Serbia just signed a documment to let Ksova Police to run Northern part of Kosova as soon as the elections in Serbia are over.Dont you see the situation is going in the same tracks Knin went.Who wants to stay will stay and who dont will leave.Dardania will be part of Albania sooner than you think.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
Unfortunately, you don’t determine what is the law; otherwise the world would be such a better place – what a shame that you are not the universal legislator Yet Another J S :)
----------
1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
(Steve, 24 February 2012 14:08)
“those laws can be put into question in an international court” ?! That’s a weird sentence… Those laws are in accordance with Kosovo’s constitution, which is in accordance with Kosovo’s UDI, which is in accordance with 1244 and international law. And this footnote confirms all of that; just in case somebody forgets that 1244 is still in force (and Kosovo’s UDI in accordance with it).
----------
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
(Analyst, 24 February 2012 15:20)
You are fully correct dear, but still it is not good for Serbia to exclude itself from regional meetings, so an agreement had to be found to enable Serbia to participate.
----------
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
Yes Comm. Parrison, we know already that you like things which are false :) like the statement above. The court never declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence”. I don't even had to read the ICJ opinion to tell you that because that quote contains an error of law that experienced jurists like the ICJ judges could never make.
----------
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 20:22)
Thanks for the text analysis about the footnote to the footnote of Kosovo’s name LOL; that does not change the fact that if Vuk wants to visit Kosovo has to get a visa :) If all Serbia is looking for is words, just say so – nobody will have a problem with that (except extremists) as long as Serbia does not ask for Vuk to go to Kosovo without permission from Kosovo.
----------
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:46)
Yes dear, it is basic law that if you do X in accordance with the law, the results of X are also in accordance with the law. You don’t have to spend a fortune and several years of your life in law school to understand that LOL.
----------
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 21:05)
Of course it does not make you independent dear, because you and your friends can declare all you want, but at the end of the day you have to do what the police says at the state where you live. But Serbian police has no longer a say in Kosovo - in case you’ve not heard the news from the last 13 years :). Kosovo was independent from Serbia long before the UDI (even Serbia agrees to that when it says that UNMIK is in charge and not Serbia). The UDI was a formality. Kosovo Albanians care about practicalities first, then about formalities; for Serbia it appears the order of priorities is reversed LOL.
"Kosovo is to be represented at regional forums under the title Kosovo accompanied by the footnote citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's declaration"
Makes sense, since 1244 is still in force and, as the ICJ said, Kosovo's UDI is in accordance with 1244.
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
No. Kosovo* is to be represented as a disputed territory that according to UNSCR 1244 is a part of Serbia and according to the ICJ did not do anything illegal when it unilaterally declared independence.
* This label [ie "Kosovo"] does not prejudge the status of Kosovo and is in accordance with Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the ICJ on Kosovo's declaration of independence.
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
[link]'s_declaration_of_independence
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
:) So the UN General assembly seems to be strange institution where funny requests are formulated based on compromise.
Right now both Serbian and Albanian societies are a mess and Serbia has a lot of problems and as bad as it is..Albanian controlled Kosovo has even more.
Its going to be a race of who can modernize first and which group of people can pull them selves out of such a steep hole first. For some reason, I think Serbs have at least more oppurtunities to pull themselves out than the Albs.
Instead of focusing on your joke of an economy and putting people to work, you spend millions of money that was given to you on buying recognition's (which will ultimately do nothing for you) and sending this whale to Brussels to talk to a yellow quasi Serb. Until you can build a good society, Kosovo is not independent.
Montenegrins are starting to ask Djukanovic where all the money is going too and why are certain actions carried out. I suggest the Albs to do the same, but you wont. You will stick by Thaci and the KLA till the very end, until Project 2nd Albanian State's very end.
I don't understand why Serbian officials had refused mention of UDI before, but agreed to it later.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:48)
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
"Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. "
(a New Day, 24 February 2012 19:37)
You mean 'the West' without Spain and Greece? Or are they part of the South? Whatever, one thing is clear: The world and UN is not only 'the west', and it takes some more to become a full-fledged state and UN member than to unilaterally declare independence.
uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
there is nothing to indicate that the ruling would be different. It may have been the courts intention that it would have been more constructive to ask an intelligent question if you really wanted a definitive answer. Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. Serbia had its chance, it is highly unlikely the UNGA would vote to pose a second question on the subject.
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 17:02)
In case some people don't know it: The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
One does not have to go too deep about this agreement. Just tweo things should be kept in mind:
1. Have public positions of the two countries changed toward each other because of this agreement, no.
2. On practical side, Kosovo got all of what it wanted.
Another thing, by the time Serbia joins Europe, Belgrade will see Kosovo just as another neighboring country, same as it sees Hungary or Macedonia today. State policy will have to separate from historical myths which burden policies today.
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
Well, talks are important, but I do not like the results of these so called negotiation. These reusults were not achieved based on the free will of either country. It was forced on both, and I wonder if it will lead anywhere. Mr Burns and the EU forced Kosova to give give up it's legitimate name and part of it's identity for some meaningless promises for a European future, which right away were questioned by other some EU officicials. Serbia was forced to accept Kosova's participation in regional forums for a future promise to become an EU member, which will still take a long, long time, and Tadic knew that without a candidate status he had no chance of winning the forthcoming elections. A deeply rooted and honest compromise can only come if the underlying problems are solved, the deeply rooted rejections of the 'other one's' are overcome. This can only be achieved if at least the more current developments since the late 80's which lead to the current situation are tacked in an open way from both sides. Those wounds have to heal first, and can only be healed if both societies start realizing what they did to each other. The main part in this lies on Serbia, and it has to stop it's nationalist, has to face what was done in it's name under the Milosovic regime.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
Come on Borko. Who are you kidding.
It's as if you and the opposing team worked tirelessly for 16 hours to reach an agreement.
The agreement was reached long ago. These talks are about saving face and finding ways for the ruling parties on both sides to get relected.
That's pretty easy to see.
What was probably discussed behind closed doors was how you all were planning your next vacation.
What's important is that both sides will be represented and have a voice at important regional meetings.
I hope that they start to ditch the old way of thinking the Turks embedded in this region where if 'I'm willing to fail as long as I see you fail'.
I think that the best people to ask if this "deal" was good or not is the Northern Serbians! I have a feeling that they do NOT like any of this at all.
If the northern Serbs(because its really about them since THEY are the ones that live in Kosova instead of some politicians from Belgrade or elitist Serbs from Belgrade) do not like this agreement then you know this is a great deal for the Kosovar Albanians and Indpendent Kosova! LOL!! Its easy for Borko and Tadic to claim a victory. Ask the Northern Kosovar Serbs what they think....
Let's be fair: this is another step towards Serbia recognising Kosovo. It's simple: with all the footnotes in the world, at a table will be Serbia and distinctly, Kosovo.
I'm sorry my serb friends: your politicians just sold you for EU's money. Money for them, not for the country, offcourse.
"The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some."
(pss, 24 February 2012 14:06)
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
People relax with reactions nothing will change after this:
1) Kosovo is same as before recognized by 87 or whatever countries. Serbia is not one of them
2) They will be in European forums where 22EU countries see it as a country 5 do not.(Same as before)
3) There will be a Boundary (Border / Administrative line) controlled by both sides.
4) Both Sides will claim victory ad hence ( Tadic and Thaci will stay in power) their Main goal.
5) No Serbian Election Held in Kosovo but they will vote Electronically ( just like Peggy can from Australia) but she gets to vote 12 hours sooner as she is down under.
I wish we could create a Union with all Balkan states and we use this as our strength instead of saying I won you lost.
Have a great weekend friends stop thinking anything has changed an agreement by both sides is a good think for all.
Kosovo accompanied by the footnote “citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's Independence Declaration”. I think that people that participate are not too capable in language. I will make more concise and simple the footnote.
Republic of Kosovo*
Anyway as a part of this agreement,Serbia will not organise elections in North Kosova stressing tacnical problems.Thats mean that North Kosova is out of juridiction of Serbia since the IMB sets the border in Jarinje and not in Ibar river.
The agreement was win-win.Kosova represents itself in international organizations not through UNMIK and now can even apply for UN,NATO,EU,and Serbia is happy that 1244 was mentioned in footnote even though nothing of 1244 is appy in the ground.
Now Serbia,must take care the Vlah minority problem,and the possibly of their friend Romania veto.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some. The UN/EU are "status neutral" officially meaning they consider Kosovo neither an independent state nor a province of Serbia, and finally the 6 point plan is only meaningful to you as you seem to be the only person who mentions it anymore, as it was presented to the UNSC in a report and never acted on.
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
(ben, 24 February 2012 13:31)
Yes, the ICJ answered the question that it was asked. Nothing more, nething less. So, what would the 'right question' have been? Something like: "Is it in accordance with international law for a group of people to unilaterally split off some territory from a state with the goal to create an own one state?" And you seriously think the ICJ would have said : "Yes, of course, everyone can create on own country" Funny.
Maybe Mr. crime Minister Thaci should ask the ICJ if the state of Kosovo is legal or not. LOL
"I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap!"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
No, the UDI is legal, and about an independent Kosovo the ICJ wasn't asked for and didn't say anything about it, so it might be legal or not.
The relevant quote from the ICJ advisory opinion:
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
When you have a bad tooth you need to extract it, painful as it is. Otherwise it will infect your scull, may be even your brain. The amputation of Kosovo from the healthy body of Serbia was long delayed and now other parts of it are starting to gangrene. Romania, until recently the only neighbor ally of Serbia started posing demands for the rights of the “Romanian” minority. Needless to say that the Wallachs had a strong Serbian consciousness and never participated in the creation of the Romanian identity. The good news that Bulgaria supported Serbian EU bid remained ignored by b92. May be it is time Serbs to realize that the Albanians, the Bulgarians and the Croats were not really enemies of the Serbs.
Kosovos independence has just been contested. 1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
Probably Tadic asked German foreign minister to make Kosovo recognition a condition for EU membership, not a condition for candidate status.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 09:58)
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
you will still continua with this bsh will you???
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
You country was wise enough not to ask the "right" question about the Kosovas merit for declairing of independence also due to a very small but EXTREMELY imoportant FACT: the Milutinovic et al case where the UN court ruled that in Kosova it was ‘prepared and executed state terror against a particular population with aim to eradicate it from their homeland’.
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
It is really hard to believe anything that is written here any more. I just don't get it why K. should agree on anything that goes even slightly against it's interest for the sake of Serbia's candidate status. Unless of course Tadic has promised to recognize Kosova right after comming serbian election and for which his party needs to win elections first.
But the bs. coming out of mr. Stefanovic, on the daily basis, about how hard is his delegation trying to reach an agreement, makes me believe that he is lying out of his nose.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
"What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???"
(ben, 24 February 2012 10:31)
Violating international law by not recognizing the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo? The joke of the day!
It's more like you might accuse countries that recognized Kosovo of violating international/UN laws because they were acting against the territorial integrity of a member state (one of the basic principles of the UN)
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
of curse 1244 is agains serbian govermant to serbia cant organize voting in kosovo according to 1244 serbia can win candidat status with out kosovo borders and 1244 in my opinion its couse more harmfule to serbia then duin good the only win serbia is getting by taken over europian debt
I think it's fair that the position of both sides is respected.
Kosova and Serbia need to respect the international law and their respective constitutions.
Thus to respect the Serbia interest Prishtina needs to accept the intentional document 1244 which according to Serbia is also in line with their constitution.
Serbia needs to respect the other international document ICJ rule and also the constitutional obligation of Kosova her declaration of independence.
So both sides will respect the international law and to both sides will be respected their constitutions.
What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???
Probably Tadic asked German foreign minister to make Kosovo recognition a condition for EU membership, not a condition for candidate status.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 09:58)
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
"What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???"
(ben, 24 February 2012 10:31)
Violating international law by not recognizing the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo? The joke of the day!
It's more like you might accuse countries that recognized Kosovo of violating international/UN laws because they were acting against the territorial integrity of a member state (one of the basic principles of the UN)
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
Kosovos independence has just been contested. 1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
(ben, 24 February 2012 13:31)
Yes, the ICJ answered the question that it was asked. Nothing more, nething less. So, what would the 'right question' have been? Something like: "Is it in accordance with international law for a group of people to unilaterally split off some territory from a state with the goal to create an own one state?" And you seriously think the ICJ would have said : "Yes, of course, everyone can create on own country" Funny.
Maybe Mr. crime Minister Thaci should ask the ICJ if the state of Kosovo is legal or not. LOL
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
you will still continua with this bsh will you???
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
You country was wise enough not to ask the "right" question about the Kosovas merit for declairing of independence also due to a very small but EXTREMELY imoportant FACT: the Milutinovic et al case where the UN court ruled that in Kosova it was ‘prepared and executed state terror against a particular population with aim to eradicate it from their homeland’.
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some. The UN/EU are "status neutral" officially meaning they consider Kosovo neither an independent state nor a province of Serbia, and finally the 6 point plan is only meaningful to you as you seem to be the only person who mentions it anymore, as it was presented to the UNSC in a report and never acted on.
People relax with reactions nothing will change after this:
1) Kosovo is same as before recognized by 87 or whatever countries. Serbia is not one of them
2) They will be in European forums where 22EU countries see it as a country 5 do not.(Same as before)
3) There will be a Boundary (Border / Administrative line) controlled by both sides.
4) Both Sides will claim victory ad hence ( Tadic and Thaci will stay in power) their Main goal.
5) No Serbian Election Held in Kosovo but they will vote Electronically ( just like Peggy can from Australia) but she gets to vote 12 hours sooner as she is down under.
I wish we could create a Union with all Balkan states and we use this as our strength instead of saying I won you lost.
Have a great weekend friends stop thinking anything has changed an agreement by both sides is a good think for all.
I think it's fair that the position of both sides is respected.
Kosova and Serbia need to respect the international law and their respective constitutions.
Thus to respect the Serbia interest Prishtina needs to accept the intentional document 1244 which according to Serbia is also in line with their constitution.
Serbia needs to respect the other international document ICJ rule and also the constitutional obligation of Kosova her declaration of independence.
So both sides will respect the international law and to both sides will be respected their constitutions.
What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???
It is really hard to believe anything that is written here any more. I just don't get it why K. should agree on anything that goes even slightly against it's interest for the sake of Serbia's candidate status. Unless of course Tadic has promised to recognize Kosova right after comming serbian election and for which his party needs to win elections first.
But the bs. coming out of mr. Stefanovic, on the daily basis, about how hard is his delegation trying to reach an agreement, makes me believe that he is lying out of his nose.
Let's be fair: this is another step towards Serbia recognising Kosovo. It's simple: with all the footnotes in the world, at a table will be Serbia and distinctly, Kosovo.
I'm sorry my serb friends: your politicians just sold you for EU's money. Money for them, not for the country, offcourse.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
I think that the best people to ask if this "deal" was good or not is the Northern Serbians! I have a feeling that they do NOT like any of this at all.
If the northern Serbs(because its really about them since THEY are the ones that live in Kosova instead of some politicians from Belgrade or elitist Serbs from Belgrade) do not like this agreement then you know this is a great deal for the Kosovar Albanians and Indpendent Kosova! LOL!! Its easy for Borko and Tadic to claim a victory. Ask the Northern Kosovar Serbs what they think....
One does not have to go too deep about this agreement. Just tweo things should be kept in mind:
1. Have public positions of the two countries changed toward each other because of this agreement, no.
2. On practical side, Kosovo got all of what it wanted.
Another thing, by the time Serbia joins Europe, Belgrade will see Kosovo just as another neighboring country, same as it sees Hungary or Macedonia today. State policy will have to separate from historical myths which burden policies today.
Well, talks are important, but I do not like the results of these so called negotiation. These reusults were not achieved based on the free will of either country. It was forced on both, and I wonder if it will lead anywhere. Mr Burns and the EU forced Kosova to give give up it's legitimate name and part of it's identity for some meaningless promises for a European future, which right away were questioned by other some EU officicials. Serbia was forced to accept Kosova's participation in regional forums for a future promise to become an EU member, which will still take a long, long time, and Tadic knew that without a candidate status he had no chance of winning the forthcoming elections. A deeply rooted and honest compromise can only come if the underlying problems are solved, the deeply rooted rejections of the 'other one's' are overcome. This can only be achieved if at least the more current developments since the late 80's which lead to the current situation are tacked in an open way from both sides. Those wounds have to heal first, and can only be healed if both societies start realizing what they did to each other. The main part in this lies on Serbia, and it has to stop it's nationalist, has to face what was done in it's name under the Milosovic regime.
"I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap!"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
No, the UDI is legal, and about an independent Kosovo the ICJ wasn't asked for and didn't say anything about it, so it might be legal or not.
The relevant quote from the ICJ advisory opinion:
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
When you have a bad tooth you need to extract it, painful as it is. Otherwise it will infect your scull, may be even your brain. The amputation of Kosovo from the healthy body of Serbia was long delayed and now other parts of it are starting to gangrene. Romania, until recently the only neighbor ally of Serbia started posing demands for the rights of the “Romanian” minority. Needless to say that the Wallachs had a strong Serbian consciousness and never participated in the creation of the Romanian identity. The good news that Bulgaria supported Serbian EU bid remained ignored by b92. May be it is time Serbs to realize that the Albanians, the Bulgarians and the Croats were not really enemies of the Serbs.
Anyway as a part of this agreement,Serbia will not organise elections in North Kosova stressing tacnical problems.Thats mean that North Kosova is out of juridiction of Serbia since the IMB sets the border in Jarinje and not in Ibar river.
The agreement was win-win.Kosova represents itself in international organizations not through UNMIK and now can even apply for UN,NATO,EU,and Serbia is happy that 1244 was mentioned in footnote even though nothing of 1244 is appy in the ground.
Now Serbia,must take care the Vlah minority problem,and the possibly of their friend Romania veto.
of curse 1244 is agains serbian govermant to serbia cant organize voting in kosovo according to 1244 serbia can win candidat status with out kosovo borders and 1244 in my opinion its couse more harmfule to serbia then duin good the only win serbia is getting by taken over europian debt
Kosovo accompanied by the footnote “citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's Independence Declaration”. I think that people that participate are not too capable in language. I will make more concise and simple the footnote.
Republic of Kosovo*
"The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some."
(pss, 24 February 2012 14:06)
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
Come on Borko. Who are you kidding.
It's as if you and the opposing team worked tirelessly for 16 hours to reach an agreement.
The agreement was reached long ago. These talks are about saving face and finding ways for the ruling parties on both sides to get relected.
That's pretty easy to see.
What was probably discussed behind closed doors was how you all were planning your next vacation.
What's important is that both sides will be represented and have a voice at important regional meetings.
I hope that they start to ditch the old way of thinking the Turks embedded in this region where if 'I'm willing to fail as long as I see you fail'.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
there is nothing to indicate that the ruling would be different. It may have been the courts intention that it would have been more constructive to ask an intelligent question if you really wanted a definitive answer. Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. Serbia had its chance, it is highly unlikely the UNGA would vote to pose a second question on the subject.
Right now both Serbian and Albanian societies are a mess and Serbia has a lot of problems and as bad as it is..Albanian controlled Kosovo has even more.
Its going to be a race of who can modernize first and which group of people can pull them selves out of such a steep hole first. For some reason, I think Serbs have at least more oppurtunities to pull themselves out than the Albs.
Instead of focusing on your joke of an economy and putting people to work, you spend millions of money that was given to you on buying recognition's (which will ultimately do nothing for you) and sending this whale to Brussels to talk to a yellow quasi Serb. Until you can build a good society, Kosovo is not independent.
Montenegrins are starting to ask Djukanovic where all the money is going too and why are certain actions carried out. I suggest the Albs to do the same, but you wont. You will stick by Thaci and the KLA till the very end, until Project 2nd Albanian State's very end.
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
No. Kosovo* is to be represented as a disputed territory that according to UNSCR 1244 is a part of Serbia and according to the ICJ did not do anything illegal when it unilaterally declared independence.
* This label [ie "Kosovo"] does not prejudge the status of Kosovo and is in accordance with Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the ICJ on Kosovo's declaration of independence.
Serbia just signed a documment to let Ksova Police to run Northern part of Kosova as soon as the elections in Serbia are over.Dont you see the situation is going in the same tracks Knin went.Who wants to stay will stay and who dont will leave.Dardania will be part of Albania sooner than you think.
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 17:02)
In case some people don't know it: The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
"Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. "
(a New Day, 24 February 2012 19:37)
You mean 'the West' without Spain and Greece? Or are they part of the South? Whatever, one thing is clear: The world and UN is not only 'the west', and it takes some more to become a full-fledged state and UN member than to unilaterally declare independence.
I don't understand why Serbian officials had refused mention of UDI before, but agreed to it later.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:48)
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
[link]'s_declaration_of_independence
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
:) So the UN General assembly seems to be strange institution where funny requests are formulated based on compromise.
"Kosovo is to be represented at regional forums under the title Kosovo accompanied by the footnote citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's declaration"
Makes sense, since 1244 is still in force and, as the ICJ said, Kosovo's UDI is in accordance with 1244.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
Unfortunately, you don’t determine what is the law; otherwise the world would be such a better place – what a shame that you are not the universal legislator Yet Another J S :)
----------
1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
(Steve, 24 February 2012 14:08)
“those laws can be put into question in an international court” ?! That’s a weird sentence… Those laws are in accordance with Kosovo’s constitution, which is in accordance with Kosovo’s UDI, which is in accordance with 1244 and international law. And this footnote confirms all of that; just in case somebody forgets that 1244 is still in force (and Kosovo’s UDI in accordance with it).
----------
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
(Analyst, 24 February 2012 15:20)
You are fully correct dear, but still it is not good for Serbia to exclude itself from regional meetings, so an agreement had to be found to enable Serbia to participate.
----------
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
Yes Comm. Parrison, we know already that you like things which are false :) like the statement above. The court never declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence”. I don't even had to read the ICJ opinion to tell you that because that quote contains an error of law that experienced jurists like the ICJ judges could never make.
----------
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 20:22)
Thanks for the text analysis about the footnote to the footnote of Kosovo’s name LOL; that does not change the fact that if Vuk wants to visit Kosovo has to get a visa :) If all Serbia is looking for is words, just say so – nobody will have a problem with that (except extremists) as long as Serbia does not ask for Vuk to go to Kosovo without permission from Kosovo.
----------
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:46)
Yes dear, it is basic law that if you do X in accordance with the law, the results of X are also in accordance with the law. You don’t have to spend a fortune and several years of your life in law school to understand that LOL.
----------
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 21:05)
Of course it does not make you independent dear, because you and your friends can declare all you want, but at the end of the day you have to do what the police says at the state where you live. But Serbian police has no longer a say in Kosovo - in case you’ve not heard the news from the last 13 years :). Kosovo was independent from Serbia long before the UDI (even Serbia agrees to that when it says that UNMIK is in charge and not Serbia). The UDI was a formality. Kosovo Albanians care about practicalities first, then about formalities; for Serbia it appears the order of priorities is reversed LOL.
I think it's fair that the position of both sides is respected.
Kosova and Serbia need to respect the international law and their respective constitutions.
Thus to respect the Serbia interest Prishtina needs to accept the intentional document 1244 which according to Serbia is also in line with their constitution.
Serbia needs to respect the other international document ICJ rule and also the constitutional obligation of Kosova her declaration of independence.
So both sides will respect the international law and to both sides will be respected their constitutions.
What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
Kosovos independence has just been contested. 1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
"What EU thinks about this? Will the EU bureaucrats still pressurise Kosova for the sake of the 5 EU countries that violate the international law???"
(ben, 24 February 2012 10:31)
Violating international law by not recognizing the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo? The joke of the day!
It's more like you might accuse countries that recognized Kosovo of violating international/UN laws because they were acting against the territorial integrity of a member state (one of the basic principles of the UN)
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
of curse 1244 is agains serbian govermant to serbia cant organize voting in kosovo according to 1244 serbia can win candidat status with out kosovo borders and 1244 in my opinion its couse more harmfule to serbia then duin good the only win serbia is getting by taken over europian debt
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
you will still continua with this bsh will you???
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
You country was wise enough not to ask the "right" question about the Kosovas merit for declairing of independence also due to a very small but EXTREMELY imoportant FACT: the Milutinovic et al case where the UN court ruled that in Kosova it was ‘prepared and executed state terror against a particular population with aim to eradicate it from their homeland’.
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
It is really hard to believe anything that is written here any more. I just don't get it why K. should agree on anything that goes even slightly against it's interest for the sake of Serbia's candidate status. Unless of course Tadic has promised to recognize Kosova right after comming serbian election and for which his party needs to win elections first.
But the bs. coming out of mr. Stefanovic, on the daily basis, about how hard is his delegation trying to reach an agreement, makes me believe that he is lying out of his nose.
Kosovo accompanied by the footnote “citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's Independence Declaration”. I think that people that participate are not too capable in language. I will make more concise and simple the footnote.
Republic of Kosovo*
Let's be fair: this is another step towards Serbia recognising Kosovo. It's simple: with all the footnotes in the world, at a table will be Serbia and distinctly, Kosovo.
I'm sorry my serb friends: your politicians just sold you for EU's money. Money for them, not for the country, offcourse.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some. The UN/EU are "status neutral" officially meaning they consider Kosovo neither an independent state nor a province of Serbia, and finally the 6 point plan is only meaningful to you as you seem to be the only person who mentions it anymore, as it was presented to the UNSC in a report and never acted on.
well go and ask ICJ again the "correct" question as last time you "didn't thought of it".
Anyhow go ahead and take us to the court again now with the “right” question if you want. But in meantime please spear us of your bsh.
(ben, 24 February 2012 13:31)
Yes, the ICJ answered the question that it was asked. Nothing more, nething less. So, what would the 'right question' have been? Something like: "Is it in accordance with international law for a group of people to unilaterally split off some territory from a state with the goal to create an own one state?" And you seriously think the ICJ would have said : "Yes, of course, everyone can create on own country" Funny.
Maybe Mr. crime Minister Thaci should ask the ICJ if the state of Kosovo is legal or not. LOL
"The Opinion of the Court of Justice is nonbinding but respected by all authorities. Resolution 1244 is a resolution of the UNSC which provides for a then (1999) map for future status of Kosovo, which is considered resolved by many and not by some."
(pss, 24 February 2012 14:06)
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
Anyway as a part of this agreement,Serbia will not organise elections in North Kosova stressing tacnical problems.Thats mean that North Kosova is out of juridiction of Serbia since the IMB sets the border in Jarinje and not in Ibar river.
The agreement was win-win.Kosova represents itself in international organizations not through UNMIK and now can even apply for UN,NATO,EU,and Serbia is happy that 1244 was mentioned in footnote even though nothing of 1244 is appy in the ground.
Now Serbia,must take care the Vlah minority problem,and the possibly of their friend Romania veto.
Probably Tadic asked German foreign minister to make Kosovo recognition a condition for EU membership, not a condition for candidate status.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 09:58)
When you have a bad tooth you need to extract it, painful as it is. Otherwise it will infect your scull, may be even your brain. The amputation of Kosovo from the healthy body of Serbia was long delayed and now other parts of it are starting to gangrene. Romania, until recently the only neighbor ally of Serbia started posing demands for the rights of the “Romanian” minority. Needless to say that the Wallachs had a strong Serbian consciousness and never participated in the creation of the Romanian identity. The good news that Bulgaria supported Serbian EU bid remained ignored by b92. May be it is time Serbs to realize that the Albanians, the Bulgarians and the Croats were not really enemies of the Serbs.
I think that the best people to ask if this "deal" was good or not is the Northern Serbians! I have a feeling that they do NOT like any of this at all.
If the northern Serbs(because its really about them since THEY are the ones that live in Kosova instead of some politicians from Belgrade or elitist Serbs from Belgrade) do not like this agreement then you know this is a great deal for the Kosovar Albanians and Indpendent Kosova! LOL!! Its easy for Borko and Tadic to claim a victory. Ask the Northern Kosovar Serbs what they think....
One does not have to go too deep about this agreement. Just tweo things should be kept in mind:
1. Have public positions of the two countries changed toward each other because of this agreement, no.
2. On practical side, Kosovo got all of what it wanted.
Another thing, by the time Serbia joins Europe, Belgrade will see Kosovo just as another neighboring country, same as it sees Hungary or Macedonia today. State policy will have to separate from historical myths which burden policies today.
Well, talks are important, but I do not like the results of these so called negotiation. These reusults were not achieved based on the free will of either country. It was forced on both, and I wonder if it will lead anywhere. Mr Burns and the EU forced Kosova to give give up it's legitimate name and part of it's identity for some meaningless promises for a European future, which right away were questioned by other some EU officicials. Serbia was forced to accept Kosova's participation in regional forums for a future promise to become an EU member, which will still take a long, long time, and Tadic knew that without a candidate status he had no chance of winning the forthcoming elections. A deeply rooted and honest compromise can only come if the underlying problems are solved, the deeply rooted rejections of the 'other one's' are overcome. This can only be achieved if at least the more current developments since the late 80's which lead to the current situation are tacked in an open way from both sides. Those wounds have to heal first, and can only be healed if both societies start realizing what they did to each other. The main part in this lies on Serbia, and it has to stop it's nationalist, has to face what was done in it's name under the Milosovic regime.
Right now both Serbian and Albanian societies are a mess and Serbia has a lot of problems and as bad as it is..Albanian controlled Kosovo has even more.
Its going to be a race of who can modernize first and which group of people can pull them selves out of such a steep hole first. For some reason, I think Serbs have at least more oppurtunities to pull themselves out than the Albs.
Instead of focusing on your joke of an economy and putting people to work, you spend millions of money that was given to you on buying recognition's (which will ultimately do nothing for you) and sending this whale to Brussels to talk to a yellow quasi Serb. Until you can build a good society, Kosovo is not independent.
Montenegrins are starting to ask Djukanovic where all the money is going too and why are certain actions carried out. I suggest the Albs to do the same, but you wont. You will stick by Thaci and the KLA till the very end, until Project 2nd Albanian State's very end.
People relax with reactions nothing will change after this:
1) Kosovo is same as before recognized by 87 or whatever countries. Serbia is not one of them
2) They will be in European forums where 22EU countries see it as a country 5 do not.(Same as before)
3) There will be a Boundary (Border / Administrative line) controlled by both sides.
4) Both Sides will claim victory ad hence ( Tadic and Thaci will stay in power) their Main goal.
5) No Serbian Election Held in Kosovo but they will vote Electronically ( just like Peggy can from Australia) but she gets to vote 12 hours sooner as she is down under.
I wish we could create a Union with all Balkan states and we use this as our strength instead of saying I won you lost.
Have a great weekend friends stop thinking anything has changed an agreement by both sides is a good think for all.
"I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap!"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
No, the UDI is legal, and about an independent Kosovo the ICJ wasn't asked for and didn't say anything about it, so it might be legal or not.
The relevant quote from the ICJ advisory opinion:
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
Come on Borko. Who are you kidding.
It's as if you and the opposing team worked tirelessly for 16 hours to reach an agreement.
The agreement was reached long ago. These talks are about saving face and finding ways for the ruling parties on both sides to get relected.
That's pretty easy to see.
What was probably discussed behind closed doors was how you all were planning your next vacation.
What's important is that both sides will be represented and have a voice at important regional meetings.
I hope that they start to ditch the old way of thinking the Turks embedded in this region where if 'I'm willing to fail as long as I see you fail'.
And remember: The ICJ only ruled about the legality of an UDI.
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 12:29)
I really do not understand how Serbia officials were able to sell this UDI is legal but actual independence is not crap! The people who believe that must be easy targets for the guys running the so called "Nigerian Scams"
(too funny, 24 February 2012 12:51)
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
I don't understand why Serbian officials had refused mention of UDI before, but agreed to it later.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:48)
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
"Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. "
(a New Day, 24 February 2012 19:37)
You mean 'the West' without Spain and Greece? Or are they part of the South? Whatever, one thing is clear: The world and UN is not only 'the west', and it takes some more to become a full-fledged state and UN member than to unilaterally declare independence.
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
[link]'s_declaration_of_independence
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
:) So the UN General assembly seems to be strange institution where funny requests are formulated based on compromise.
"51. In the present case, the question posed by the General Assembly is clearly formulated. The question is narrow and specific; it asks for the Court’s opinion on whether or not THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE is in accordance with international law. It DOES NOT ASK about the LEGAL CONSEQUENCES of that declaration. In particular, it does NOT ASK whether or not Kosovo HAS ACHIEVED STATEHOOD. Nor does it ask about the VALIDITY OR LEGAL EFFECTS of the recognition of Kosovo by those States which have recognized it as an independent State."
(uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
Do you have any versions why did Serb officials formulate their request to ICJ exactly as they did?
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 17:02)
In case some people don't know it: The ICJ was not asked by Serbia, but by the UN General assembly. As far as I know, the 'minimal' question (only about the legality of an UDI) was a compromise reached, there have been many UN members who opposed to ask the question at all.
For more information about the ICJ advisory opinion check Wikipedia
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
So basically Kosovo is to be represented as a former province whose independence was found legal.
Fair play.
(Ian, UK, 24 February 2012 20:01)
No. Kosovo* is to be represented as a disputed territory that according to UNSCR 1244 is a part of Serbia and according to the ICJ did not do anything illegal when it unilaterally declared independence.
* This label [ie "Kosovo"] does not prejudge the status of Kosovo and is in accordance with Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the ICJ on Kosovo's declaration of independence.
The Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a Non Binding opinion that is not Law; whereas, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, and the United Nations Six Point Plan for Kosovo are the Law.
(Yet Another J S, 24 February 2012 13:01)
Unfortunately, you don’t determine what is the law; otherwise the world would be such a better place – what a shame that you are not the universal legislator Yet Another J S :)
----------
1244 affirms Yugoslavia's sovereignty over Kosovo. Serbia is Yugoslavia's succesor state. Whilst the reaity on the ground is that Kosovo establishes its own laws, truth is, with this footnote, those laws can be put into question in an international court. This is a win for Serbia no doubt
(Steve, 24 February 2012 14:08)
“those laws can be put into question in an international court” ?! That’s a weird sentence… Those laws are in accordance with Kosovo’s constitution, which is in accordance with Kosovo’s UDI, which is in accordance with 1244 and international law. And this footnote confirms all of that; just in case somebody forgets that 1244 is still in force (and Kosovo’s UDI in accordance with it).
----------
If Kosovo's status in the world would really be resolved, we wouldn't need all these agreements, negotiations, discussions about wordings, footnotes and everything else! Kosovo would be a normal country like Slovakia instead of a disputed territory.
(Analyst, 24 February 2012 15:20)
You are fully correct dear, but still it is not good for Serbia to exclude itself from regional meetings, so an agreement had to be found to enable Serbia to participate.
----------
(I especially like the nice summary about the legality there:
"The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'.")
(Comm. Parrison, 24 February 2012 18:07)
Yes Comm. Parrison, we know already that you like things which are false :) like the statement above. The court never declared that "the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence”. I don't even had to read the ICJ opinion to tell you that because that quote contains an error of law that experienced jurists like the ICJ judges could never make.
----------
Because they probably interpret it in the same way as the Kosovo extremists from the Self Determination Movement: In the footnote, the UDI is only mentioned as an appendix to the ICJ (i.e. the 'ICJ ruling about the UDI')
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 20:22)
Thanks for the text analysis about the footnote to the footnote of Kosovo’s name LOL; that does not change the fact that if Vuk wants to visit Kosovo has to get a visa :) If all Serbia is looking for is words, just say so – nobody will have a problem with that (except extremists) as long as Serbia does not ask for Vuk to go to Kosovo without permission from Kosovo.
----------
This is not Serbian officials who say that UDI is legal, while independence is not, it is basic international low.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 16:46)
Yes dear, it is basic law that if you do X in accordance with the law, the results of X are also in accordance with the law. You don’t have to spend a fortune and several years of your life in law school to understand that LOL.
----------
Ian, independence and declaration of independence are completely different things. To put it simply: you may gether with your friends and declare UDI. Is it against the low, does it make you criminals? No.
Does it make you independent state? Again, no.
(aaayyy, 24 February 2012 21:05)
Of course it does not make you independent dear, because you and your friends can declare all you want, but at the end of the day you have to do what the police says at the state where you live. But Serbian police has no longer a say in Kosovo - in case you’ve not heard the news from the last 13 years :). Kosovo was independent from Serbia long before the UDI (even Serbia agrees to that when it says that UNMIK is in charge and not Serbia). The UDI was a formality. Kosovo Albanians care about practicalities first, then about formalities; for Serbia it appears the order of priorities is reversed LOL.
uppercase by me, to help people who have problems with understanding some simple sentences)
(Comm. Parrisson, 24 February 2012 14:30)
there is nothing to indicate that the ruling would be different. It may have been the courts intention that it would have been more constructive to ask an intelligent question if you really wanted a definitive answer. Note this was Serbia's question, Kosovo and the west had no reservations about its legality, just like Kosovo and the west have no reservations about the legality of Kosovo's statehood. Serbia had its chance, it is highly unlikely the UNGA would vote to pose a second question on the subject.
"Kosovo is to be represented at regional forums under the title Kosovo accompanied by the footnote citing UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Kosovo's declaration"
Makes sense, since 1244 is still in force and, as the ICJ said, Kosovo's UDI is in accordance with 1244.
Serbia just signed a documment to let Ksova Police to run Northern part of Kosova as soon as the elections in Serbia are over.Dont you see the situation is going in the same tracks Knin went.Who wants to stay will stay and who dont will leave.Dardania will be part of Albania sooner than you think.
IMAGE SOURCE
46 Komentari
Sortiraj po: