96

Monday, 11.02.2013.

13:37

Analyst: Kosovo was illegally "taken away" from Serbia

There is no final solution acceptable to both Belgrade and Priština, but that does not mean that they cannot improve and even institutionalize their relations.

Izvor: Politika

Analyst: Kosovo was illegally "taken away" from Serbia IMAGE SOURCE
IMAGE DESCRIPTION

96 Komentari

Sortiraj po:

Skifteri

pre 11 godina

First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.
(Peggy, 13 February 2013 00:39)
_______________________________________________________________________

Yes, Albanians are indeed mentioned by the Romans in 150AD. That still 3 and a 1/2 centuries before Barbarian, than slav invasions. (Look up Albani tribe) Albanopolis is mentioned way before that by Ptoleme.

You'd have to study the evidence and form on indirect theory since no direct evidance exists. The absence of Illyrian cultural monumenst/documents is also charateristic of Albanians which did not have a writing system since the 19th century. No migration exists. No relative of Shqip language can be found.

Since you what a tangible proof, we can conclude that Albanians are living artifacts of Illyrians.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 1
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.
(Black Jack, 13 February 2013 14:44)

I don't care.

You just have to know that population migration is natural and the mixing of ethnic groups is also natural. It has been happening for thousands of years.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 4
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 15:59)

Yes but the FRY was not the sole direct successor to the SFRY therefore it didn't inherit international membership in organisations, treaties ect.

"Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?"

Because someone else brought it up in Serbia's favour and I turned it on it's head by using it in Kosovo's favour. Therefore by showing it can be used in favour of both Kosovo and Serbia, it proves that it is useless to both as it can be beneficial to the opposing party.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

The kosovo war began not because of an oppression against albanians, it began because you albanians started rioting and killing police officers and military personnel and non serb civilians ..do you think that the state would have jsut sat back and watched this happen, of course they wouldnt thats why they sent in the troops to calm things down, there is a reason why the kla was considered a terrorist organization by everyone including your western countires who only delisted it so they can have a puppet in place ..serbia did negotiate with kosovo about its final status however the negotiations collapsed but that did not give the right to kosovo to do whatever it wanted, kosovo's final status is still in limbo otherwise there would be no problems/negotiations ..in 2006 a referendum was held but what difference does it make if it was held in kosovo or not, even if the albanains voted the result would have been the same ..a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity taking precedent over self determination unless there is an agreement in place is not my interpretation it is a fact ..name me one incident where this did not apply and the territories were able to join the un?? exactly there is none ..serbia is the successor state to yugoslavia as all the the other republics decided to leave and you cannot be a successor if you left, this was agreed in 1995 and 2000 when they were readmitted into the un (along with kosovo as a legal part of serbia's territory)

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 14:33)

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 1
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Nikolle and other Albanians, we keep asking over and over and over for you guys to show us some proof of you being in Kosovo before the Serbs. Anything will do. How about a cave painting, anything but you have never even attempted to prove any of your claims.

So either show some evidence or shut up. So really fed up with your claims which you have no evidence at all for.

What do you hope to accomplish with repeating the same of tired "we are illyrians and you must believe us" routine. I can say that I am from planet Krypton and superman was my dad but without proof all I am is delusional.

So go ahead, show us something for God's sake. Can you do it?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 2
Black Jack

pre 11 godina

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 12:09)


I've never supported the Helsinki Act. I stated:

1) It was signed by the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' not the 'Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' (two very different countries). FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY. Serbia did not sign it and it is not a recognised successor state to a state which did sign it either.

2) There are Articles in the Helsinki Act which can be both used in Serbia's and Kosovo's favour, therefore the Helsinki Act only shows ambiguity (uncertainty).

3) It is non-bidding therefore it has no legal weight, which means it has no legal implications.

So I will stand by what I said ands say that the Helsinki Act is dud.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however,
==============================
How do you figure that Serbs occupied Kosovo?
When did that happen and what did Albanians do about it then?
Did Serbs do what the English have done in America and Australia? Did they subdue the local people and push them onto some sort of reservations?
What exactly happened during that "occupation"?

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today).
The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

This German study 5 years later was unreliable as the one before. You think if it has been published by Liverpool University Press it is reliable? Another Austrian study published by an Austrians in 1899 estimated:
182,650 Albanians (47.88%)
166,700 Serbs (43.7%)

But how that in 12 years become 75% against 25%? It shows that all studys have been unreliable. However, Serbia was not in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, it just reclaimed what used to belong to them before Turkish expansion.

And BTW all studys have been performed either by Austrians, Germans or British. I find the unreliable and biased towards Albanian as majority.

Regarding Greek Turkish war, 90% majority of those who were expeled were Serbs.

And if look at Kosovo Vilayet (as most of estimates where done for Kosovo Vilayet) which included also Sandzak, population was clasified according to religion not according to nationality. Definately in Kosovo Vilayet Serbs were minority but not all Muslims were Albanians. For e.g. if we look in Kosovo Vilayet, one third of Vilayet was the area of Sandzak and there is not mentioning of Serbian Muslims.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 21:53)

No the UDI was a result of Serbia refusing to negotiate with Pristina on Kosovo's final status and as Serbia's unilateral attempt to finalise Kosovo's status with their 2006 Constitution where the referendum was not even held in Kosovo. These important events leading up to the UDI took place after the Kosovo War. And besides the Kosovo War was caused by force and oppression against Albanians in the 80s and 90s.

Nowhere in 1244 does it say that final status for Kosovo has to be mutually agreed by both parties.

"self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity" According to who? That is your opinion and interpretation. That is not written in stone anywhere.

FR Yugoslavia wasn't recognised (not even in 1995) as the sole successor state to SFR Yugoslavia. This is why FR Yugoslavia only joined the UN in 2000 and was not a member of NAM. SFR Yugoslavia is recognised as having several successor states, but not one sole state which inherits all previous agreements and treaties. Most countries didn't even recognise FRY as "Yugoslavia", it was simply referred to as "Serbia" pre-2000.

Besides the Helsinki Act is non-binding therefore it means sweet FA. And no it is not considered international law. So lets say for arguements sake that Serbia was recognised as the successor to SFRY, it wouldn't mean anything anyway as the Helsinki Act has no legal weight.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 4
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a
recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the
Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with
"self-determination".
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not
have treaty status" (Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then! (Ian, UK,
12 February 2013 20:44)

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 0
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 00:27)

First off don't use Wikipedia as a reference point as it is very unreliable. For example the "mutesarifluk of Prizren" didn't correspond with today's Kosovo as it included large chunks of today's Central Serbia. Also that is just a "study" by Kukulj aka an estimate. A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today). Also many people (Serbs, Albanians, Roma ect) left the region during the War between the Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Greece. Neither of which were friends of the Albanians.

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Beth

pre 11 godina

So, we're to 'quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal', according to one person who commented here. If 'Kosova' is a done deal, it was because of a desperate need for Camp Bondsteel. The extremists got their 'Kosova' because USA-NATO were intent on having a military footprint in the Balkans. The jury is out whether all of illegalities are 'a done deal'.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 2
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however, I would like Aura to tell me what the moral basis for Serbia is? or that matter what the moral basis for France is?

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Pls say it ain't so!!!

pre 11 godina

People, quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal; don't understand why this is even up for a discussion!! You're so preoccupied with Kosova that every single article here has to revolve around us.

Well I understand that your peeps are trying to divert your attentions from your internal MAJOR issues, but we do not CARE, deal with it.

We have nothing to do with your people, so mind your business.

Don't worry how we'll sustain our economy, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Don't worry if we'll make it to the EU, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Yes I did, I sure said it.....

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 2
Denaud

pre 11 godina

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy
Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 20:58)

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Peggy

pre 11 godina

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?
(Nikolle, 12 February 2013 20:15)
========================

They did not break away. They liberated their land and themselves from the occupier.
HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?
============================
First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 4
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.
(Sofronije, 12 February 2013 04:34

_______________________________________________
I have difficulty understanding your broken English. You should post some links to explain how a Greek general of the Byzantine army of the 11th century has anything to do regarding Albanian origins.

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?

Show me the Propaganda website :)

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

first off i said kosovo so called udi was as a result of nato force being used on serbia in 1999, it does not matter when they declared independence, the fact was that it was ACHIEVED through force .. second of all kosovo could not implement any final status process or declare independence because there was NO AGREEMENT in place with serbia and due to this kosovo is still legally a part of serbia under unsc 1244.. you can talk about self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the only way it does take precedence is if both sides come to an agreement which in this case it has not .. and your wrong serbia is a signatory of the helsinki act, because even though Yugoslavia signed in 1975, serbia was recognized as the legal successor of yugoslavia after 1995, and dont try to discredit it by saying its not a treaty, the fact is that it is in effect and is a part of international law

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then!

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 3
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.
(Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy

Also why would Mexicans in Texas want to be independent? I understand Mexico's ancestral claims to part of the US's territory. However I'm sure that a many Mexican try to get in the US illegally each year so they don't have to live in Mexico.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.
(Stan, 12 February 2013 17:15)

Good word is "interpretation". No World Organisation or International Court has ever said that Kosovo's independence was illegal and they never will. So I'll leave people on B92 to interpret international law to try and show that Kosovo's independence was illegal.

Serbia is not in the successor to SFRY. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wasn't the successor to SFRY either (even though it wanted to be) hence why it didn't retain it's seat in the UN and had problems with foreign diplomatic buildings abroad. The FRY didn't inherit what it wanted to from SFRY. It failed to be recognised as the successor state. There were several successors to SFRY, not one sole one.

Yes Kosovo may be in some sort of limbo but I'm sure they're happy now than they were in 2008. And the longer Kosovo remains in "limbo" the longer Serbia and Northern Kosovo remain in limbo. And for Kosovo, with every recognition, every diplomatic relation established and every Organisation it joins it comes less and less out of Limbo.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 4
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

Comparing is good when you realize that all you do is compare. No...the Mexican people probably love the USA and would not think of being independent but what if? Comparing a Serbian apple to USA apple is not a good idea. I never had a Serbian apple. To decide that anyone can move into a country and say they are now independent is illegal. Kosovo is not that great but it belongs to Serbia. You cannot give it away when Russia, China and I think India says no.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 5
Stan

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
Aura

pre 11 godina

Niki- you make my point. If borders can be changed on such flimsy grounds, the world will go to hell. Thats the whole basis of international law. You can't pick and choose. And it would be much more appropriate to conflate the German example with Albania, as you were the willing executioners and war criminals on an industrial scale.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 15:35)

Congratulations, you've realised that SFR Yugoslavia and the Union State of Serbia and Montenegro had very different Constitutions.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 13:14)

The UN Charter also talks about "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development" which is used in Kosovo's favour.

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

Kosovo's Declaration of Independence took place in 2008 not in 1999 when the Kosovo War took place.

Yes UNSCR 1244 did "reaffirm yugoslavia's territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo" whilst Kosovo's final status were to be decided upon. UNSCR 1244 was by no means a permanent guarantee of sovereignty over Kosovo.

However since 1999 the elected Government of Kosovo decided to implement Kosovo's final status through independence in 2008.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 5
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

"Comm. Parrisson"

are you still persisting with that stupid argument? all states declare themselves to being with, without the consent of those who rule them. Serbia did the same, the Ottomans accepted it as fact years later. Seriously, you do write a lot of garbage now and again

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

Kosova has no moral legitimacy as a moral state? Tell me, what is the moral basis for Serbia's existence or for that matter Germany's? come to think of it, what is the moral pillar of any state?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 13:37)

The "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" is regarding the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' which was disolved in 1991 and replaced by Croatia, Slovenia, BiH, Macedonia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 3
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)
Wow Kathryn did you come up with that Texas thing yourself? Actually other Serbs have tried to use it before but it has many, many flaws.
1. To date no great percentage of Mexicans have wanted to declare independence in Texas(actually most came to the US to be a part of the US).
2. So far the federal govt has not declared war on the Mexicans and ordered the military units to burn their homes, commit sexual assaults, mass executions, burials in mass graves.
3. Instead of closing down Spanish speaking schools and factories that employ Mexicans you see mandated Spanish classes and most all govt documents are available in English and Spanish.
4. You have latino governors, senators and congressmen that represent all people in their districts not just their "own kind".
5. You have no one in US govt on trial or convicted of these type of crimes against the Mexican people.

Now when you find an American apple to compare to the Serbian one, come back to the table and we can talk.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 7
Mendo

pre 11 godina

This is Mr Kanin's reactions to this article: In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was “taken illegally” from Serbia.  I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case.  In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO’s willingness to use force in 1999.  Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way–on the battlefield.  Legality had nothing to do with it.

Cheers

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 8
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@Ian

listen first off kosovo trying to secede from serbia is illegal under international law specifically under the un charter and the helsinki act, in which both GUARANTEE a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity .. second of all kosovo's so called udi was achieved through force (i.e. nato bombings) so dont talk about it being done in peace when it wasnt ... and third a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity supersede the right to self-determination that you keep mentioning, otherwise we would have mass chaos all over the world with minorities trying to declare independence .. however self determination can take precedent if and only if both sides can come to an agreement and in this case they havent ... by the way i also forgot to mention that unsc resolution 1244 although it doesnt say what the final status of kosovo is and that negotiations should be done, it did however reaffirm yugoslavia's (now serbia's) territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo, thus legally kosovo still is serbia's territory ... i can almost guarantee you that this conflict over kosovo is not even close to being over, you can highly expect another war and this time serbia will reclaim ALL of kosovo cuz there will be no nato intevention (they'll just pull out not wanting to risk starting a world war)

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 7
Aura

pre 11 godina

Try as hard as they might might Kosovo has no legitimacy as an independent state. Neither politically or historically or morally. All the players know it stinks and are desperate to get out.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 7
Denaud

pre 11 godina

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 12:05)

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 5
Missoni

pre 11 godina

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 10:22)

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

Nice try but the "Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia" aka "Badinter Arbitration Committee" are 15 legal "opinions" and are therefore not legally binding.

Not to mention that the Commission is ambiguous on what is meant by the term "Frontier".

Keep trying though.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.
(Daniel, 12 February 2013 09:30)

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 6
Daniel

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.
(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 8
Sandzaklija

pre 11 godina

"original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!"
@(rocky, 11 February 2013 17:02)
I loved this post!!!
Com on poor rocky you will be happy with 1042yr.
this is first year of original ancient inhabitants for Albos in Balkan.
Before that time Albo is working to build big Castle in Syracuse.
Balkan vacation is over albo start to ruin everything to the his neighbor. Kosovo is fresh example.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 5
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
j

pre 11 godina

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!
(Joe Banana, 11 February 2013 19:38)

How do you know. Did you read the horoscope?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 3
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Denaud

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

So far I have not seen in any article where David Kanin refers to Kosovo as "Kosova". He only mentioned that name of Kosovo is represented as "Kosova*" (as agreed by Serbia)but he never used term Kosova in his articles. According to Daniel Serwer, David Kanin sent him email and this is what he quoted. However, I would not trust Daniel Serwer, in the past he was "economical with truth".

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Ross

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

"German Citizen", could you please send webpage where is this written? But not to webpage of Daniel Serwer,famous Albanian lobbyist. There is only statement from Daniel Server about this, but nothing written by David Kanin himself.

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 6
winston

pre 11 godina

Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors! Brian
Brian, what can I say, except that you should read the news more accurately. Dacic never met with jagajga. Serbia is not collecting customs for Pristina. And, there was never, and will not be an exchange of ambassadors between BG and Pristina. What news channels have you been listening to? Being wrong here and there is OK, but you struck out, 3 up, 3 down. BTW, Dacic is the little, short, fat one, Nikolic is the tall, goofy looking, no personality one. Is Jagaiga the little hairy one?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

"Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it."
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)
Serbia did not loose the battlefield with Albos. with NATO Yes.
Legally NATO did not destroy serbian deed for Kosovo
Arnaut is steel vithout any legal paper in the hand.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 6
gjon fusha

pre 11 godina

The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all. (Radovan, 11 February 2013 15:17)

To other Serbian that do the same threat too!
Do not do empty threats please. If you fill so strong come and do what you saying you can do.
You did try so many times before and failed. Last one was Milloshevic who failed so bad and lost his life too. Not to mention that jails in Hague are busy with your criminals leaders also. So please stop being tough behind the computer.

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
LtCol Friedmann

pre 11 godina

Yes, just like Sandzak & Vojvodina was illegally acquired. But then again Serbs truly believe that everything they do is legal & what everyone else does is illegal. I'd say the term 'You win some, you lose some' just can't be grasped by these people.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 13
Bob

pre 11 godina

More to the point, it was stupidly taken away from Serbia. Who in future will believe that a 'humanitarian intervention' is not in fact an invasion? That argument was abused. The best solution would have mended things for all sides, but instead there is a fixation on 'Serbia' as being the cause of problems. All sides are corrupted without exception, and all sides have large populations of ordinary citizens who suffer because of the ambitions of their poor quality governments - Serbia too.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 4
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Real Mendo

One doesn't have to be genius to suss out that Ian is an Albanian.The majority of Brits cannot name their Chancelor of the exchequer let alone Haradinaj .He just tries to pull the wool over our eyes making us believe that he presents the Brits point of view.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 5
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin
(David Kanin, 11 February 2013 21:13)

The length's these primitive Albanians will go through is remarkable. No one but Albs refers to Kosovo i Metohija as 'kosova' it is not even the name of your occupation so why would David refer to it as that?

And lost Kosovo i Metohija on the battlefield? That's funny, I don't recall a bombardment by an outside military alliance a battlefield. Because when it came down to one on one battle, Serbs destroyed the KLA just ask Adem Jashari, he can easily tell you this. (No Albs don't compare this terrorists death to the March 2004 Islamist pogroms it just shows your primitive nature)

Nice try, "David"

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 9
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.
(Sofronije, 11 February 2013 17:55)
_________________________

I read a serb propaganda comment about Albanians to be ancient Azeris. And another about Sicily, spelled (Cicily Albo). The first has been proven obsolete. The second was never a proposed theory.

Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it.

Let the propaganda machine resume.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 10
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

I copied this statement with quotation marks and could not find it anywhere on the net. Can you please show your source?! I know its a hard concept given Hoxha's education system did not require sources because everything you were fed was lies but in the real world you should back up when you present a comment as factual rather than your own opinion.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 7
Willi Pfaff

pre 11 godina

Just would like to inform you, that David Kanin never said what you claimed in your article. He just came out with a statement and that is how he corrects the Politika article :

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.

Preporučujem 12 Ne preporučujem 13
David Kanin

pre 11 godina

For the record, during my interview with Politika interview I did not say--and do not believe--that Kosova was "illegally taken away" from Serbia. In my view, Serbia lost its former province because it mismanaged it during the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated the willingness to NATO to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Comm. Parrisson, 11 February 2013 19:34)
Ah simple minds that think they can peel a banana to show what the inside of an orange looks like!

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
MikeC

pre 11 godina

Ian. UK

America, the Uk and Germany have all hijacked democracy. They all know that taking Kosovo away from Serbia was illegal and wrong. However, an independent Kosovo was the best option since there were thousands of alb criminals who couldnt be sent back home because of the "opresion by Miloseviq". An independent Kosovo was accepted , not because it was legal, but because the west had the power to take it away from Serbia for its own convenience. Carl Bild the foreign minister of Sweden was honest when he said that recognizing Kosovo was a contoversial matter since it didn't follow international law. And about the ICJ decision the ruling was neutral. It wasnt for or against Kosovo independence. However, you albs interpret all neutral decisions to be in your favour. Taking Kosovo away from Serbia is nothing less then thefts. I comapre it to the Europeans coming to America, raping and taking the land of the indigonous people. Most of the world sees it the same way. Even you albs know its true, otherwise you wouldn't make up stories about the illyrian/albanian connection and claim to this land that nobody outside of Albania and Kosovo recognize as a historical fact.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 8
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!
(Brian, 11 February 2013 18:43)

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOO

Albanians took the "borders" ?!?! ahahahahahaha

When was this in July 2011 when ROSU came up to Mitrovica and left with one less terrorist than what they came with? Man Albanian revisionism at it finest, I really don't envy the physiological affect Hoxha had on you guys.

KFOR is currently flying you guys in on helicopters and is standing there holding your hand to make sure no one hurts the fragile Albanians.

Yes the corrupt and treasonous Serbian gov't supports Kosovo i Metohija's occupation, but the people don't. Not one politician other than Ceda Jovanovic runs on this as his pre-election platform and he routinely (despite having the most campaign funds) barely scrapes by the census. Then the corruption kicks in and the elite do things they would not be allowed to do in a normal country, but nothing in the Balkans is normal.




....Albanians taking borders, pfffffffft

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 7
Joe Banana

pre 11 godina

It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence.
(Ian (the "Busted"), UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 8
Real Mendo

pre 11 godina

You are a GOD!
(KOSOVA, 11 February 2013 17:55)

Albanians dont believe in God. Their religion is albanianism. It just prove that Ian is albanian!

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 7
Comm. Parrisson

pre 11 godina

"ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!..."
(Gjilanasi, 11 February 2013 16:34)

One more Albanian who doesn't understand then 'declaration of independence' and 'independence'. So, let's make it easy: I can gather some friends and declare ourselves the 'kings and dukes of China'. Perfectly legal, but don't expect China to accept us when we take some land as our kingdom.

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 11
Brian

pre 11 godina

This guy is completely ignorant. Serbia is a strident supporter of Kosovo independence and no longer opposes it. Customs, ambassadors. Platform, meetings with dacic and jagjajga. Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 15
MikeC

pre 11 godina

"I've read other articles written by David Kanin and this one is in stark contrast to them. Perhaps this one was cooked by Tanjug."

Gustave

As always when albanians make a claim its without any link to the source.
Please, provide us with some link to these fascinating articles by Kanin.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 7
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

Notice Ian here was away conveniently (even though he checks Serbian news everyday) when 5 Monks were being threatened with their lives because well, not even he can defend such a thing. So he happily steps away thinking no one will notice and then reappears when someone insults his thinking and goes against his racist and Serbophobic discourse.

See, you might be too insignificant for others to pay attention to when exactly you post (only on days when Albanians are not behaving like terrorists) but I on the other hand will make it a point for as long as I'm posting here to make clear to everyone what kind of person you are.

So welcome back friend, I am sure your racist self will take your much needed break the next rape or bomb explosion or whatever the hell your Islamic terrorist friends have cooking up in the near future!

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 13
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

@(Gotsefromohrid, 11 February 2013 15:30)

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
rocky

pre 11 godina

Almost forgot Mr. Kanin, 1 quick fact, originally it was Kosova that was illegally taken away from Albania, in the early 1900s! In 1999, Kosova was in-fact legally reclaimed by its rightful owners & original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!

Preporučujem 15 Ne preporučujem 21
Helsingborg

pre 11 godina

Unilateral secession without parliamentary approval is illegal. Are you kalbs too stupid to understand that. And the UDI isnt worth the paper it is written on. All it confirms is that it is not illegal to declare independence. Anyone can. Northern Kosovo can and probably should as Kosovo is not a recognised country and never will be. But i bet if, God forbid, that Frankenstein ever becomes indepenedent, the Kalbs will deny the right of indepence to N Kosovo on the same grounds they deny exist today.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 12
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

@Bekim _ Novi Sad

I understand you would like to believe that there will be "multiple Albanian states" in the Balkans because well, you would love more Muslim states in the heart of Europe of course. However here's the thing, the countries these Albanians are trying to extract land from will not sit there and allow this to happen.

I have always said I pray that the eventual plan is Greater Albania at the expense of Serbia, FYR Macedonia, Greece & Montenegro. I really hope this is what they want to do, because there is simply no way 4 UN recognized sovereign nations will allow their territory to be stripped from them for the sake of savage terrorist ambitions. So please, form this "kosavoh army", start with your plans for Greater Talibania and we will see what happens.


Btw one of the posters on here (IAN, help me out they are your friends I can't put their names with the b.s. they write on here), I think it was the fellow who only understands the ! as a way to finish a sentence (Hoxha's education curriculum was always a weak point in Albania) said that it was "news coming out of Russia" when some randoms with no names attached to it posted a 'map' of how the Balkans will look in the future.

So I guess me question would be, Mr. Kannin's views "news coming out of America" ??

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 11
Gjilanasi

pre 11 godina

"The universal rule in politics is to tell the difference between problems that can be solved and those that can only be kept under control and to decide which are which..."
These are so called "experts" that are trying to solve the issue of Palestine. Just recently, I was reading in newspapers, netanjahu was quoted saying: There is no definite solution with Palestine but the problem can be managed in temporary timings (which would mean, we agree, we stop violence, we build houses (colonies), they raise their voice, we accuse them (and of course we bomb them) and than we agre to manage temporarily one solution etc etc... I guess some smart "experts (like this one, who was senior advisor to CIA) will make his salary like this for a long time until someone will ask him to shut up. The world without similar experts would be much better than it is now...
He was saying Kosovo was taken ilegally from Serbia. Based on which law (not so) dear expert? ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!...

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 17
Bekim_Novi Sad

pre 11 godina

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,
(Rocky, 11 February 2013 15:03)

Rocky, excellent analysis. You must have a crystal ball handy. That is exactly what I see panning out over the next decade. Despite what the Serb expats living in Australia, UK, US or Canada say, there will be no VS tanks rolling into Pristina.

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 20
Radovan

pre 11 godina

"Kosovo truly is a problem for Serbia because it was illegally taken away from them, and Belgrade does not accept its unilateral declaration of independence."

No kidding. Seriously? They want to make another second Albanian state in the balkans? The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all.

Preporučujem 38 Ne preporučujem 33
Rocky

pre 11 godina

The Albanian question is there because it is still not known how the Albanians will organize, as a single state or as more than one, what their relations with their neighbors will be like, and how the neighbors will adapt to the Albanian demographic expansion," concluded Kanin.

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,

Preporučujem 18 Ne preporučujem 26
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Damn right Kosovo was taken illegally by the ancient
Azerbaijanis aka modern Albanians with the help of the fascist West.But it won't be long before is taken back and the occupiers expelled.

Preporučujem 27 Ne preporučujem 26
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.

Preporučujem 42 Ne preporučujem 50
CH

pre 11 godina

First of all you have to make clear that international law is based on vage principles.
It's not clear how the principle of self-determination and the principle of territorial intergrity correlate. They are opposites. Therefore you cannot say that the Declaration of Independence is illegal just because it violates one of the principles when at the same time the other principle is fulfilled.
Today the international law is so holy to Serbia while 13 years ago they broke every single Resolution of the UNSC. These Res. are international law as well! That's what Bulgaria pointed out in front of the ICJ.

Preporučujem 31 Ne preporučujem 27
CH

pre 11 godina

If a man hits and abuses his woman, no court in the world would force them to live together anymore.
These simple principles of international law are just too simple to be achieved in reality. We are talking about humans. If one state dares to violate international law in the worst manner (just like Serbia did. If you don't believe me, look to the prisoners of Hague. One of them admitted a few days ago which crimes he committed in Kosovo in the name of Serbia), then international law should not be applied to this country.
You cannot hit somebody and then say: don't hit me or i'll charge you!
But this seems to be the way some serbians think. They will come to reality sooner or later.

CH

Preporučujem 28 Ne preporučujem 30
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

''...for historical and political reasons..."

historical and political? yes, i must have missed that bit about Albanians and Bosnians having had a great hand in the formation of the United States of America (!) what historical reasons is this guy talking about?

political? what does this actually mean? i can only guess one thing, Albanians and Bosnians are more averse to socialism than others in former Yugoslavia? this so called analyst, doesn't seem to know his stuff

Preporučujem 23 Ne preporučujem 26
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.

Preporučujem 42 Ne preporučujem 50
Radovan

pre 11 godina

"Kosovo truly is a problem for Serbia because it was illegally taken away from them, and Belgrade does not accept its unilateral declaration of independence."

No kidding. Seriously? They want to make another second Albanian state in the balkans? The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all.

Preporučujem 38 Ne preporučujem 33
CH

pre 11 godina

First of all you have to make clear that international law is based on vage principles.
It's not clear how the principle of self-determination and the principle of territorial intergrity correlate. They are opposites. Therefore you cannot say that the Declaration of Independence is illegal just because it violates one of the principles when at the same time the other principle is fulfilled.
Today the international law is so holy to Serbia while 13 years ago they broke every single Resolution of the UNSC. These Res. are international law as well! That's what Bulgaria pointed out in front of the ICJ.

Preporučujem 31 Ne preporučujem 27
CH

pre 11 godina

If a man hits and abuses his woman, no court in the world would force them to live together anymore.
These simple principles of international law are just too simple to be achieved in reality. We are talking about humans. If one state dares to violate international law in the worst manner (just like Serbia did. If you don't believe me, look to the prisoners of Hague. One of them admitted a few days ago which crimes he committed in Kosovo in the name of Serbia), then international law should not be applied to this country.
You cannot hit somebody and then say: don't hit me or i'll charge you!
But this seems to be the way some serbians think. They will come to reality sooner or later.

CH

Preporučujem 28 Ne preporučujem 30
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Damn right Kosovo was taken illegally by the ancient
Azerbaijanis aka modern Albanians with the help of the fascist West.But it won't be long before is taken back and the occupiers expelled.

Preporučujem 27 Ne preporučujem 26
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

''...for historical and political reasons..."

historical and political? yes, i must have missed that bit about Albanians and Bosnians having had a great hand in the formation of the United States of America (!) what historical reasons is this guy talking about?

political? what does this actually mean? i can only guess one thing, Albanians and Bosnians are more averse to socialism than others in former Yugoslavia? this so called analyst, doesn't seem to know his stuff

Preporučujem 23 Ne preporučujem 26
Rocky

pre 11 godina

The Albanian question is there because it is still not known how the Albanians will organize, as a single state or as more than one, what their relations with their neighbors will be like, and how the neighbors will adapt to the Albanian demographic expansion," concluded Kanin.

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,

Preporučujem 18 Ne preporučujem 26
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

Notice Ian here was away conveniently (even though he checks Serbian news everyday) when 5 Monks were being threatened with their lives because well, not even he can defend such a thing. So he happily steps away thinking no one will notice and then reappears when someone insults his thinking and goes against his racist and Serbophobic discourse.

See, you might be too insignificant for others to pay attention to when exactly you post (only on days when Albanians are not behaving like terrorists) but I on the other hand will make it a point for as long as I'm posting here to make clear to everyone what kind of person you are.

So welcome back friend, I am sure your racist self will take your much needed break the next rape or bomb explosion or whatever the hell your Islamic terrorist friends have cooking up in the near future!

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 13
Comm. Parrisson

pre 11 godina

"ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!..."
(Gjilanasi, 11 February 2013 16:34)

One more Albanian who doesn't understand then 'declaration of independence' and 'independence'. So, let's make it easy: I can gather some friends and declare ourselves the 'kings and dukes of China'. Perfectly legal, but don't expect China to accept us when we take some land as our kingdom.

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 11
Helsingborg

pre 11 godina

Unilateral secession without parliamentary approval is illegal. Are you kalbs too stupid to understand that. And the UDI isnt worth the paper it is written on. All it confirms is that it is not illegal to declare independence. Anyone can. Northern Kosovo can and probably should as Kosovo is not a recognised country and never will be. But i bet if, God forbid, that Frankenstein ever becomes indepenedent, the Kalbs will deny the right of indepence to N Kosovo on the same grounds they deny exist today.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 12
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

@Bekim _ Novi Sad

I understand you would like to believe that there will be "multiple Albanian states" in the Balkans because well, you would love more Muslim states in the heart of Europe of course. However here's the thing, the countries these Albanians are trying to extract land from will not sit there and allow this to happen.

I have always said I pray that the eventual plan is Greater Albania at the expense of Serbia, FYR Macedonia, Greece & Montenegro. I really hope this is what they want to do, because there is simply no way 4 UN recognized sovereign nations will allow their territory to be stripped from them for the sake of savage terrorist ambitions. So please, form this "kosavoh army", start with your plans for Greater Talibania and we will see what happens.


Btw one of the posters on here (IAN, help me out they are your friends I can't put their names with the b.s. they write on here), I think it was the fellow who only understands the ! as a way to finish a sentence (Hoxha's education curriculum was always a weak point in Albania) said that it was "news coming out of Russia" when some randoms with no names attached to it posted a 'map' of how the Balkans will look in the future.

So I guess me question would be, Mr. Kannin's views "news coming out of America" ??

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 11
MikeC

pre 11 godina

"I've read other articles written by David Kanin and this one is in stark contrast to them. Perhaps this one was cooked by Tanjug."

Gustave

As always when albanians make a claim its without any link to the source.
Please, provide us with some link to these fascinating articles by Kanin.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 7
rocky

pre 11 godina

Almost forgot Mr. Kanin, 1 quick fact, originally it was Kosova that was illegally taken away from Albania, in the early 1900s! In 1999, Kosova was in-fact legally reclaimed by its rightful owners & original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!

Preporučujem 15 Ne preporučujem 21
Bekim_Novi Sad

pre 11 godina

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,
(Rocky, 11 February 2013 15:03)

Rocky, excellent analysis. You must have a crystal ball handy. That is exactly what I see panning out over the next decade. Despite what the Serb expats living in Australia, UK, US or Canada say, there will be no VS tanks rolling into Pristina.

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 20
Gjilanasi

pre 11 godina

"The universal rule in politics is to tell the difference between problems that can be solved and those that can only be kept under control and to decide which are which..."
These are so called "experts" that are trying to solve the issue of Palestine. Just recently, I was reading in newspapers, netanjahu was quoted saying: There is no definite solution with Palestine but the problem can be managed in temporary timings (which would mean, we agree, we stop violence, we build houses (colonies), they raise their voice, we accuse them (and of course we bomb them) and than we agre to manage temporarily one solution etc etc... I guess some smart "experts (like this one, who was senior advisor to CIA) will make his salary like this for a long time until someone will ask him to shut up. The world without similar experts would be much better than it is now...
He was saying Kosovo was taken ilegally from Serbia. Based on which law (not so) dear expert? ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!...

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 17
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin
(David Kanin, 11 February 2013 21:13)

The length's these primitive Albanians will go through is remarkable. No one but Albs refers to Kosovo i Metohija as 'kosova' it is not even the name of your occupation so why would David refer to it as that?

And lost Kosovo i Metohija on the battlefield? That's funny, I don't recall a bombardment by an outside military alliance a battlefield. Because when it came down to one on one battle, Serbs destroyed the KLA just ask Adem Jashari, he can easily tell you this. (No Albs don't compare this terrorists death to the March 2004 Islamist pogroms it just shows your primitive nature)

Nice try, "David"

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 9
Real Mendo

pre 11 godina

You are a GOD!
(KOSOVA, 11 February 2013 17:55)

Albanians dont believe in God. Their religion is albanianism. It just prove that Ian is albanian!

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 7
Ross

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

"German Citizen", could you please send webpage where is this written? But not to webpage of Daniel Serwer,famous Albanian lobbyist. There is only statement from Daniel Server about this, but nothing written by David Kanin himself.

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 6
Willi Pfaff

pre 11 godina

Just would like to inform you, that David Kanin never said what you claimed in your article. He just came out with a statement and that is how he corrects the Politika article :

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.

Preporučujem 12 Ne preporučujem 13
MikeC

pre 11 godina

Ian. UK

America, the Uk and Germany have all hijacked democracy. They all know that taking Kosovo away from Serbia was illegal and wrong. However, an independent Kosovo was the best option since there were thousands of alb criminals who couldnt be sent back home because of the "opresion by Miloseviq". An independent Kosovo was accepted , not because it was legal, but because the west had the power to take it away from Serbia for its own convenience. Carl Bild the foreign minister of Sweden was honest when he said that recognizing Kosovo was a contoversial matter since it didn't follow international law. And about the ICJ decision the ruling was neutral. It wasnt for or against Kosovo independence. However, you albs interpret all neutral decisions to be in your favour. Taking Kosovo away from Serbia is nothing less then thefts. I comapre it to the Europeans coming to America, raping and taking the land of the indigonous people. Most of the world sees it the same way. Even you albs know its true, otherwise you wouldn't make up stories about the illyrian/albanian connection and claim to this land that nobody outside of Albania and Kosovo recognize as a historical fact.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 8
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

I copied this statement with quotation marks and could not find it anywhere on the net. Can you please show your source?! I know its a hard concept given Hoxha's education system did not require sources because everything you were fed was lies but in the real world you should back up when you present a comment as factual rather than your own opinion.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 7
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

"Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it."
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)
Serbia did not loose the battlefield with Albos. with NATO Yes.
Legally NATO did not destroy serbian deed for Kosovo
Arnaut is steel vithout any legal paper in the hand.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 6
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Real Mendo

One doesn't have to be genius to suss out that Ian is an Albanian.The majority of Brits cannot name their Chancelor of the exchequer let alone Haradinaj .He just tries to pull the wool over our eyes making us believe that he presents the Brits point of view.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 5
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!
(Brian, 11 February 2013 18:43)

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOO

Albanians took the "borders" ?!?! ahahahahahaha

When was this in July 2011 when ROSU came up to Mitrovica and left with one less terrorist than what they came with? Man Albanian revisionism at it finest, I really don't envy the physiological affect Hoxha had on you guys.

KFOR is currently flying you guys in on helicopters and is standing there holding your hand to make sure no one hurts the fragile Albanians.

Yes the corrupt and treasonous Serbian gov't supports Kosovo i Metohija's occupation, but the people don't. Not one politician other than Ceda Jovanovic runs on this as his pre-election platform and he routinely (despite having the most campaign funds) barely scrapes by the census. Then the corruption kicks in and the elite do things they would not be allowed to do in a normal country, but nothing in the Balkans is normal.




....Albanians taking borders, pfffffffft

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 7
David Kanin

pre 11 godina

For the record, during my interview with Politika interview I did not say--and do not believe--that Kosova was "illegally taken away" from Serbia. In my view, Serbia lost its former province because it mismanaged it during the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated the willingness to NATO to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
gjon fusha

pre 11 godina

The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all. (Radovan, 11 February 2013 15:17)

To other Serbian that do the same threat too!
Do not do empty threats please. If you fill so strong come and do what you saying you can do.
You did try so many times before and failed. Last one was Milloshevic who failed so bad and lost his life too. Not to mention that jails in Hague are busy with your criminals leaders also. So please stop being tough behind the computer.

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

@(Gotsefromohrid, 11 February 2013 15:30)

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
Joe Banana

pre 11 godina

It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence.
(Ian (the "Busted"), UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 8
LtCol Friedmann

pre 11 godina

Yes, just like Sandzak & Vojvodina was illegally acquired. But then again Serbs truly believe that everything they do is legal & what everyone else does is illegal. I'd say the term 'You win some, you lose some' just can't be grasped by these people.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 13
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 15:35)

Congratulations, you've realised that SFR Yugoslavia and the Union State of Serbia and Montenegro had very different Constitutions.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
Bob

pre 11 godina

More to the point, it was stupidly taken away from Serbia. Who in future will believe that a 'humanitarian intervention' is not in fact an invasion? That argument was abused. The best solution would have mended things for all sides, but instead there is a fixation on 'Serbia' as being the cause of problems. All sides are corrupted without exception, and all sides have large populations of ordinary citizens who suffer because of the ambitions of their poor quality governments - Serbia too.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 4
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.
(Sofronije, 11 February 2013 17:55)
_________________________

I read a serb propaganda comment about Albanians to be ancient Azeris. And another about Sicily, spelled (Cicily Albo). The first has been proven obsolete. The second was never a proposed theory.

Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it.

Let the propaganda machine resume.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 10
Daniel

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.
(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 8
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

Nice try but the "Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia" aka "Badinter Arbitration Committee" are 15 legal "opinions" and are therefore not legally binding.

Not to mention that the Commission is ambiguous on what is meant by the term "Frontier".

Keep trying though.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 7
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 6
Brian

pre 11 godina

This guy is completely ignorant. Serbia is a strident supporter of Kosovo independence and no longer opposes it. Customs, ambassadors. Platform, meetings with dacic and jagjajga. Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 15
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
Sandzaklija

pre 11 godina

"original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!"
@(rocky, 11 February 2013 17:02)
I loved this post!!!
Com on poor rocky you will be happy with 1042yr.
this is first year of original ancient inhabitants for Albos in Balkan.
Before that time Albo is working to build big Castle in Syracuse.
Balkan vacation is over albo start to ruin everything to the his neighbor. Kosovo is fresh example.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.
(Daniel, 12 February 2013 09:30)

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 6
Missoni

pre 11 godina

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 10:22)

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Aura

pre 11 godina

Try as hard as they might might Kosovo has no legitimacy as an independent state. Neither politically or historically or morally. All the players know it stinks and are desperate to get out.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 13:37)

The "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" is regarding the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' which was disolved in 1991 and replaced by Croatia, Slovenia, BiH, Macedonia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 3
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.
(Sofronije, 12 February 2013 04:34

_______________________________________________
I have difficulty understanding your broken English. You should post some links to explain how a Greek general of the Byzantine army of the 11th century has anything to do regarding Albanian origins.

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?

Show me the Propaganda website :)

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Comm. Parrisson, 11 February 2013 19:34)
Ah simple minds that think they can peel a banana to show what the inside of an orange looks like!

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Denaud

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

So far I have not seen in any article where David Kanin refers to Kosovo as "Kosova". He only mentioned that name of Kosovo is represented as "Kosova*" (as agreed by Serbia)but he never used term Kosova in his articles. According to Daniel Serwer, David Kanin sent him email and this is what he quoted. However, I would not trust Daniel Serwer, in the past he was "economical with truth".

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Mendo

pre 11 godina

This is Mr Kanin's reactions to this article: In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was “taken illegally” from Serbia.  I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case.  In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO’s willingness to use force in 1999.  Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way–on the battlefield.  Legality had nothing to do with it.

Cheers

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 8
Denaud

pre 11 godina

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 12:05)

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

Kosova has no moral legitimacy as a moral state? Tell me, what is the moral basis for Serbia's existence or for that matter Germany's? come to think of it, what is the moral pillar of any state?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 13:14)

The UN Charter also talks about "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development" which is used in Kosovo's favour.

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

Kosovo's Declaration of Independence took place in 2008 not in 1999 when the Kosovo War took place.

Yes UNSCR 1244 did "reaffirm yugoslavia's territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo" whilst Kosovo's final status were to be decided upon. UNSCR 1244 was by no means a permanent guarantee of sovereignty over Kosovo.

However since 1999 the elected Government of Kosovo decided to implement Kosovo's final status through independence in 2008.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

first off i said kosovo so called udi was as a result of nato force being used on serbia in 1999, it does not matter when they declared independence, the fact was that it was ACHIEVED through force .. second of all kosovo could not implement any final status process or declare independence because there was NO AGREEMENT in place with serbia and due to this kosovo is still legally a part of serbia under unsc 1244.. you can talk about self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the only way it does take precedence is if both sides come to an agreement which in this case it has not .. and your wrong serbia is a signatory of the helsinki act, because even though Yugoslavia signed in 1975, serbia was recognized as the legal successor of yugoslavia after 1995, and dont try to discredit it by saying its not a treaty, the fact is that it is in effect and is a part of international law

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 7
Denaud

pre 11 godina

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy
Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 20:58)

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@Ian

listen first off kosovo trying to secede from serbia is illegal under international law specifically under the un charter and the helsinki act, in which both GUARANTEE a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity .. second of all kosovo's so called udi was achieved through force (i.e. nato bombings) so dont talk about it being done in peace when it wasnt ... and third a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity supersede the right to self-determination that you keep mentioning, otherwise we would have mass chaos all over the world with minorities trying to declare independence .. however self determination can take precedent if and only if both sides can come to an agreement and in this case they havent ... by the way i also forgot to mention that unsc resolution 1244 although it doesnt say what the final status of kosovo is and that negotiations should be done, it did however reaffirm yugoslavia's (now serbia's) territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo, thus legally kosovo still is serbia's territory ... i can almost guarantee you that this conflict over kosovo is not even close to being over, you can highly expect another war and this time serbia will reclaim ALL of kosovo cuz there will be no nato intevention (they'll just pull out not wanting to risk starting a world war)

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 7
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.
(Stan, 12 February 2013 17:15)

Good word is "interpretation". No World Organisation or International Court has ever said that Kosovo's independence was illegal and they never will. So I'll leave people on B92 to interpret international law to try and show that Kosovo's independence was illegal.

Serbia is not in the successor to SFRY. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wasn't the successor to SFRY either (even though it wanted to be) hence why it didn't retain it's seat in the UN and had problems with foreign diplomatic buildings abroad. The FRY didn't inherit what it wanted to from SFRY. It failed to be recognised as the successor state. There were several successors to SFRY, not one sole one.

Yes Kosovo may be in some sort of limbo but I'm sure they're happy now than they were in 2008. And the longer Kosovo remains in "limbo" the longer Serbia and Northern Kosovo remain in limbo. And for Kosovo, with every recognition, every diplomatic relation established and every Organisation it joins it comes less and less out of Limbo.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 4
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

Comparing is good when you realize that all you do is compare. No...the Mexican people probably love the USA and would not think of being independent but what if? Comparing a Serbian apple to USA apple is not a good idea. I never had a Serbian apple. To decide that anyone can move into a country and say they are now independent is illegal. Kosovo is not that great but it belongs to Serbia. You cannot give it away when Russia, China and I think India says no.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.
(Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy

Also why would Mexicans in Texas want to be independent? I understand Mexico's ancestral claims to part of the US's territory. However I'm sure that a many Mexican try to get in the US illegally each year so they don't have to live in Mexico.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)
Wow Kathryn did you come up with that Texas thing yourself? Actually other Serbs have tried to use it before but it has many, many flaws.
1. To date no great percentage of Mexicans have wanted to declare independence in Texas(actually most came to the US to be a part of the US).
2. So far the federal govt has not declared war on the Mexicans and ordered the military units to burn their homes, commit sexual assaults, mass executions, burials in mass graves.
3. Instead of closing down Spanish speaking schools and factories that employ Mexicans you see mandated Spanish classes and most all govt documents are available in English and Spanish.
4. You have latino governors, senators and congressmen that represent all people in their districts not just their "own kind".
5. You have no one in US govt on trial or convicted of these type of crimes against the Mexican people.

Now when you find an American apple to compare to the Serbian one, come back to the table and we can talk.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 7
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

"Comm. Parrisson"

are you still persisting with that stupid argument? all states declare themselves to being with, without the consent of those who rule them. Serbia did the same, the Ottomans accepted it as fact years later. Seriously, you do write a lot of garbage now and again

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then!

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 3
winston

pre 11 godina

Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors! Brian
Brian, what can I say, except that you should read the news more accurately. Dacic never met with jagajga. Serbia is not collecting customs for Pristina. And, there was never, and will not be an exchange of ambassadors between BG and Pristina. What news channels have you been listening to? Being wrong here and there is OK, but you struck out, 3 up, 3 down. BTW, Dacic is the little, short, fat one, Nikolic is the tall, goofy looking, no personality one. Is Jagaiga the little hairy one?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
j

pre 11 godina

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!
(Joe Banana, 11 February 2013 19:38)

How do you know. Did you read the horoscope?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 3
Aura

pre 11 godina

Niki- you make my point. If borders can be changed on such flimsy grounds, the world will go to hell. Thats the whole basis of international law. You can't pick and choose. And it would be much more appropriate to conflate the German example with Albania, as you were the willing executioners and war criminals on an industrial scale.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 7
Stan

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?
============================
First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 4
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a
recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the
Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with
"self-determination".
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not
have treaty status" (Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then! (Ian, UK,
12 February 2013 20:44)

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 0
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Nikolle and other Albanians, we keep asking over and over and over for you guys to show us some proof of you being in Kosovo before the Serbs. Anything will do. How about a cave painting, anything but you have never even attempted to prove any of your claims.

So either show some evidence or shut up. So really fed up with your claims which you have no evidence at all for.

What do you hope to accomplish with repeating the same of tired "we are illyrians and you must believe us" routine. I can say that I am from planet Krypton and superman was my dad but without proof all I am is delusional.

So go ahead, show us something for God's sake. Can you do it?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 2
Denaud

pre 11 godina

FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 14:33)

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 5
Peggy

pre 11 godina

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?
(Nikolle, 12 February 2013 20:15)
========================

They did not break away. They liberated their land and themselves from the occupier.
HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Beth

pre 11 godina

So, we're to 'quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal', according to one person who commented here. If 'Kosova' is a done deal, it was because of a desperate need for Camp Bondsteel. The extremists got their 'Kosova' because USA-NATO were intent on having a military footprint in the Balkans. The jury is out whether all of illegalities are 'a done deal'.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 2
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 00:27)

First off don't use Wikipedia as a reference point as it is very unreliable. For example the "mutesarifluk of Prizren" didn't correspond with today's Kosovo as it included large chunks of today's Central Serbia. Also that is just a "study" by Kukulj aka an estimate. A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today). Also many people (Serbs, Albanians, Roma ect) left the region during the War between the Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Greece. Neither of which were friends of the Albanians.

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however,
==============================
How do you figure that Serbs occupied Kosovo?
When did that happen and what did Albanians do about it then?
Did Serbs do what the English have done in America and Australia? Did they subdue the local people and push them onto some sort of reservations?
What exactly happened during that "occupation"?

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today).
The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

This German study 5 years later was unreliable as the one before. You think if it has been published by Liverpool University Press it is reliable? Another Austrian study published by an Austrians in 1899 estimated:
182,650 Albanians (47.88%)
166,700 Serbs (43.7%)

But how that in 12 years become 75% against 25%? It shows that all studys have been unreliable. However, Serbia was not in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, it just reclaimed what used to belong to them before Turkish expansion.

And BTW all studys have been performed either by Austrians, Germans or British. I find the unreliable and biased towards Albanian as majority.

Regarding Greek Turkish war, 90% majority of those who were expeled were Serbs.

And if look at Kosovo Vilayet (as most of estimates where done for Kosovo Vilayet) which included also Sandzak, population was clasified according to religion not according to nationality. Definately in Kosovo Vilayet Serbs were minority but not all Muslims were Albanians. For e.g. if we look in Kosovo Vilayet, one third of Vilayet was the area of Sandzak and there is not mentioning of Serbian Muslims.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Black Jack

pre 11 godina

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

The kosovo war began not because of an oppression against albanians, it began because you albanians started rioting and killing police officers and military personnel and non serb civilians ..do you think that the state would have jsut sat back and watched this happen, of course they wouldnt thats why they sent in the troops to calm things down, there is a reason why the kla was considered a terrorist organization by everyone including your western countires who only delisted it so they can have a puppet in place ..serbia did negotiate with kosovo about its final status however the negotiations collapsed but that did not give the right to kosovo to do whatever it wanted, kosovo's final status is still in limbo otherwise there would be no problems/negotiations ..in 2006 a referendum was held but what difference does it make if it was held in kosovo or not, even if the albanains voted the result would have been the same ..a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity taking precedent over self determination unless there is an agreement in place is not my interpretation it is a fact ..name me one incident where this did not apply and the territories were able to join the un?? exactly there is none ..serbia is the successor state to yugoslavia as all the the other republics decided to leave and you cannot be a successor if you left, this was agreed in 1995 and 2000 when they were readmitted into the un (along with kosovo as a legal part of serbia's territory)

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Pls say it ain't so!!!

pre 11 godina

People, quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal; don't understand why this is even up for a discussion!! You're so preoccupied with Kosova that every single article here has to revolve around us.

Well I understand that your peeps are trying to divert your attentions from your internal MAJOR issues, but we do not CARE, deal with it.

We have nothing to do with your people, so mind your business.

Don't worry how we'll sustain our economy, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Don't worry if we'll make it to the EU, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Yes I did, I sure said it.....

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 2
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however, I would like Aura to tell me what the moral basis for Serbia is? or that matter what the moral basis for France is?

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 21:53)

No the UDI was a result of Serbia refusing to negotiate with Pristina on Kosovo's final status and as Serbia's unilateral attempt to finalise Kosovo's status with their 2006 Constitution where the referendum was not even held in Kosovo. These important events leading up to the UDI took place after the Kosovo War. And besides the Kosovo War was caused by force and oppression against Albanians in the 80s and 90s.

Nowhere in 1244 does it say that final status for Kosovo has to be mutually agreed by both parties.

"self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity" According to who? That is your opinion and interpretation. That is not written in stone anywhere.

FR Yugoslavia wasn't recognised (not even in 1995) as the sole successor state to SFR Yugoslavia. This is why FR Yugoslavia only joined the UN in 2000 and was not a member of NAM. SFR Yugoslavia is recognised as having several successor states, but not one sole state which inherits all previous agreements and treaties. Most countries didn't even recognise FRY as "Yugoslavia", it was simply referred to as "Serbia" pre-2000.

Besides the Helsinki Act is non-binding therefore it means sweet FA. And no it is not considered international law. So lets say for arguements sake that Serbia was recognised as the successor to SFRY, it wouldn't mean anything anyway as the Helsinki Act has no legal weight.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 4
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 12:09)


I've never supported the Helsinki Act. I stated:

1) It was signed by the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' not the 'Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' (two very different countries). FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY. Serbia did not sign it and it is not a recognised successor state to a state which did sign it either.

2) There are Articles in the Helsinki Act which can be both used in Serbia's and Kosovo's favour, therefore the Helsinki Act only shows ambiguity (uncertainty).

3) It is non-bidding therefore it has no legal weight, which means it has no legal implications.

So I will stand by what I said ands say that the Helsinki Act is dud.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 15:59)

Yes but the FRY was not the sole direct successor to the SFRY therefore it didn't inherit international membership in organisations, treaties ect.

"Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?"

Because someone else brought it up in Serbia's favour and I turned it on it's head by using it in Kosovo's favour. Therefore by showing it can be used in favour of both Kosovo and Serbia, it proves that it is useless to both as it can be beneficial to the opposing party.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.
(Black Jack, 13 February 2013 14:44)

I don't care.

You just have to know that population migration is natural and the mixing of ethnic groups is also natural. It has been happening for thousands of years.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 4
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.
(Peggy, 13 February 2013 00:39)
_______________________________________________________________________

Yes, Albanians are indeed mentioned by the Romans in 150AD. That still 3 and a 1/2 centuries before Barbarian, than slav invasions. (Look up Albani tribe) Albanopolis is mentioned way before that by Ptoleme.

You'd have to study the evidence and form on indirect theory since no direct evidance exists. The absence of Illyrian cultural monumenst/documents is also charateristic of Albanians which did not have a writing system since the 19th century. No migration exists. No relative of Shqip language can be found.

Since you what a tangible proof, we can conclude that Albanians are living artifacts of Illyrians.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 1
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.

Preporučujem 42 Ne preporučujem 50
Radovan

pre 11 godina

"Kosovo truly is a problem for Serbia because it was illegally taken away from them, and Belgrade does not accept its unilateral declaration of independence."

No kidding. Seriously? They want to make another second Albanian state in the balkans? The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all.

Preporučujem 38 Ne preporučujem 33
CH

pre 11 godina

If a man hits and abuses his woman, no court in the world would force them to live together anymore.
These simple principles of international law are just too simple to be achieved in reality. We are talking about humans. If one state dares to violate international law in the worst manner (just like Serbia did. If you don't believe me, look to the prisoners of Hague. One of them admitted a few days ago which crimes he committed in Kosovo in the name of Serbia), then international law should not be applied to this country.
You cannot hit somebody and then say: don't hit me or i'll charge you!
But this seems to be the way some serbians think. They will come to reality sooner or later.

CH

Preporučujem 28 Ne preporučujem 30
CH

pre 11 godina

First of all you have to make clear that international law is based on vage principles.
It's not clear how the principle of self-determination and the principle of territorial intergrity correlate. They are opposites. Therefore you cannot say that the Declaration of Independence is illegal just because it violates one of the principles when at the same time the other principle is fulfilled.
Today the international law is so holy to Serbia while 13 years ago they broke every single Resolution of the UNSC. These Res. are international law as well! That's what Bulgaria pointed out in front of the ICJ.

Preporučujem 31 Ne preporučujem 27
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

''...for historical and political reasons..."

historical and political? yes, i must have missed that bit about Albanians and Bosnians having had a great hand in the formation of the United States of America (!) what historical reasons is this guy talking about?

political? what does this actually mean? i can only guess one thing, Albanians and Bosnians are more averse to socialism than others in former Yugoslavia? this so called analyst, doesn't seem to know his stuff

Preporučujem 23 Ne preporučujem 26
Rocky

pre 11 godina

The Albanian question is there because it is still not known how the Albanians will organize, as a single state or as more than one, what their relations with their neighbors will be like, and how the neighbors will adapt to the Albanian demographic expansion," concluded Kanin.

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,

Preporučujem 18 Ne preporučujem 26
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Damn right Kosovo was taken illegally by the ancient
Azerbaijanis aka modern Albanians with the help of the fascist West.But it won't be long before is taken back and the occupiers expelled.

Preporučujem 27 Ne preporučujem 26
rocky

pre 11 godina

Almost forgot Mr. Kanin, 1 quick fact, originally it was Kosova that was illegally taken away from Albania, in the early 1900s! In 1999, Kosova was in-fact legally reclaimed by its rightful owners & original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!

Preporučujem 15 Ne preporučujem 21
Bekim_Novi Sad

pre 11 godina

Thank you mr. Kanin, for your professional explanation of the inevitable! To organize into one state, would be the right thing! To have multiple states, would be twice as Nice! Frankly, Kosova is not worried about a Serbian recognition, as long as the normalization of relations between Kosova & Serbia is on the right track, and key agreements of the ongoing negotiations become officially binding, in-order for Serbia to become a member of the EU, and vice versa! Once these key agreements become binding, one could then infact call it a soft recognition of Kosova, by Serbia! Kosova is basically getting what it wants, short of a official serbian recognition, while Belgrade will get what it wants, membership within the EU with binding guarantees that Serbia, will no longer be in a governmental position to any claims of influence or controll of Kosova's territory & destiny! Hey I can live with that,
(Rocky, 11 February 2013 15:03)

Rocky, excellent analysis. You must have a crystal ball handy. That is exactly what I see panning out over the next decade. Despite what the Serb expats living in Australia, UK, US or Canada say, there will be no VS tanks rolling into Pristina.

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 20
Gjilanasi

pre 11 godina

"The universal rule in politics is to tell the difference between problems that can be solved and those that can only be kept under control and to decide which are which..."
These are so called "experts" that are trying to solve the issue of Palestine. Just recently, I was reading in newspapers, netanjahu was quoted saying: There is no definite solution with Palestine but the problem can be managed in temporary timings (which would mean, we agree, we stop violence, we build houses (colonies), they raise their voice, we accuse them (and of course we bomb them) and than we agre to manage temporarily one solution etc etc... I guess some smart "experts (like this one, who was senior advisor to CIA) will make his salary like this for a long time until someone will ask him to shut up. The world without similar experts would be much better than it is now...
He was saying Kosovo was taken ilegally from Serbia. Based on which law (not so) dear expert? ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!...

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 17
Brian

pre 11 godina

This guy is completely ignorant. Serbia is a strident supporter of Kosovo independence and no longer opposes it. Customs, ambassadors. Platform, meetings with dacic and jagjajga. Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 15
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

Notice Ian here was away conveniently (even though he checks Serbian news everyday) when 5 Monks were being threatened with their lives because well, not even he can defend such a thing. So he happily steps away thinking no one will notice and then reappears when someone insults his thinking and goes against his racist and Serbophobic discourse.

See, you might be too insignificant for others to pay attention to when exactly you post (only on days when Albanians are not behaving like terrorists) but I on the other hand will make it a point for as long as I'm posting here to make clear to everyone what kind of person you are.

So welcome back friend, I am sure your racist self will take your much needed break the next rape or bomb explosion or whatever the hell your Islamic terrorist friends have cooking up in the near future!

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 13
David Kanin

pre 11 godina

For the record, during my interview with Politika interview I did not say--and do not believe--that Kosova was "illegally taken away" from Serbia. In my view, Serbia lost its former province because it mismanaged it during the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated the willingness to NATO to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
Willi Pfaff

pre 11 godina

Just would like to inform you, that David Kanin never said what you claimed in your article. He just came out with a statement and that is how he corrects the Politika article :

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.

Preporučujem 12 Ne preporučujem 13
LtCol Friedmann

pre 11 godina

Yes, just like Sandzak & Vojvodina was illegally acquired. But then again Serbs truly believe that everything they do is legal & what everyone else does is illegal. I'd say the term 'You win some, you lose some' just can't be grasped by these people.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 13
gjon fusha

pre 11 godina

The Serbs need to send these Illyrian wanabe Albos back to Azerbaijan once and for all. (Radovan, 11 February 2013 15:17)

To other Serbian that do the same threat too!
Do not do empty threats please. If you fill so strong come and do what you saying you can do.
You did try so many times before and failed. Last one was Milloshevic who failed so bad and lost his life too. Not to mention that jails in Hague are busy with your criminals leaders also. So please stop being tough behind the computer.

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 13
Helsingborg

pre 11 godina

Unilateral secession without parliamentary approval is illegal. Are you kalbs too stupid to understand that. And the UDI isnt worth the paper it is written on. All it confirms is that it is not illegal to declare independence. Anyone can. Northern Kosovo can and probably should as Kosovo is not a recognised country and never will be. But i bet if, God forbid, that Frankenstein ever becomes indepenedent, the Kalbs will deny the right of indepence to N Kosovo on the same grounds they deny exist today.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 12
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

@Bekim _ Novi Sad

I understand you would like to believe that there will be "multiple Albanian states" in the Balkans because well, you would love more Muslim states in the heart of Europe of course. However here's the thing, the countries these Albanians are trying to extract land from will not sit there and allow this to happen.

I have always said I pray that the eventual plan is Greater Albania at the expense of Serbia, FYR Macedonia, Greece & Montenegro. I really hope this is what they want to do, because there is simply no way 4 UN recognized sovereign nations will allow their territory to be stripped from them for the sake of savage terrorist ambitions. So please, form this "kosavoh army", start with your plans for Greater Talibania and we will see what happens.


Btw one of the posters on here (IAN, help me out they are your friends I can't put their names with the b.s. they write on here), I think it was the fellow who only understands the ! as a way to finish a sentence (Hoxha's education curriculum was always a weak point in Albania) said that it was "news coming out of Russia" when some randoms with no names attached to it posted a 'map' of how the Balkans will look in the future.

So I guess me question would be, Mr. Kannin's views "news coming out of America" ??

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 11
Comm. Parrisson

pre 11 godina

"ICJ has given its ruling: Declaration of independence is LEGALL... Where have you been when this issue was ruled by ICJ?!!! If you do not agree on ICJ ruling, than make public statement and tell us, which law defines Kosovo Independence as illegal?!!!..."
(Gjilanasi, 11 February 2013 16:34)

One more Albanian who doesn't understand then 'declaration of independence' and 'independence'. So, let's make it easy: I can gather some friends and declare ourselves the 'kings and dukes of China'. Perfectly legal, but don't expect China to accept us when we take some land as our kingdom.

Preporučujem 17 Ne preporučujem 11
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.
(Sofronije, 11 February 2013 17:55)
_________________________

I read a serb propaganda comment about Albanians to be ancient Azeris. And another about Sicily, spelled (Cicily Albo). The first has been proven obsolete. The second was never a proposed theory.

Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it.

Let the propaganda machine resume.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 10
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield (the same way it acquired it in 1912-1913). Legality had nothing to do with it.

David Kanin
(David Kanin, 11 February 2013 21:13)

The length's these primitive Albanians will go through is remarkable. No one but Albs refers to Kosovo i Metohija as 'kosova' it is not even the name of your occupation so why would David refer to it as that?

And lost Kosovo i Metohija on the battlefield? That's funny, I don't recall a bombardment by an outside military alliance a battlefield. Because when it came down to one on one battle, Serbs destroyed the KLA just ask Adem Jashari, he can easily tell you this. (No Albs don't compare this terrorists death to the March 2004 Islamist pogroms it just shows your primitive nature)

Nice try, "David"

Preporučujem 14 Ne preporučujem 9
Joe Banana

pre 11 godina

It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence.
(Ian (the "Busted"), UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 8
MikeC

pre 11 godina

Ian. UK

America, the Uk and Germany have all hijacked democracy. They all know that taking Kosovo away from Serbia was illegal and wrong. However, an independent Kosovo was the best option since there were thousands of alb criminals who couldnt be sent back home because of the "opresion by Miloseviq". An independent Kosovo was accepted , not because it was legal, but because the west had the power to take it away from Serbia for its own convenience. Carl Bild the foreign minister of Sweden was honest when he said that recognizing Kosovo was a contoversial matter since it didn't follow international law. And about the ICJ decision the ruling was neutral. It wasnt for or against Kosovo independence. However, you albs interpret all neutral decisions to be in your favour. Taking Kosovo away from Serbia is nothing less then thefts. I comapre it to the Europeans coming to America, raping and taking the land of the indigonous people. Most of the world sees it the same way. Even you albs know its true, otherwise you wouldn't make up stories about the illyrian/albanian connection and claim to this land that nobody outside of Albania and Kosovo recognize as a historical fact.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 8
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Daniel

pre 11 godina

How was it illegal? What law was broken? Illegal according to who? UNSCR 1244 didn't say that UDI wasn't permitted as a final solution. It was Serbia which tried to unilaterally tried to finalise Kosovo's final status with their 2006 Constitution and not a single person in Kosovo was given a say. That wasn't acceptable for Kosovo so they decided to go for independence. Not a single World Organisation or International court has said that Kosovo's independence was illegal. Anyway good luck with trying to prove that Kosovo's independence was illegal because you'll need it.
(Ian, UK, 11 February 2013 14:27)

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 8
Missoni

pre 11 godina

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 10:22)

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 8
Mendo

pre 11 godina

This is Mr Kanin's reactions to this article: In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was “taken illegally” from Serbia.  I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case.  In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO’s willingness to use force in 1999.  Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way–on the battlefield.  Legality had nothing to do with it.

Cheers

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 8
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

@(Gotsefromohrid, 11 February 2013 15:30)

Cicily Albo is proud today with Maniakes Castle.
Did you found any monument in Ohrid for albo leader Maniakes.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
MikeC

pre 11 godina

"I've read other articles written by David Kanin and this one is in stark contrast to them. Perhaps this one was cooked by Tanjug."

Gustave

As always when albanians make a claim its without any link to the source.
Please, provide us with some link to these fascinating articles by Kanin.

Preporučujem 16 Ne preporučujem 7
Real Mendo

pre 11 godina

You are a GOD!
(KOSOVA, 11 February 2013 17:55)

Albanians dont believe in God. Their religion is albanianism. It just prove that Ian is albanian!

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 7
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors!
(Brian, 11 February 2013 18:43)

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOO

Albanians took the "borders" ?!?! ahahahahahaha

When was this in July 2011 when ROSU came up to Mitrovica and left with one less terrorist than what they came with? Man Albanian revisionism at it finest, I really don't envy the physiological affect Hoxha had on you guys.

KFOR is currently flying you guys in on helicopters and is standing there holding your hand to make sure no one hurts the fragile Albanians.

Yes the corrupt and treasonous Serbian gov't supports Kosovo i Metohija's occupation, but the people don't. Not one politician other than Ceda Jovanovic runs on this as his pre-election platform and he routinely (despite having the most campaign funds) barely scrapes by the census. Then the corruption kicks in and the elite do things they would not be allowed to do in a normal country, but nothing in the Balkans is normal.




....Albanians taking borders, pfffffffft

Preporučujem 10 Ne preporučujem 7
Ari Gold

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

I copied this statement with quotation marks and could not find it anywhere on the net. Can you please show your source?! I know its a hard concept given Hoxha's education system did not require sources because everything you were fed was lies but in the real world you should back up when you present a comment as factual rather than your own opinion.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

Nice try but the "Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia" aka "Badinter Arbitration Committee" are 15 legal "opinions" and are therefore not legally binding.

Not to mention that the Commission is ambiguous on what is meant by the term "Frontier".

Keep trying though.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 7
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@Ian

listen first off kosovo trying to secede from serbia is illegal under international law specifically under the un charter and the helsinki act, in which both GUARANTEE a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity .. second of all kosovo's so called udi was achieved through force (i.e. nato bombings) so dont talk about it being done in peace when it wasnt ... and third a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity supersede the right to self-determination that you keep mentioning, otherwise we would have mass chaos all over the world with minorities trying to declare independence .. however self determination can take precedent if and only if both sides can come to an agreement and in this case they havent ... by the way i also forgot to mention that unsc resolution 1244 although it doesnt say what the final status of kosovo is and that negotiations should be done, it did however reaffirm yugoslavia's (now serbia's) territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo, thus legally kosovo still is serbia's territory ... i can almost guarantee you that this conflict over kosovo is not even close to being over, you can highly expect another war and this time serbia will reclaim ALL of kosovo cuz there will be no nato intevention (they'll just pull out not wanting to risk starting a world war)

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 7
Aura

pre 11 godina

Try as hard as they might might Kosovo has no legitimacy as an independent state. Neither politically or historically or morally. All the players know it stinks and are desperate to get out.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 7
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)
Wow Kathryn did you come up with that Texas thing yourself? Actually other Serbs have tried to use it before but it has many, many flaws.
1. To date no great percentage of Mexicans have wanted to declare independence in Texas(actually most came to the US to be a part of the US).
2. So far the federal govt has not declared war on the Mexicans and ordered the military units to burn their homes, commit sexual assaults, mass executions, burials in mass graves.
3. Instead of closing down Spanish speaking schools and factories that employ Mexicans you see mandated Spanish classes and most all govt documents are available in English and Spanish.
4. You have latino governors, senators and congressmen that represent all people in their districts not just their "own kind".
5. You have no one in US govt on trial or convicted of these type of crimes against the Mexican people.

Now when you find an American apple to compare to the Serbian one, come back to the table and we can talk.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 7
Aura

pre 11 godina

Niki- you make my point. If borders can be changed on such flimsy grounds, the world will go to hell. Thats the whole basis of international law. You can't pick and choose. And it would be much more appropriate to conflate the German example with Albania, as you were the willing executioners and war criminals on an industrial scale.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 7
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 15:35)

Congratulations, you've realised that SFR Yugoslavia and the Union State of Serbia and Montenegro had very different Constitutions.

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 7
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

first off i said kosovo so called udi was as a result of nato force being used on serbia in 1999, it does not matter when they declared independence, the fact was that it was ACHIEVED through force .. second of all kosovo could not implement any final status process or declare independence because there was NO AGREEMENT in place with serbia and due to this kosovo is still legally a part of serbia under unsc 1244.. you can talk about self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the only way it does take precedence is if both sides come to an agreement which in this case it has not .. and your wrong serbia is a signatory of the helsinki act, because even though Yugoslavia signed in 1975, serbia was recognized as the legal successor of yugoslavia after 1995, and dont try to discredit it by saying its not a treaty, the fact is that it is in effect and is a part of international law

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 7
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

"Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it."
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)
Serbia did not loose the battlefield with Albos. with NATO Yes.
Legally NATO did not destroy serbian deed for Kosovo
Arnaut is steel vithout any legal paper in the hand.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 6
Ross

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

"German Citizen", could you please send webpage where is this written? But not to webpage of Daniel Serwer,famous Albanian lobbyist. There is only statement from Daniel Server about this, but nothing written by David Kanin himself.

Preporučujem 13 Ne preporučujem 6
winston

pre 11 godina

Few things mean nosing independence recognition from Serbia more than those meetings of dacic and jagjajga. There is total recognition from Serbia in every way. What did Serbia do when the border was taken over by Albanians nothing and now they collect customs!! And send and accept ambassadors! Brian
Brian, what can I say, except that you should read the news more accurately. Dacic never met with jagajga. Serbia is not collecting customs for Pristina. And, there was never, and will not be an exchange of ambassadors between BG and Pristina. What news channels have you been listening to? Being wrong here and there is OK, but you struck out, 3 up, 3 down. BTW, Dacic is the little, short, fat one, Nikolic is the tall, goofy looking, no personality one. Is Jagaiga the little hairy one?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

It clearly says in international law that you can not CHANGE THE BORDERS OF A SOVEREIGN STATBE BY FORCE, THATS WHY IT WAS ILLEGAL.
(Daniel, 12 February 2013 09:30)

Nowhere in international law does it say that. And if you wish to prove me wrong, please name which international law that "clearly says" this.

Anyway it wasn't done by force, it was done by peaceful means.

Then by the United Nations there is "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status [Political Status being the key term] and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

Serbia is trying to deny Kosovo this right and it isn't suprising that Russia and China are backing Serbia on this issue as they're also great offenders of this human right.

CAPITAL LETTERS TO SHOW THAT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU HAVE WRITTEN.

Anyway, good luck with trying to prove it was illegal.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 6
Denaud

pre 11 godina

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 12:05)

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

Kosova has no moral legitimacy as a moral state? Tell me, what is the moral basis for Serbia's existence or for that matter Germany's? come to think of it, what is the moral pillar of any state?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 13:14)

The UN Charter also talks about "The right to self-determination of peoples" whereby they can "freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development" which is used in Kosovo's favour.

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

Kosovo's Declaration of Independence took place in 2008 not in 1999 when the Kosovo War took place.

Yes UNSCR 1244 did "reaffirm yugoslavia's territorial integrity and sovereignty over kosovo" whilst Kosovo's final status were to be decided upon. UNSCR 1244 was by no means a permanent guarantee of sovereignty over Kosovo.

However since 1999 the elected Government of Kosovo decided to implement Kosovo's final status through independence in 2008.

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 6
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 6
Stan

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 6
Kathryn

pre 11 godina

Comparing is good when you realize that all you do is compare. No...the Mexican people probably love the USA and would not think of being independent but what if? Comparing a Serbian apple to USA apple is not a good idea. I never had a Serbian apple. To decide that anyone can move into a country and say they are now independent is illegal. Kosovo is not that great but it belongs to Serbia. You cannot give it away when Russia, China and I think India says no.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

If US decided Kosovo is independent now, what about Texas, where a great majority of Mexican people are living. Would they declare independence and would the US say "sure." Myself, I say that Kosovo is part of Serbia, just because the Albanians moved in does not say they own it. I am shocked that so many countries went along with this. Serbia you have rights and no matter what country says otherwise, Kosovo belongs to you.
(Kathryn, 12 February 2013 02:01)

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy

Also why would Mexicans in Texas want to be independent? I understand Mexico's ancestral claims to part of the US's territory. However I'm sure that a many Mexican try to get in the US illegally each year so they don't have to live in Mexico.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 6
Gotsefromohrid

pre 11 godina

Real Mendo

One doesn't have to be genius to suss out that Ian is an Albanian.The majority of Brits cannot name their Chancelor of the exchequer let alone Haradinaj .He just tries to pull the wool over our eyes making us believe that he presents the Brits point of view.

Preporučujem 11 Ne preporučujem 5
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Sandzaklija

pre 11 godina

"original ancient inhabitants!!! Us Albanians like to correct wrongdoings into right doings , Just so you know! You might want to go back into history a little further, then 1999!"
@(rocky, 11 February 2013 17:02)
I loved this post!!!
Com on poor rocky you will be happy with 1042yr.
this is first year of original ancient inhabitants for Albos in Balkan.
Before that time Albo is working to build big Castle in Syracuse.
Balkan vacation is over albo start to ruin everything to the his neighbor. Kosovo is fresh example.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 5
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (Badinter Arbitration Committee):

"As they are given the right of self-determination, individuals may demand and obtain their
recognition as being part of a group of persons of their choice. This would be done through precise
mechanisms, bringing with them guarantees, which have to be negotiated and settled at
international level. This would not, however, have any effect upon the territories of those States
concerned. Frontiers would remain unchanged."
(Missoni, 12 February 2013 11:11)

And another thing, the "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" was giving legal opinions on the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aka a country which hasn't existed for 22 years. So what has that got to do with Kosovo's independence?

Preporučujem 9 Ne preporučujem 5
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

"Comm. Parrisson"

are you still persisting with that stupid argument? all states declare themselves to being with, without the consent of those who rule them. Serbia did the same, the Ottomans accepted it as fact years later. Seriously, you do write a lot of garbage now and again

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
Denaud

pre 11 godina

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 14:56)

"Following the referendum on independence organised on 21 May 2006 in Montenegro (in which 55.5% of voters expressed their support for independence whereas the turnout reached 86.5% of those eligible to vote), on 5 June Serbian Parliament, acting in accordance with Article 60 of the Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro confirmed the continuity of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union and informed thereof the EU and other representatives of the international community."

"On 12 June 2006 the EU Council adopted Conclusions, in which taking note of the Serbian Parliament's Decision it recognised Republic of Serbia as a legal successor of the State Union. The Council called also on Montenegro and on Serbia to pursue a direct and constructive dialogue on their future relations."

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 5
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with "self-determination".

(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 5
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Aura

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 5
a New Day

pre 11 godina

Comm. Parrisson, 11 February 2013 19:34)
Ah simple minds that think they can peel a banana to show what the inside of an orange looks like!

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Bob

pre 11 godina

More to the point, it was stupidly taken away from Serbia. Who in future will believe that a 'humanitarian intervention' is not in fact an invasion? That argument was abused. The best solution would have mended things for all sides, but instead there is a fixation on 'Serbia' as being the cause of problems. All sides are corrupted without exception, and all sides have large populations of ordinary citizens who suffer because of the ambitions of their poor quality governments - Serbia too.

Preporučujem 8 Ne preporučujem 4
Denaud

pre 11 godina

In an interview with me published over the past couple of days, the Serbian daily Politika claimed I said Kosova was "taken illegally" from Serbia. I did not say this and do not believe it to be the case. In my view, Serbia lost its former province through its own mismanagement in the 1990s, and because Milosevic miscalculated NATO's willingness to use force in 1999. Serbia lost Kosova the old fashioned way--on the battlefield. Legality had nothing to do with it.
(Willi Pfaff, 11 February 2013 21:29)

So far I have not seen in any article where David Kanin refers to Kosovo as "Kosova". He only mentioned that name of Kosovo is represented as "Kosova*" (as agreed by Serbia)but he never used term Kosova in his articles. According to Daniel Serwer, David Kanin sent him email and this is what he quoted. However, I would not trust Daniel Serwer, in the past he was "economical with truth".

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Sofronije

pre 11 godina

" The second was never a proposed theory.
Most International historians generally agree that Albanians are the Illyrian descendants. Most historians who doubt this theory are salvs. Coincidence? Who cares, they obviosly know who we are but don't want to admit it."
(Skifteri, 11 February 2013 22:53)
your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Ian - As is often the case, it is open to interpretation. Serbia is clearly the successor state to SFRY and Sand M. Regarding Kosovo, the constitution has, in almost all facets, remained the same. Kosovo is in limbo, and so it shall remain until you realise you will have to compromise your absolutist and frankly illegal demands. Over to you.
(Stan, 12 February 2013 17:15)

Good word is "interpretation". No World Organisation or International Court has ever said that Kosovo's independence was illegal and they never will. So I'll leave people on B92 to interpret international law to try and show that Kosovo's independence was illegal.

Serbia is not in the successor to SFRY. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wasn't the successor to SFRY either (even though it wanted to be) hence why it didn't retain it's seat in the UN and had problems with foreign diplomatic buildings abroad. The FRY didn't inherit what it wanted to from SFRY. It failed to be recognised as the successor state. There were several successors to SFRY, not one sole one.

Yes Kosovo may be in some sort of limbo but I'm sure they're happy now than they were in 2008. And the longer Kosovo remains in "limbo" the longer Serbia and Northern Kosovo remain in limbo. And for Kosovo, with every recognition, every diplomatic relation established and every Organisation it joins it comes less and less out of Limbo.

Preporučujem 5 Ne preporučujem 4
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

your post is very nice empty story
Keep your theory in one packet and visit in Syracuse George Maniakes Castle. also tell them exactly what you tell us in your post.
Receiving & reading book from them your last word in the new post will be: sorry. if not Castle is there before most modern historian.
Castle make money with tourist, historian make money with wrong book.
In the Balkan albo did not build nothing, except 1/2 million concrete bunker, empty story to be Illirian, including anarchy in the Kosovo.
(Sofronije, 12 February 2013 04:34

_______________________________________________
I have difficulty understanding your broken English. You should post some links to explain how a Greek general of the Byzantine army of the 11th century has anything to do regarding Albanian origins.

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?

Show me the Propaganda website :)

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 4
Denaud

pre 11 godina

According to Serbia's own sources, Albanians accounted for at least 75% of Kosovo's population when Serbia conquered Kosovo in 1912/13. To say that the "Albanians moved in" is what Serbian Nationalists would have you believe. Albanians have been in Kosovo for hundreds of years. Serbian Nationalists would also tell you that Serbia liberated Kosovo in 1912/13 but to Albanians they'll tell you that an Ottoman Sultan was swapped for a Serbian King. They were still ruined by a Foreign Absolute Monarchy
Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 20:58)

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?

Preporučujem 6 Ne preporučujem 4
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Also since when do (only) buildings prove ones existence on a territory? How do we account for the native Americans? Australians?
============================
First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 4
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

(Aleks, 12 February 2013 21:53)

No the UDI was a result of Serbia refusing to negotiate with Pristina on Kosovo's final status and as Serbia's unilateral attempt to finalise Kosovo's status with their 2006 Constitution where the referendum was not even held in Kosovo. These important events leading up to the UDI took place after the Kosovo War. And besides the Kosovo War was caused by force and oppression against Albanians in the 80s and 90s.

Nowhere in 1244 does it say that final status for Kosovo has to be mutually agreed by both parties.

"self-determination all you want the fact is that it does NOT take precedence over a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity" According to who? That is your opinion and interpretation. That is not written in stone anywhere.

FR Yugoslavia wasn't recognised (not even in 1995) as the sole successor state to SFR Yugoslavia. This is why FR Yugoslavia only joined the UN in 2000 and was not a member of NAM. SFR Yugoslavia is recognised as having several successor states, but not one sole state which inherits all previous agreements and treaties. Most countries didn't even recognise FRY as "Yugoslavia", it was simply referred to as "Serbia" pre-2000.

Besides the Helsinki Act is non-binding therefore it means sweet FA. And no it is not considered international law. So lets say for arguements sake that Serbia was recognised as the successor to SFRY, it wouldn't mean anything anyway as the Helsinki Act has no legal weight.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 4
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.
(Black Jack, 13 February 2013 14:44)

I don't care.

You just have to know that population migration is natural and the mixing of ethnic groups is also natural. It has been happening for thousands of years.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 4
j

pre 11 godina

"Not a single person in Kosovo was given a say". How did you figure that out? They were not included on voters lists as they would not vote anyway! They would not make any difference with their votes. Albanians only do what their masters in white house say to them. Ian (the "Busted") you can have better arguments for your inlaws!
(Joe Banana, 11 February 2013 19:38)

How do you know. Did you read the horoscope?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

Exactly, as Kosovo was not even mentioned. Serbia was mentioned there and Kosovo was integral part of Serbia, not a republic as others. According to SFRY constitution only republics had a right for self determination. Kosovo was never republic, it was autonomous region and part of Serbia.
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 13:37)

The "Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia" is regarding the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' which was disolved in 1991 and replaced by Croatia, Slovenia, BiH, Macedonia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

It has no implications for state which was formed 15 years later in 2006 called the "Republic of Serbia", following the disolution of the SFR Yugoslavia, disolution of FR Yugoslavia and the dissolution of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro".

According to the SFRY Constitution none of the Republics were entitled to self determination.

Preporučujem 7 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not have treaty status"
(Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then!

Preporučujem 4 Ne preporučujem 3
Peggy

pre 11 godina

what? so borders can't be changed at will? weird, it seems serbs didn't think of borders when they broke away from the Ottomans. what moral basis is there for serbia, who have contributed Mladic, Kradzic and others to the world?
(Nikolle, 12 February 2013 20:15)
========================

They did not break away. They liberated their land and themselves from the occupier.
HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Nikolle

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however, I would like Aura to tell me what the moral basis for Serbia is? or that matter what the moral basis for France is?

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

"A study done in 1871 by Austrian colonel Peter Kukulj for the internal use of the Austro-Hungarian army showed that the mutesarifluk of Prizren (corresponding largely to present-day Kosovo) had some 500,000 inhabitants, of which:

318,000 Serbs (64%),
161,000 Albanians (32%),
10,000 Roma (Gypsies) and Circassians
2,000 Turks"

Just wonder how Serbs went from 64% to 25% and Albanians from 32% to 75% in 40 years? Ethnic cleansic perhaps? Or perhaps increased migration of Albanians from other parts of Turkish empire to Kosovo?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 00:27)

First off don't use Wikipedia as a reference point as it is very unreliable. For example the "mutesarifluk of Prizren" didn't correspond with today's Kosovo as it included large chunks of today's Central Serbia. Also that is just a "study" by Kukulj aka an estimate. A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today). Also many people (Serbs, Albanians, Roma ect) left the region during the War between the Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Greece. Neither of which were friends of the Albanians.

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 12:09)


I've never supported the Helsinki Act. I stated:

1) It was signed by the 'Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' not the 'Federal Republic of Yugoslavia' (two very different countries). FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY. Serbia did not sign it and it is not a recognised successor state to a state which did sign it either.

2) There are Articles in the Helsinki Act which can be both used in Serbia's and Kosovo's favour, therefore the Helsinki Act only shows ambiguity (uncertainty).

3) It is non-bidding therefore it has no legal weight, which means it has no legal implications.

So I will stand by what I said ands say that the Helsinki Act is dud.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Ian, UK

pre 11 godina

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?
(Denaud, 13 February 2013 15:59)

Yes but the FRY was not the sole direct successor to the SFRY therefore it didn't inherit international membership in organisations, treaties ect.

"Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?"

Because someone else brought it up in Serbia's favour and I turned it on it's head by using it in Kosovo's favour. Therefore by showing it can be used in favour of both Kosovo and Serbia, it proves that it is useless to both as it can be beneficial to the opposing party.

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 3
Pls say it ain't so!!!

pre 11 godina

People, quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal; don't understand why this is even up for a discussion!! You're so preoccupied with Kosova that every single article here has to revolve around us.

Well I understand that your peeps are trying to divert your attentions from your internal MAJOR issues, but we do not CARE, deal with it.

We have nothing to do with your people, so mind your business.

Don't worry how we'll sustain our economy, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Don't worry if we'll make it to the EU, it's OUR business not YOURS.

Yes I did, I sure said it.....

Preporučujem 1 Ne preporučujem 2
Beth

pre 11 godina

So, we're to 'quit crying and mumbling, Kosova is a done deal', according to one person who commented here. If 'Kosova' is a done deal, it was because of a desperate need for Camp Bondsteel. The extremists got their 'Kosova' because USA-NATO were intent on having a military footprint in the Balkans. The jury is out whether all of illegalities are 'a done deal'.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 2
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Nikolle and other Albanians, we keep asking over and over and over for you guys to show us some proof of you being in Kosovo before the Serbs. Anything will do. How about a cave painting, anything but you have never even attempted to prove any of your claims.

So either show some evidence or shut up. So really fed up with your claims which you have no evidence at all for.

What do you hope to accomplish with repeating the same of tired "we are illyrians and you must believe us" routine. I can say that I am from planet Krypton and superman was my dad but without proof all I am is delusional.

So go ahead, show us something for God's sake. Can you do it?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 2
Peggy

pre 11 godina

Peggy

yes, one man's liberation is another occupation. replace ottoman for serbs now and see how Albanians feel. however,
==============================
How do you figure that Serbs occupied Kosovo?
When did that happen and what did Albanians do about it then?
Did Serbs do what the English have done in America and Australia? Did they subdue the local people and push them onto some sort of reservations?
What exactly happened during that "occupation"?

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

A German study five years later shows that Albanians were the vast majority in Kosovo minus the North (same as today).
The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

This German study 5 years later was unreliable as the one before. You think if it has been published by Liverpool University Press it is reliable? Another Austrian study published by an Austrians in 1899 estimated:
182,650 Albanians (47.88%)
166,700 Serbs (43.7%)

But how that in 12 years become 75% against 25%? It shows that all studys have been unreliable. However, Serbia was not in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, it just reclaimed what used to belong to them before Turkish expansion.

And BTW all studys have been performed either by Austrians, Germans or British. I find the unreliable and biased towards Albanian as majority.

Regarding Greek Turkish war, 90% majority of those who were expeled were Serbs.

And if look at Kosovo Vilayet (as most of estimates where done for Kosovo Vilayet) which included also Sandzak, population was clasified according to religion not according to nationality. Definately in Kosovo Vilayet Serbs were minority but not all Muslims were Albanians. For e.g. if we look in Kosovo Vilayet, one third of Vilayet was the area of Sandzak and there is not mentioning of Serbian Muslims.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Black Jack

pre 11 godina

In them 40 years you talk about, the amount of Albanians increased by around 20,000 which isn't a very large amount to increase by. The fact of the matter is that when the Kingdom of Serbia was in the process of Imperialist Expansion of it's Kingdom, they forcibly conquered a territory full of Albanians not Serbs.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 12:20)

History only begins at a certain point for some. Okay then explain why in 1455 the Turkish defter results in an overwhelming Slav majority. You know before the expansionistic and immigration policies of the Ottoman empire.

Another thing to consider why is it the Tosks (Albs from Southern Albania/Tirana) share Slavic haplogroups, yet the Ghegs much less so. Did the Slavs travel further to intermingle with the Tosks because they were more attractive or were the Ghegs latecoming imports.

Don't care about nation/ethnic/national engineering, at this point history deserves more respect.

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

FRY is NOT a successor state to SFRY.
(Ian, UK, 13 February 2013 14:33)

You are wrong Ian, FRY is one of successor states of SFRY. And FRY was Serbia and Montenegro which were two states from SFRY, which gives additional weight to FRY compared two other succesor states. "Serbia and Montenegro" was successor state og FRY and Serbia successor state of "Serbia and Montenegro".

Why would you mention Helsinki accords in favour of Kosovo's independence and fact that Serbia was not signatory of those accords and then later write that Helsinki act is dud?

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 1
Aleks

pre 11 godina

@ Ian

The kosovo war began not because of an oppression against albanians, it began because you albanians started rioting and killing police officers and military personnel and non serb civilians ..do you think that the state would have jsut sat back and watched this happen, of course they wouldnt thats why they sent in the troops to calm things down, there is a reason why the kla was considered a terrorist organization by everyone including your western countires who only delisted it so they can have a puppet in place ..serbia did negotiate with kosovo about its final status however the negotiations collapsed but that did not give the right to kosovo to do whatever it wanted, kosovo's final status is still in limbo otherwise there would be no problems/negotiations ..in 2006 a referendum was held but what difference does it make if it was held in kosovo or not, even if the albanains voted the result would have been the same ..a state's sovereignty and territorial integrity taking precedent over self determination unless there is an agreement in place is not my interpretation it is a fact ..name me one incident where this did not apply and the territories were able to join the un?? exactly there is none ..serbia is the successor state to yugoslavia as all the the other republics decided to leave and you cannot be a successor if you left, this was agreed in 1995 and 2000 when they were readmitted into the un (along with kosovo as a legal part of serbia's territory)

Preporučujem 2 Ne preporučujem 1
Skifteri

pre 11 godina

First of all, both American Indians and Aborigines were documented as being on the land when explorers arrived. Albanians were not documented anywhere.
Second, they do have physical proof of being there before the white man. There are cave paintings at least, what do the Albanians have? Zilch, nothing.
C'mon, give us something, anything. A cave painting will do.
(Peggy, 13 February 2013 00:39)
_______________________________________________________________________

Yes, Albanians are indeed mentioned by the Romans in 150AD. That still 3 and a 1/2 centuries before Barbarian, than slav invasions. (Look up Albani tribe) Albanopolis is mentioned way before that by Ptoleme.

You'd have to study the evidence and form on indirect theory since no direct evidance exists. The absence of Illyrian cultural monumenst/documents is also charateristic of Albanians which did not have a writing system since the 19th century. No migration exists. No relative of Shqip language can be found.

Since you what a tangible proof, we can conclude that Albanians are living artifacts of Illyrians.

Preporučujem 0 Ne preporučujem 1
Denaud

pre 11 godina

Serbia is not a signatory of the Helsinki Accords, nor is it a
recognised successor state to a signatory. Article 8 of the
Helsinki Accords also falls in Kosovo's favour with
"self-determination".
(Ian, UK, 12 February 2013 15:19)

"The Helsinki Accords, however, were not binding as they did not
have treaty status" (Denaud, 12 February 2013 18:32)

Well that just proves how dud The Helsinki Act is then! (Ian, UK,
12 February 2013 20:44)

You are the one who said that Serbia is not signatory of Helsinki Accords and than you said how Helsinki Act is dud. You are contradicting yourself Ian! Serbia could not sign Helsinki Accords as it was FRY in that time and the Helsinki Accords were sign after famous FRY constitution of 1974.

And you complain that Serbian did not sign Helsinki Accords including Article 8 which is in favor of self determination and then you said that Helsinki Act is dud? According to you whole Helsinki Act is dud including article 8 which also falls in Kosovo's favour for "self-determination". Sorry English is not my first language but this is how I understood what you wrote.

Preporučujem 3 Ne preporučujem 0