"Slovakia could recognize if Serbia signs agreement"

But how can Slovakia recognise Kosovo? If Slovakia recognised Kosovo, the Hungarians in Southern Slovakia would instantly UDI and separate from Slovakia.

Oh yeah I forget. The so-called "Kosovo Precedent" is an artificial manufactured concept created by those who are opposed to Kosovo's independence. Therefore Kosovo's independence and Slovakia's potential recognition of Kosovo has not/ will not have any implications on the Hungarians in Southern Slovakia what-so-ever.

And Slovakia is just the beginnning...

In the end you will see, that those who have'nt recognized Kosovo did this only, to wait and see how Prishtina and Belgrade treat each other. Now that they see them talking and even possibly reaching an agreement, there's no reason not to recognize Kosovos independence.

Since Radičova noted she could not speak for the current government,she's expressing her personal opinion.
Why should this be of any interest?

So normalizing relations means recognition of Kosovo.
Then, Serbia will never normalize relations with Kosovo. Did Slovakia think that one day Serbia will do that?

Ian and Kenny,

This article clearly states that Slovakia will support Serbia's decision on Kosovo. I don't understand how you two English speaking guys could misconstrue the entire article to benefit the illegal encroachment of Albanians in Kosovo.

Ian and Kenny

This article clearly states that Slovakia will support Serbia's decision on Kosovo. I don't understand how you two English speaking guys could misconstrue the entire article to benefit the illegal encroachment of Albanians in Kosovo.
(Another Canadian Serb, 15 April 2013 12:14)

Did you even read my comment? I never denied that Slovakia will support Serbia over Kosovo and I never said that Slovakia will support Kosovo either. My comment focussed on the implications of the so-called "Kosovo Precedent" on Slovakia, this is why I used the term "potential recognition".

Anyway it doesn't even matter what Iveta Radičova has to say as she is no longer engaged in politics, never mind the Prime Minister of Slovakia. She is a lecturer in Sociology at Oxford University. She has no power in Slovakia's decision making and she has no political weight.

I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country.
(Ari Gold, 15 April 2013 12:58)

Bloody Hell! We've agreed on something!

Take the Scottish Independence Referendum next year for example, I think it is fair to say that it would be happening regardless of what has happened in Kosovo. It be absurd to suggest that Kosovo has influenced it any way and it would be absurd to suggest that when the Scottish electorate are casting their votes, Kosovo will be in the back of their heads influencing their vote.

Yes some countries haven't recognised Kosovo because they believe that doing would be contrary to International Law whereas some have done so as they believe it is in line with International Law. Regardless of what one believes about the legality of it, no International World Organisation will ever come out and say that it is legal or that is illegal as big powers will prevent it from doing so either way. Some countries such as Spain for example have not recognised Kosovo to show that they're opposed to internal secessionist movements. And I think many countries have not recognised Kosovo or voiced their support for Serbia as they don't be involved in a dispute, they don't want to be seen as 'taking sides' either way.

Ian, UK,

I can't help smiling to your logic. You say:

"The so-called "Kosovo Precedent" is an artificial manufactured concept created by those who are opposed to Kosovo's independence."

Please, explain me how the concept of Kosovo sui generis isn't artificial and manufactured? Did it perhaps fall from heavens, or it's a nature's product?

I'm waiting for your explination.

(Ian, UK, 15 April 2013 10:41)

I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country.

But Slovakia cannot be bigger Serbs than Serbs themselves. If Serbia's traitorous government (tries to) sell off Kosovo i Metohija, how could any other country not recognize this?

Anyway, we'll see what will happen. I don't have too much faith in Serbia's political leaders not to go down the treasonous route. But perhaps the extremely vocal protest against Bojan Pajtic and his separatist tendencies in Vojvodina could send a signal to Daciq and the rest on what would happen if they went down the same path.

Please, explain me how the concept of Kosovo sui generis isn't artificial and manufactured? Did it perhaps fall from heavens, or it's a nature's product?

I'm waiting for your explination.
(Olli, 15 April 2013 12:11)

I've never said that Kosovo is a "sui generis" case but the establishment of the State of Kosovo is a very unique situation. People like to draw parallels with Kosovo and other states with partial international recognition such as Abkhazia, ROC/Taiwan and TRNC. However Kosovo's establishment and the current situation in Kosovo is very different to them three. Abkhazia's population has more than halved since it's formation following the expulsion of Georgians and it only received it's first recognition 16 years later, it is more like an autonomous oblast of the Russian Federation rather than a State, this is a view shared by many Abkhazians. ROC is a government in exile on the isle of Taiwan and it's international recognition is in reverse gear. TRNC only has one recognition and it is de facto pretty much a part of the Republic of Turkey, however the Turks in Northern Cyprus actually want a unified Cyprus. These three are very different to Kosovo and that's what I say makes Kosovo unique.

If you believe that 'free will' is classed as being "nature's product" then I would say that the State of Kosovo is nature's product as it was established due to the will of the people of Kosovo and without it, it wouldn't have been possible.

sela,

You forgot to mention the part where Serbia along with the Balkans should also be free of Albanians.

Slovakia what big deal you recognize Kosovo or not Hungarian should be free from Slovakia and Serbia soon or later they will be free like Kosovo independent.

"Now that they see them talking and even possibly reaching an agreement, there's no reason not to recognize Kosovos independence."
(Kenny, 15 April 2013 11:06)

Of course. The problems Slovakia, Spain, Russia, China and many other countries have with that 'Kosovo' is that it was created unilaterally.

A new state created/split off according to a mutual agreed solution doesn't cause any problems in the world. Ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..

If Serbia recognises it then Slovakia will. Take reading classes....

"I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country. "
(Ari Gold, 15 April 2013 12:58)

Yes! Purely 'adherence to international law'. Especially Russia, which didn't have any problem with the 'international law' when it recognized South Ossetia :)

Well, Slovakia please understand. That then would mean that:

- A piece of Slovakia can declare indpendence
- Most of EU will recognize it
- EU will force you to recognize it too!

Is that what you really want?
Slovakia should not recognize Kosovo (or Abkhazia or Ossetia or Karabakh) unless there is a mutual agreed deal on independence. Normalizing relations under EU pressure is not the same as having a mutual agreed deal!!

Joachim: If B92 only published articles of 'interest' there wouldn't be much to read on here. I suspect that generating debate is their main focus and they seem to be doing a decent job of it from what I see each day.

"If you believe that 'free will' is classed as being "nature's product" then I would say that the State of Kosovo is nature's product as it was established due to the will of the people of Kosovo and without it, it wouldn't have been possible."
(Ian, UK, 15 April 2013 13:02)

Better said: By the will of the Albanian minority within Serbia. You know well that there is no such thing as 'Kosovarians' or 'people of Kosovo', it's a purely artificial product.

The same goes for Kosovo. Of course the historical region of Kosovo existed for centuries, but today's borders (which are the ex-YU provincial borders) are without any historic foundation.

Ian,

I question the rightfulness and wrongfulness of utilization of concepts as "(Kosovo) precedent", "sui generis", "Pandora's Box", "will of people", "reality on the ground", etc., all the way to "humanitarian bombing". Motives of action lie elsewhere than in ethics, legalities or illegalities attached to them. The true contents of concepts do not come from the concepts themselves but from the power that utilizises them.

An easy example, Pandora's Box. Opening the box in the first place was no problem. The concept didn't exist or bother anyone, until certain series of operations and military actions were executed and the master power overruns the earlier guiding concept of "will of people" by the concept of "Pandora's Box".

"Unique situation" is a concept that allows practically any twist in a story. You say "the establishment of the State of Kosovo is a very unique situation". Give me one establishment of a new state that isn't a unique situation... But we are told that Kosovo is a Unique Situation, therefore we can forget a number of matters. One of them being, again, the will of people, namely the majority of people in Northern Kosovo. So we can force them to live in a state they don't want to live in.

Why do you only call Kosovo a unique case, but not the other three cases: Abkhazia, Taiwan, TRNC. I can't see anything less unique in them. And there isn't anything less unique in them. But do we allow these cases the same liberties as we do with the unique Kosovo?

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)

I thought about it and I figured it out. Kosovo should have accepted Vojislav’s offer of more-then-autonomy-but-less-then-independence in order to achieve many more recognitions in a much shorter amount of time :)

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)


Remember that South Sudan war for independence lasted 50 years and claimed 2 million lives.
The UN seat didnt come in a week and certainly didnt come for free.

In case you still don't get it, it means that all cases need to be AGREED upon and not decided by the US of A.
(Peggy, 17 April 2013 01:35)

Most independence movements are not agreed. Want an example? Serbia did not agree with Turkey but went to war for it. Want more ? I have about 100 more examples. In fact agreements for independence are not the norm. It is precisely because such lack of agreements that independence movements start. If everyone would agree on the issue independence there would be no wars for them. If everyone was waiting for the ok from the other side, there would be no Serbia today, no US and we'd all still be under the Roman Empire cause they would never allow for their territories to be lost. What you and Ron and Olli are stating are pipe dreams and not based on reality. You are ok with that because for as long as you want others to follow these pipe dreams you don't loose anything. Most people are not naive enough to wait for Serbia and the Serbs for eternity just like you didn't wait for the Turks for eternity. If that's good enough for you, that's also good enough for us.

This is rubbish

Serbia has customs agents on the border right now!! Why not have Slovakia recognize Kosovo based on that! Serbia isn't even arguing for Belgrade control but for Serb run municipalities in Kosovo run ultimately by prisitina!!

All I understood from the statement is that Slovakia wants to sit on two chairs. Please make up your mind.

Don’t bother. Serbia will not sign such an agreement which recognizes Kosovo.

Why do you only call Kosovo a unique case, but not the other three cases: Abkhazia, Taiwan, TRNC. I can't see anything less unique in them. And there isn't anything less unique in them. But do we allow these cases the same liberties as we do with the unique Kosovo?
(Olli, 15 April 2013 18:11)

Because each case has to be solved separately. Why for example should those in Abkhazia be held hostage to the situation between china and Taiwan?One good reason would be sufficient. Why should those in Palestine be held hostage to the situation in south Ossetia? I guess because you and Ron can write a comment here go to a bar later on and forget about it; while people suffer because of your all or nothing attitude over a self- righteous principle. This is not only wrong but cruel. How about this, we should not bother with N. Kosova deal until Palestine and Israel have reached an agreement. Sounds good, no? It's completely non-sensical but since you could care less about other people then let's care less about the Serbs as well. What's good for the grander is good for the goose.

Comm Parisson: Oil.

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)

The main reason was that Sudan (reluctantly) accepted to allow all options on the table rather than rushing through a new constitution, in which the Southern Sudanese would be deprived the right to vote, making any discussion of even the prospect of allowing the citizens of Southern Sudan to freely choose the destiny of the political territory they inhabited and saw their own future associated with, unconstitutional. That's what Vojo did, thereby effectively tying the hands of then current and future Sudanese political negotiators. When the very issue at hand is legal state status, you cannot claim to negotiate in good faith if you make it an unconstitutional act to discuss anything but degrees of autonomy when you do not have any leverage over that autonomy in the first place.

A far better negotiating platform would have been for Belgrade to offer the same, but not more, to Pristina that Pristina would be ready to offer to Serb-controlled areas. This would have meant that for Pristina to have legitimacy to call either a referendum or a UDI, they would have had to offer the same to Northern Kosovo and the enclaves to decide whether to remain part of Serbia or not.

It's completely non-sensical but since you could care less about other people then let's care less about the Serbs as well. What's good for the grander is good for the goose.
(J, 16 April 2013 21:55)
===============================

You are ridiculous.
Nobody is saying that no case can be solved unless all cases are solved. All Ron and others are saying is that ALL cases have to follow the same international laws and no chrry picking which law is to be followed and which one is to be ignored.
In case you still don't get it, it means that all cases need to be AGREED upon and not decided by the US of A.

But how can Slovakia recognise Kosovo? If Slovakia recognised Kosovo, the Hungarians in Southern Slovakia would instantly UDI and separate from Slovakia.

Oh yeah I forget. The so-called "Kosovo Precedent" is an artificial manufactured concept created by those who are opposed to Kosovo's independence. Therefore Kosovo's independence and Slovakia's potential recognition of Kosovo has not/ will not have any implications on the Hungarians in Southern Slovakia what-so-ever.

sela,

You forgot to mention the part where Serbia along with the Balkans should also be free of Albanians.

Ian and Kenny,

This article clearly states that Slovakia will support Serbia's decision on Kosovo. I don't understand how you two English speaking guys could misconstrue the entire article to benefit the illegal encroachment of Albanians in Kosovo.

And Slovakia is just the beginnning...

In the end you will see, that those who have'nt recognized Kosovo did this only, to wait and see how Prishtina and Belgrade treat each other. Now that they see them talking and even possibly reaching an agreement, there's no reason not to recognize Kosovos independence.

So normalizing relations means recognition of Kosovo.
Then, Serbia will never normalize relations with Kosovo. Did Slovakia think that one day Serbia will do that?

Ian, UK,

I can't help smiling to your logic. You say:

"The so-called "Kosovo Precedent" is an artificial manufactured concept created by those who are opposed to Kosovo's independence."

Please, explain me how the concept of Kosovo sui generis isn't artificial and manufactured? Did it perhaps fall from heavens, or it's a nature's product?

I'm waiting for your explination.

Slovakia what big deal you recognize Kosovo or not Hungarian should be free from Slovakia and Serbia soon or later they will be free like Kosovo independent.

(Ian, UK, 15 April 2013 10:41)

I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country.

But Slovakia cannot be bigger Serbs than Serbs themselves. If Serbia's traitorous government (tries to) sell off Kosovo i Metohija, how could any other country not recognize this?

Anyway, we'll see what will happen. I don't have too much faith in Serbia's political leaders not to go down the treasonous route. But perhaps the extremely vocal protest against Bojan Pajtic and his separatist tendencies in Vojvodina could send a signal to Daciq and the rest on what would happen if they went down the same path.

Well, Slovakia please understand. That then would mean that:

- A piece of Slovakia can declare indpendence
- Most of EU will recognize it
- EU will force you to recognize it too!

Is that what you really want?
Slovakia should not recognize Kosovo (or Abkhazia or Ossetia or Karabakh) unless there is a mutual agreed deal on independence. Normalizing relations under EU pressure is not the same as having a mutual agreed deal!!

Since Radičova noted she could not speak for the current government,she's expressing her personal opinion.
Why should this be of any interest?

"If you believe that 'free will' is classed as being "nature's product" then I would say that the State of Kosovo is nature's product as it was established due to the will of the people of Kosovo and without it, it wouldn't have been possible."
(Ian, UK, 15 April 2013 13:02)

Better said: By the will of the Albanian minority within Serbia. You know well that there is no such thing as 'Kosovarians' or 'people of Kosovo', it's a purely artificial product.

The same goes for Kosovo. Of course the historical region of Kosovo existed for centuries, but today's borders (which are the ex-YU provincial borders) are without any historic foundation.

Please, explain me how the concept of Kosovo sui generis isn't artificial and manufactured? Did it perhaps fall from heavens, or it's a nature's product?

I'm waiting for your explination.
(Olli, 15 April 2013 12:11)

I've never said that Kosovo is a "sui generis" case but the establishment of the State of Kosovo is a very unique situation. People like to draw parallels with Kosovo and other states with partial international recognition such as Abkhazia, ROC/Taiwan and TRNC. However Kosovo's establishment and the current situation in Kosovo is very different to them three. Abkhazia's population has more than halved since it's formation following the expulsion of Georgians and it only received it's first recognition 16 years later, it is more like an autonomous oblast of the Russian Federation rather than a State, this is a view shared by many Abkhazians. ROC is a government in exile on the isle of Taiwan and it's international recognition is in reverse gear. TRNC only has one recognition and it is de facto pretty much a part of the Republic of Turkey, however the Turks in Northern Cyprus actually want a unified Cyprus. These three are very different to Kosovo and that's what I say makes Kosovo unique.

If you believe that 'free will' is classed as being "nature's product" then I would say that the State of Kosovo is nature's product as it was established due to the will of the people of Kosovo and without it, it wouldn't have been possible.

I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country.
(Ari Gold, 15 April 2013 12:58)

Bloody Hell! We've agreed on something!

Take the Scottish Independence Referendum next year for example, I think it is fair to say that it would be happening regardless of what has happened in Kosovo. It be absurd to suggest that Kosovo has influenced it any way and it would be absurd to suggest that when the Scottish electorate are casting their votes, Kosovo will be in the back of their heads influencing their vote.

Yes some countries haven't recognised Kosovo because they believe that doing would be contrary to International Law whereas some have done so as they believe it is in line with International Law. Regardless of what one believes about the legality of it, no International World Organisation will ever come out and say that it is legal or that is illegal as big powers will prevent it from doing so either way. Some countries such as Spain for example have not recognised Kosovo to show that they're opposed to internal secessionist movements. And I think many countries have not recognised Kosovo or voiced their support for Serbia as they don't be involved in a dispute, they don't want to be seen as 'taking sides' either way.

"Now that they see them talking and even possibly reaching an agreement, there's no reason not to recognize Kosovos independence."
(Kenny, 15 April 2013 11:06)

Of course. The problems Slovakia, Spain, Russia, China and many other countries have with that 'Kosovo' is that it was created unilaterally.

A new state created/split off according to a mutual agreed solution doesn't cause any problems in the world. Ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..

Ian,

I question the rightfulness and wrongfulness of utilization of concepts as "(Kosovo) precedent", "sui generis", "Pandora's Box", "will of people", "reality on the ground", etc., all the way to "humanitarian bombing". Motives of action lie elsewhere than in ethics, legalities or illegalities attached to them. The true contents of concepts do not come from the concepts themselves but from the power that utilizises them.

An easy example, Pandora's Box. Opening the box in the first place was no problem. The concept didn't exist or bother anyone, until certain series of operations and military actions were executed and the master power overruns the earlier guiding concept of "will of people" by the concept of "Pandora's Box".

"Unique situation" is a concept that allows practically any twist in a story. You say "the establishment of the State of Kosovo is a very unique situation". Give me one establishment of a new state that isn't a unique situation... But we are told that Kosovo is a Unique Situation, therefore we can forget a number of matters. One of them being, again, the will of people, namely the majority of people in Northern Kosovo. So we can force them to live in a state they don't want to live in.

Why do you only call Kosovo a unique case, but not the other three cases: Abkhazia, Taiwan, TRNC. I can't see anything less unique in them. And there isn't anything less unique in them. But do we allow these cases the same liberties as we do with the unique Kosovo?

If Serbia recognises it then Slovakia will. Take reading classes....

Ian and Kenny

This article clearly states that Slovakia will support Serbia's decision on Kosovo. I don't understand how you two English speaking guys could misconstrue the entire article to benefit the illegal encroachment of Albanians in Kosovo.
(Another Canadian Serb, 15 April 2013 12:14)

Did you even read my comment? I never denied that Slovakia will support Serbia over Kosovo and I never said that Slovakia will support Kosovo either. My comment focussed on the implications of the so-called "Kosovo Precedent" on Slovakia, this is why I used the term "potential recognition".

Anyway it doesn't even matter what Iveta Radičova has to say as she is no longer engaged in politics, never mind the Prime Minister of Slovakia. She is a lecturer in Sociology at Oxford University. She has no power in Slovakia's decision making and she has no political weight.

This is rubbish

"I agree that precedent is not realistic at all. The countries (other than maybe Spain) which have not recognized the illegal occupation of Kosovo i Metohija as independent have done so because of their adherence to international law and not because of their fears of separatism in their own country. "
(Ari Gold, 15 April 2013 12:58)

Yes! Purely 'adherence to international law'. Especially Russia, which didn't have any problem with the 'international law' when it recognized South Ossetia :)

All I understood from the statement is that Slovakia wants to sit on two chairs. Please make up your mind.

It's completely non-sensical but since you could care less about other people then let's care less about the Serbs as well. What's good for the grander is good for the goose.
(J, 16 April 2013 21:55)
===============================

You are ridiculous.
Nobody is saying that no case can be solved unless all cases are solved. All Ron and others are saying is that ALL cases have to follow the same international laws and no chrry picking which law is to be followed and which one is to be ignored.
In case you still don't get it, it means that all cases need to be AGREED upon and not decided by the US of A.

Joachim: If B92 only published articles of 'interest' there wouldn't be much to read on here. I suspect that generating debate is their main focus and they seem to be doing a decent job of it from what I see each day.

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)

I thought about it and I figured it out. Kosovo should have accepted Vojislav’s offer of more-then-autonomy-but-less-then-independence in order to achieve many more recognitions in a much shorter amount of time :)

Don’t bother. Serbia will not sign such an agreement which recognizes Kosovo.

Why do you only call Kosovo a unique case, but not the other three cases: Abkhazia, Taiwan, TRNC. I can't see anything less unique in them. And there isn't anything less unique in them. But do we allow these cases the same liberties as we do with the unique Kosovo?
(Olli, 15 April 2013 18:11)

Because each case has to be solved separately. Why for example should those in Abkhazia be held hostage to the situation between china and Taiwan?One good reason would be sufficient. Why should those in Palestine be held hostage to the situation in south Ossetia? I guess because you and Ron can write a comment here go to a bar later on and forget about it; while people suffer because of your all or nothing attitude over a self- righteous principle. This is not only wrong but cruel. How about this, we should not bother with N. Kosova deal until Palestine and Israel have reached an agreement. Sounds good, no? It's completely non-sensical but since you could care less about other people then let's care less about the Serbs as well. What's good for the grander is good for the goose.

Serbia has customs agents on the border right now!! Why not have Slovakia recognize Kosovo based on that! Serbia isn't even arguing for Belgrade control but for Serb run municipalities in Kosovo run ultimately by prisitina!!

Comm Parisson: Oil.

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)

The main reason was that Sudan (reluctantly) accepted to allow all options on the table rather than rushing through a new constitution, in which the Southern Sudanese would be deprived the right to vote, making any discussion of even the prospect of allowing the citizens of Southern Sudan to freely choose the destiny of the political territory they inhabited and saw their own future associated with, unconstitutional. That's what Vojo did, thereby effectively tying the hands of then current and future Sudanese political negotiators. When the very issue at hand is legal state status, you cannot claim to negotiate in good faith if you make it an unconstitutional act to discuss anything but degrees of autonomy when you do not have any leverage over that autonomy in the first place.

A far better negotiating platform would have been for Belgrade to offer the same, but not more, to Pristina that Pristina would be ready to offer to Serb-controlled areas. This would have meant that for Pristina to have legitimacy to call either a referendum or a UDI, they would have had to offer the same to Northern Kosovo and the enclaves to decide whether to remain part of Serbia or not.

ever wondered why South Sudan became a recognized state, an UN member, within less than a week, without any objections, while Kosovo didn't achieve that after some years and with 100.000s of $$$ spend for 'lobbying recognitions' by Pacolli? Think about it..
(Comm. Parrisson, 15 April 2013 17:31)


Remember that South Sudan war for independence lasted 50 years and claimed 2 million lives.
The UN seat didnt come in a week and certainly didnt come for free.

In case you still don't get it, it means that all cases need to be AGREED upon and not decided by the US of A.
(Peggy, 17 April 2013 01:35)

Most independence movements are not agreed. Want an example? Serbia did not agree with Turkey but went to war for it. Want more ? I have about 100 more examples. In fact agreements for independence are not the norm. It is precisely because such lack of agreements that independence movements start. If everyone would agree on the issue independence there would be no wars for them. If everyone was waiting for the ok from the other side, there would be no Serbia today, no US and we'd all still be under the Roman Empire cause they would never allow for their territories to be lost. What you and Ron and Olli are stating are pipe dreams and not based on reality. You are ok with that because for as long as you want others to follow these pipe dreams you don't loose anything. Most people are not naive enough to wait for Serbia and the Serbs for eternity just like you didn't wait for the Turks for eternity. If that's good enough for you, that's also good enough for us.