of the world.

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?

This should be the shortest talks in the history of the Balkans!
The KLA government in Pristina will say "Serbs get out of our Kosovo" and good old fighting man Tadic will say - "No! Never..... Oh, alright then!"
Next time this happens, as it will happen again with Raska, Tadic and co should at least make it look like they are fighting for the existence of our lands instead of looking in the other direction to see if the EU door has opened yet!
My poor poor Serbia! What has she done to deserve this useless government?
Slobodan

If the Albanian temp inst enter negotiations without a UN majority, then all the ICJ-Resolution wars will be meaningless 'victories' for them that just strung them along into negotiations they've been avoiding since the first round of talks failed and all this turns into a lost race against time for them to get legitimacy before KFOR leaves.

UN offers to organize talks.

'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244. Or has Serbia 'recognized' it whilst I was asleep? Tut tut mr moon (and sloppy thinking), if the UN stops dotting the i's and crossing the t's then it becomes even less relevant than it is today! Then again, it is amazing what UNSG will do for a second term (Boutros darling, I mean you).

Keep dreaming EA (Ethnic Albanian). Serbia will never recognize an independent Albanian Kosovo, maybe an Autonomous KiM, but never an independent entity ruled by Albanians. The separatist Albanians will not get their world recognition, so NO UN SEAT. Swallow it slowly, an independent Albanian Kosovo will NEVER HAPPEN without UN approval. The freedom loving countries of the world will not have it, regardless of the EU/US games, they see right through that. They made Serbia buckle, because of its EU drive, but the world hates what the so-called powers do - muscle their will upon the world. This MUST STOP!

Serious talks will be only if Serbia recognises Kosovo independence. That will happen after when the majority of the UN countries have recognise Kosovo independence. Serbs might think that will never happen but let's wait and see!

" I think some people need to go back and re-read it and study it to the fullest. Reality is that; Serbia de facto and de jure recognized Kosova/o as a sovereign state.
So much for the honesty of Serb politicians.
(Kosova-USA, 11 September 2010 19:15) "

I read and re-read this resolution -- which is non-binding by the way -- and I just could not find anything about recognizing "Kosova". Was there some invisible ink in the resolution that can be seen only by the Albanians?

Hmm. Does the puppet Moon mean the UN is actually going to do something or does he mean that he is going ignore his responsibility, while those created this mess (NATO et. al.) "sets up" meetings, like they did for the Thaci supporter-Ahtissari? There is however, plenty to talk about (minority security, refugee returns, equity in energy policy, etc., etc.) However, Ban has never shown any interest, except when America tells him that he is interested.

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?
(Zoran, 11 September 2010 13:01)

There is no need to sell anything to people in Kosova/o, since everybody can read and understand what is written in EU resolution, that was approved by all UN members. I think some people need to go back and re-read it and study it to the fullest. Reality is that; Serbia de facto and de jure recognized Kosova/o as a sovereign state.
So much for the honesty of Serb politicians.

Go to the CNN International site yourself, look at the stories concerning Kosovo, and you will see that many Albanian analysts are weary of the Serbian/EU UN resolution. They are now a team.

"There is nothing from the institutions in Prishtina to sell the always said they are ready to talk about anything but not the status because that's already solved and they achieved that with this new resolution, there is no mention of status plus the ICJ opinion is respected in this new resolution, what else do you want."
(Mendo, 11 September 2010 18:36)

You said it, there's NO MENTION of status in the UN resolution. So how can some people interpret is as "the status is solved"? What a strange conclusion. Same goes for the ICJ opinion, there's NO MENTION about the legality of Kosovo as a state. And maybe keep in mind that there's a UN1244 which is still in force.

But everyone who can read knows that the ICJ and the new UN resolution simply AVOID to name the problems and to give a clear statement, everything is played down to a minimal consensus, so both sides can interpret it like they want to and celebrate their "victory".

Ban noted the “importance of dialogue between the two sides as a method of achieving peace, security and stability”
-
Two sides, NOT two countries.

There is a need for preliminary talks to determine what the talks should involve. There seems to be alot of misunderstanding and little clarity made worse by the joint EU/Serbian resolution.

The word "Status' has been removed for ever. Even UN does not mention that word, including Vuk in front of UNGA, the other day. Prishtina and Belgrade can talk as two good neighbors on equal footing.

Why should anyone mediated technical discussions? If Serbia is wanting to prove to the union that it is willing to reconcile with its past for the sake of the future it should sit down with Pristina (shuttle diplomacy) and take care of its own problems

Negotiations were always inevitable. I wonder how those in Pristina are going to sell this to their people?
(Zoran, 11 September 2010 13:01)

There is nothing to "sell". The UN voting was an Albanian victory which has been clearly stated on various media outlets all around the world. Moreover, it has been mention in numerous occasions that Pristina wants talks, but not those which Serbia was implying in its previous Resolution which was eventually never addressed at the UNGA but the one from the last Thursday. Technical talks were and are the aim of all which Pristina wanted and, finally, those technical talks have been announced. If the UN wants to be the mediator of technical talks, then so be it. No problems for the Albanian side.

@Zoran

I'm not sure if you want to spin it or you just don't get it? There is nothing from the institutions in Prishtina to sell the always said they are ready to talk about anything but not the status because that's already solved and they achieved that with this new resolution, there is no mention of status plus the ICJ opinion is respected in this new resolution, what else do you want.

@Aleks

if serbs still insist on that fantansy.

then follow it to the letter, we have the serb side per UN1244, the Kosovo side per UN1244.

who gets to represent the Yugoslav govt. as that is where kosovo kosovos position would have been negotiated per UN1244


that's what i thought. Do join the rest of us in reality.

Aleks - don't know much about this stuff, do you. UN Secretaries-General have been organising talks between Greek and Turkish Cypriots for almost 50 years, even after the TRNC declared independence. The UN is there to foster international peace and security and promote dialogue between conflicting 'parties' - a term that not only refers to states (this was the word used in the GA resolution). This does not constitute any sort of recognition, contrary to what you and various KA posters here seem to believe.

Keep dreaming EA (Ethnic Albanian). Serbia will never recognize an independent Albanian Kosovo, maybe an Autonomous KiM, but never an independent entity ruled by Albanians.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

That's fine for Kosovo. It appears all they care about is not to be ruled by Serbia. Whether Serbia recognizes their independence or not, that's not going to make or break anything.


The separatist Albanians will not get their world recognition, so NO UN SEAT. Swallow it slowly, an independent Albanian Kosovo will NEVER HAPPEN without UN approval.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

You have a contradiction with the first part when you say " maybe an Autonomous KiM". With that Kosovo will not get a UN seat anyway and will also give up the current 70 recognitions. So Kosovo, is much better now than what you suggest. So, I'm not sure why the Serbian side always mentions this thing about the "UN seat" since that does not have any leverage on Kosovo and the facts show that. To summarize again:

(a) Kosovo now (70 recognitions of independence and no UN seat)

(b) Autonomous KiM (no recognitions of independence and no UN seat)

Not sure if any sane mind would choose (b).


The freedom loving countries of the world will not have it, regardless of the EU/US games, they see right through that. They made Serbia buckle, because of its EU drive, but the world hates what the so-called powers do - muscle their will upon the world. This MUST STOP!
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:47)

Freedom loving countries like Venezuela and Iran ?!

Venezuela's Ambassador and the UNGA was so ridiculous on Thursday when it appeared he was reading a statement from two years ago. He spent many minutes saying how Kosovo's declaration of independence violated 1244, obviously not aware that the ICJ had already made the interpretation to the contrary on that point and even Serbia does not say that anymore.

What the talks will be concentrated on will be Serbia's earlier offer that being, if Kosovo wants independence they must offer it to the Serb areas of KiM with quite possibly adjacent ethnic Albanian areas in Serbia thrown in the mix. The ball has been thrown in the Alb court now and they must show they are genuine. Should this process be adopted, it can easily lead to peace and be applied to alot of areas, ie Azeri-Armenian, Bosniak-Serb- Croat etc. Areas in the world which are plagued with historic ethnic rivalries which re-occur time and time again need to be dealt with in this fashion, every system put in place has failed leaving the only viable solution is to place each ethnic group under it's own umbrella, even if it means a monumental sacrifice from this generation in terms of organised and fair land swaps.

Jim,

You don't read very carefully, do you?

requote:

"'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244."

There already is an mechanism via UNMIK though not of course on 'status'. The UN is already involved. What does Ban bring but some presteige to himself?

Jim,

Wake up.

requote:

"'Kosova' is not a UN member so no direct talks outside the framework of UNSCR 1244."

No one

There already is an mechanism via UNMIK (the 'UN') though not of course on 'status'. Ban is therefore useless and brings nothing unless it is to undermine UNMIK further than it is already.

AdamNYC dear boy,

If I understand you correctly, your point is that 'serbs' are not 'yugoslavs' as set out in UNSCR 1244?

If this is your point, then I will have to disappoint you. Under UN statutes (rules), the remaining part of a country that splits up automatically inherits the UN member seat of the country. Really, this is true. You can even check it yourself.

AdamNYC dear boy,

If I understand you correctly, your point is that 'serbs' are not 'yugoslavs' as set out in UNSCR 1244?

If this is your point, then I will have to disappoint you. Under UN statutes (rules), the remaining part of a country that splits up automatically inherits the UN member seat of the country. Really, this is true. You can even check it yourself.
(Aleks, 13 September 2010 16:32)
However, in the case of Yugoslavia, it was rejected that the Serbia Montenegro federation was the successor to the original Socialist Federal Yugoslavia and had to reapply for mission to the UN in 2000 as the FRY, later to become Serbia Montenego and then Serbia retained that seat (created in 2000) as Montenegro applied for their own seat.

http://www.un.org/en/members/index.shtml

@ Top

Ok Mr, then we wait and see if there is going to be status talk.

PSS,

Yes, thanks for correcting my error. Somehow it slipped my mind though the FRY did claimas successor the SFRY's seat which was blocked by the GA on recommendation of the UNSC (as per UNGAR A/RES/47/1).

Still, my point holds that Serbia is still relevant to UNSCR 1244 regardless of the text being FRY/Yugoslavia or whatever.

Go to the CNN International site yourself, look at the stories concerning Kosovo, and you will see that many Albanian analysts are weary of the Serbian/EU UN resolution. They are now a team.
(UNobserver, 12 September 2010 03:59
Of course they are a team, that is why country after country in the EU says that status talks are not an option. I just don't think they are playing in the game you want.