K. Albanians expect pause in dialogue

"At present, the differences are conceptual, as the Serbian side still insists on UN Security Council Resolution 1244, while we believe the resolution belongs to the past ..."

She might believe that, but the fact is: UN1244 is still in force, and it's validity cannot be annulled by someone who thinks 'it belongs to the past', but only by the UN/UNSC.

"we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."


Funny how albanians always use this phrase for their own purposes. In that case the "reality on the ground" also suggests that serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo. Why is one reality less important then an other?

She might believe that, but the fact is: UN1244 is still in force, and it's validity cannot be annulled by someone who thinks 'it belongs to the past', but only by the UN/UNSC.
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 13:49)

I fully agree... that's why Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244.

Wow. Does actually anybody cares about UN resolutions?

I fully agree... that's why Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244.
(icj1, 29 December 2011 18:33)

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you? So, a valid representation is UNMIK/Kosovo (like it is used for CEFTA), for example, and not 'Republic of Kosovo' or another self invented fantasy name.

" we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."

Too bad Pristina is too stupid to see the north not integrating with the rest of "Kosova" as "reality on the ground".

"As regards other topics, such as energy and telecommunications, Tahiri said the Kosovo side was very creative when it came to solutions offered, blaming Belgrade for not showing enough interest in the topics."

I'm curious to know what "creative" means other than rejecting any compromise and hiding behind US and German politicians. This woman is really silly :)

"At present, the differences are conceptual, as the Serbian side still insists on UN Security Council Resolution 1244, while we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."


hahhahaha This resolution cannot be altered by no one except Serbia and the UNSC. Serbia will stick to this resolution because both the Serbian constitution and the 1244 guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity and sovereighty over Kosovo province.

What reality on the ground Mrs. Tahiri?? This reality was created by your WESTERN masters and the Serbian people rejects it.

Election?? yes! The Serbian people will replace those traitors and will elect Nationalists.

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you?
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 21:23)

I did not say whether the UDI does imply or does not imply statehood - where did you see that ?. In addition, it's irrelevant.

All I said is that Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244. Great that you agree with that, too.

Funny how albanians always use this phrase for their own purposes. In that case the "reality on the ground" also suggests that serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo. Why is one reality less important then an other?
(MikeC, 29 December 2011 19:02)

All are equally important, but the reality of "serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo" does not exist. Serbs have never said they don't want to be part of Kosovo - like, for example, the Albanians said when they voted for independence from Serbia.

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you? So, a valid representation is UNMIK/Kosovo (like it is used for CEFTA), for example, and not 'Republic of Kosovo' or another self invented fantasy name.
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 21:23)

ICJ did not mention any statehood as statehood is not something that ICJ determines. It sovereign right of each country to recognize or not recognize the newly established country. So far Kosovo is recognized by 85 countries of the world. None of those verbal notes states name other than Kosovo.

hahhahaha This resolution cannot be altered by no one except Serbia and the UNSC. Serbia will stick to this resolution because both the Serbian constitution and the 1244 guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity and sovereighty over Kosovo province.
(PRO-SERBIA, 30 December 2011 11:53)

A correction dear... Even though Serbia might think that it is the center of the universe, it still is not a member of the UNSC so it has no saying of what happens with Resolution 1244 and, even if it did, China, France, Russia, UK or US can veto it.

In addition, Kosovo's UDI is in accordance with Resolution 1244 so all Kosovo is insisting on is to be represented in accordance with its UDI and, hence, in accordance with 1244. I don't think anybody should have an issue with that.

"At present, the differences are conceptual, as the Serbian side still insists on UN Security Council Resolution 1244, while we believe the resolution belongs to the past ..."

She might believe that, but the fact is: UN1244 is still in force, and it's validity cannot be annulled by someone who thinks 'it belongs to the past', but only by the UN/UNSC.

"we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."


Funny how albanians always use this phrase for their own purposes. In that case the "reality on the ground" also suggests that serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo. Why is one reality less important then an other?

She might believe that, but the fact is: UN1244 is still in force, and it's validity cannot be annulled by someone who thinks 'it belongs to the past', but only by the UN/UNSC.
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 13:49)

I fully agree... that's why Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244.

I fully agree... that's why Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244.
(icj1, 29 December 2011 18:33)

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you? So, a valid representation is UNMIK/Kosovo (like it is used for CEFTA), for example, and not 'Republic of Kosovo' or another self invented fantasy name.

Wow. Does actually anybody cares about UN resolutions?

Funny how albanians always use this phrase for their own purposes. In that case the "reality on the ground" also suggests that serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo. Why is one reality less important then an other?
(MikeC, 29 December 2011 19:02)

All are equally important, but the reality of "serbs in the north don't want to belong to an independent Kosovo" does not exist. Serbs have never said they don't want to be part of Kosovo - like, for example, the Albanians said when they voted for independence from Serbia.

" we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."

Too bad Pristina is too stupid to see the north not integrating with the rest of "Kosova" as "reality on the ground".

"As regards other topics, such as energy and telecommunications, Tahiri said the Kosovo side was very creative when it came to solutions offered, blaming Belgrade for not showing enough interest in the topics."

I'm curious to know what "creative" means other than rejecting any compromise and hiding behind US and German politicians. This woman is really silly :)

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you?
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 21:23)

I did not say whether the UDI does imply or does not imply statehood - where did you see that ?. In addition, it's irrelevant.

All I said is that Kosovo should be represented in accordance with its UDI which is in accordance with Resolution 1244. Great that you agree with that, too.

"At present, the differences are conceptual, as the Serbian side still insists on UN Security Council Resolution 1244, while we believe the resolution belongs to the past and does not reflect the reality on the ground."


hahhahaha This resolution cannot be altered by no one except Serbia and the UNSC. Serbia will stick to this resolution because both the Serbian constitution and the 1244 guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity and sovereighty over Kosovo province.

What reality on the ground Mrs. Tahiri?? This reality was created by your WESTERN masters and the Serbian people rejects it.

Election?? yes! The Serbian people will replace those traitors and will elect Nationalists.

Great that you agree! But as someone who's called 'icj1', you should know that the UDI doesn't imply any statehood (ICJ said it like that), don't you? So, a valid representation is UNMIK/Kosovo (like it is used for CEFTA), for example, and not 'Republic of Kosovo' or another self invented fantasy name.
(Comm. Parrisson, 29 December 2011 21:23)

ICJ did not mention any statehood as statehood is not something that ICJ determines. It sovereign right of each country to recognize or not recognize the newly established country. So far Kosovo is recognized by 85 countries of the world. None of those verbal notes states name other than Kosovo.

hahhahaha This resolution cannot be altered by no one except Serbia and the UNSC. Serbia will stick to this resolution because both the Serbian constitution and the 1244 guarantees Serbia's territorial integrity and sovereighty over Kosovo province.
(PRO-SERBIA, 30 December 2011 11:53)

A correction dear... Even though Serbia might think that it is the center of the universe, it still is not a member of the UNSC so it has no saying of what happens with Resolution 1244 and, even if it did, China, France, Russia, UK or US can veto it.

In addition, Kosovo's UDI is in accordance with Resolution 1244 so all Kosovo is insisting on is to be represented in accordance with its UDI and, hence, in accordance with 1244. I don't think anybody should have an issue with that.