UN Security Council on new Kosovo report

(Questioner, 11 February 2014 17:02)
This has been the view and the statements of China every since the declaration of independence. They have said that the situation should be resolved by talks. Serbs have jumped to the conclusion that China would veto any attempt Kosovo makes toward joining the UN. However, it is more likely that if there is enough support China would actually abstain from voting as they did with Resolution 1244.
The only real hold out is Russia, and that is not a sure thing, it has more to do with showing strength against the west than support for their "brethren". All which could change at any minute with a regime change.
Those who claim that China is afraid to allow Kosovo to become a member as it would affect Taiwan or Tibet, is full of crap as China like the US and Russia have NO fear in the UNSC as they will always hold a veto card for any action affecting them.
If you search everything available you will not find where China has publicly said anything about a veto on anything to do with Kosovo, you will however, find many many sources where Serbs have said that China would.

"Ambassadors of UNSC member states voiced different opinions on the situation. Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin stressed that his country supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia, while U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power welcomed the recognition of Kosovo's independence by more than one hundred states. "

"China's representative Li Baodong pointed out that UNCS Resolution should remain the legal foundation for a solution acceptable for both sides, and encouraged Belgrade and Priština to continue their practical and constructive dialogue, strengthening the results achieved so far and contributing to the peace and stability in the Balkans and the wider region."

Isn't it interesting the China voiced the most realistic view on Kosovo, in contrast to Russia and the USA?

"Churkin added that UN Security Council Resolution 1244 is tied to the legal solution of the Kosovo issue and that Russia opposes the diminishing of UNMIK's role."
Has that not been the same song Russia has been singing all the while agreeing to the downsizing of UNMIK and the replacement with EULEX. Watching and agreeing to the change of UNMIK personnel declining from several thousand to less than a hundred total.
If one wants to review statements from pre EULEX you will see Russia saying only with Serbia blessing, which Serbia swore they would never give, but after equipment had been purchased and transfer of some personnel had been arranged and plane tickets for the remainder had been bought and the EULEX structure and date set of takeover set. Serbia mysteriously welcomes EULEX and Russia says OK.

And where is the news B92 that yet another country has recognised Kosova, thank you Lesoto slowly but surely!

@Questioner/aka Comm

how/why is that interesting? what makes you think its the most realistic view?

Comm Parr,
You choose to cloud the issue similar to others here. The point I raised is that China has never threatened a veto, only Serbs claiming China would.
But lets look at your point you say UNSC does not say until Kosovo unilaterally declares independence, you claim it says a "mutual accepted" agreement, now the challenge support your claim with facts highlight the passage in the text.

It says the mandate of the international presence is to Facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo's future status taking into account the Rambouillet accords.

Which states that an "international meeting" would take place to determine the final status of Kosovo.
It does not even specify who these international participants are and neither Russia nor China were signatores of Rambouillet.
But I fail to find any document that states Serbia has to be in agreement to anything, although it would be the best route.
But the term "mutual agreement" is nothing more than a Serbian dream.
And I hate to beat a horse to death but the ICJ did opinion that the Declaration did NOT violate UNSC1244.

"If you search everything available you will not find where China has publicly said anything about a veto on anything to do with Kosovo"
(something to think about, 11 February 2014 20:47)

It might be like that, but as we can read in the article:
'China's representative Li Baodong pointed out that UNCS Resolution should remain the legal foundation for a solution acceptable for both sides..'

It must refer to UN1244, which mentions the temporary status of Kosovo which stays until a final, mutual accepted solution is found. The key words here are 'mutual accepted'. UNSC1244 doesn't say 'Kosovo's status is temporary until a unilaterally declared independence'

"Ambassadors of UNSC member states voiced different opinions on the situation. Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin stressed that his country supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia, while U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power welcomed the recognition of Kosovo's independence by more than one hundred states. "

"China's representative Li Baodong pointed out that UNCS Resolution should remain the legal foundation for a solution acceptable for both sides, and encouraged Belgrade and Priština to continue their practical and constructive dialogue, strengthening the results achieved so far and contributing to the peace and stability in the Balkans and the wider region."

Isn't it interesting the China voiced the most realistic view on Kosovo, in contrast to Russia and the USA?

(Questioner, 11 February 2014 17:02)
This has been the view and the statements of China every since the declaration of independence. They have said that the situation should be resolved by talks. Serbs have jumped to the conclusion that China would veto any attempt Kosovo makes toward joining the UN. However, it is more likely that if there is enough support China would actually abstain from voting as they did with Resolution 1244.
The only real hold out is Russia, and that is not a sure thing, it has more to do with showing strength against the west than support for their "brethren". All which could change at any minute with a regime change.
Those who claim that China is afraid to allow Kosovo to become a member as it would affect Taiwan or Tibet, is full of crap as China like the US and Russia have NO fear in the UNSC as they will always hold a veto card for any action affecting them.
If you search everything available you will not find where China has publicly said anything about a veto on anything to do with Kosovo, you will however, find many many sources where Serbs have said that China would.

"Churkin added that UN Security Council Resolution 1244 is tied to the legal solution of the Kosovo issue and that Russia opposes the diminishing of UNMIK's role."
Has that not been the same song Russia has been singing all the while agreeing to the downsizing of UNMIK and the replacement with EULEX. Watching and agreeing to the change of UNMIK personnel declining from several thousand to less than a hundred total.
If one wants to review statements from pre EULEX you will see Russia saying only with Serbia blessing, which Serbia swore they would never give, but after equipment had been purchased and transfer of some personnel had been arranged and plane tickets for the remainder had been bought and the EULEX structure and date set of takeover set. Serbia mysteriously welcomes EULEX and Russia says OK.

And where is the news B92 that yet another country has recognised Kosova, thank you Lesoto slowly but surely!

"If you search everything available you will not find where China has publicly said anything about a veto on anything to do with Kosovo"
(something to think about, 11 February 2014 20:47)

It might be like that, but as we can read in the article:
'China's representative Li Baodong pointed out that UNCS Resolution should remain the legal foundation for a solution acceptable for both sides..'

It must refer to UN1244, which mentions the temporary status of Kosovo which stays until a final, mutual accepted solution is found. The key words here are 'mutual accepted'. UNSC1244 doesn't say 'Kosovo's status is temporary until a unilaterally declared independence'

@Questioner/aka Comm

how/why is that interesting? what makes you think its the most realistic view?

Comm Parr,
You choose to cloud the issue similar to others here. The point I raised is that China has never threatened a veto, only Serbs claiming China would.
But lets look at your point you say UNSC does not say until Kosovo unilaterally declares independence, you claim it says a "mutual accepted" agreement, now the challenge support your claim with facts highlight the passage in the text.

It says the mandate of the international presence is to Facilitate a political process to determine Kosovo's future status taking into account the Rambouillet accords.

Which states that an "international meeting" would take place to determine the final status of Kosovo.
It does not even specify who these international participants are and neither Russia nor China were signatores of Rambouillet.
But I fail to find any document that states Serbia has to be in agreement to anything, although it would be the best route.
But the term "mutual agreement" is nothing more than a Serbian dream.
And I hate to beat a horse to death but the ICJ did opinion that the Declaration did NOT violate UNSC1244.