Matthew
pre 17 godina
“What I personally think he was trying to say was that same arguements of Serbia's for a right to Kosovo could be used for Hungary to claim Vojvodina.” (Daniel, Friday, 13 April, 2007, 11:41)
That doesn’t make any sense at all Daniel. Zobel said if Kosovo DIDN’T get independence then “problems in Vojvodina and Sandžak might flare up”. To me it sounds more like a threat then anything else simply because it doesn’t make any sense at the least on the surface. If Kosovo DOES get independence then those areas are MORE likely to be able to use Kosovo as a valid precedent to ask for independence, basically all you would need is repression against a minority and international intervention by the UN (How many countries are going to be willing to have the UN forces come in and intervene in internal matters now?). The only thing that could stop them is an International Community refusal to recognize them, which is what Germany could or could not do, like in Croatia for example against the wishes of the UN. Basically he’s saying they wouldn’t stop Vojvodina from declaring independence if Serbia is stubborn and doesn’t go along with the International Community. It is most definitely a threat.
“The very act of the sistematic expulsion of hundreds of thousands of K Albanians from Kosovo and the murder of tens of thousands is genocide according to the official definition” (Nick, Friday, 13 April, 2007, 19:51)
Nick, from the ICJ ruling…
“Neither the intent, as a matter of policy, to render an area “ethnically homogeneous”, nor the operations that may be carried out to implement such policy, can as such be designated as genocide. However, this does not mean that acts described as “ethnic cleansing” may never constitute genocide, if they are such as to be characterized as, for example, “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”, contrary to Article II, paragraph (c), of the Convention, provided such action is carried out with the necessary specific intent (dolus specialis), that is to say with a view to the destruction of the group, as distinct from its removal from the region.”
Basically they set a very high standard for when ethnic cleansing qualifies as genocide. Not only would you have to prove that the act was in order to physically destroy a significant “part” of the population, but you’d have to prove intent to do so. My understanding is also that roughly 10,000 at most were killed on both sides in the conflict, and that the ratio of Serb victims to Albanian victims was roughly 1 to 10 mirroring the population distribution. I really don’t see where you can go with that line of argument. If you think about it, what’s more dangerous for the average minority and what’s easier to control? Violence that occurs on the grassroots level of society, like the 2004 riots, or institutional violence like that perpetrated and controlled by a handful of individuals at the top like Milosevic? A lot of foreign diplomats seemed concerned there will be violence by the Albanian population again, but no one seems worried the Serbs will attack.
Nick I feel truly sorry for what you went through, and we Serbs need to do more to acknowledge what your people suffered, but I personally believe actions labeled as genocide need to meet the level of what the Nazi’s did to the Jews, or it losses its meaning and impact. Already the legal definition has a lower standard then the descriptive term Lemkin coined as a result of WWII, which is what most people are familiar with and think of when they hear the word Genocide. I don’t think any rational person can make the argument that Serbian policy towards Albanians is the same as that pursued by the Germans towards the Jews.
“While there were incidents betwen 1939 and 1945” (Nick, Friday, 13 April, 2007, 19:51)
My understanding is the Italians were so horrified by the actions of the Albanians in power towards the Serbs that they were forced to restrain them, much like they fought the Ustashe to protect Serbs and Jews. My understanding is the treatment was rather severe and on a comparable level to what you suffered under Milosevic, although I personally do not believe it raised to the level of the Ustashe crimes against Serbs. Is there a reason why one is referred to by you as an incident and another referred to as Genocide in your statements? I do acknowledge that crimes were committed against your people, and yes, I do believe your people should get real and significant compensation that is balanced to fit the crime. However, both sides really need to look at this objectively and logically and acknowledge the mistakes of the past in order that we can move forward. Its been a cycle of violence with retaliation for previous crimes always being used as some sort of stupid justification for new crimes. It has to stop. You messed us up pretty good after the NATO bombing and in 2004. Are we even yet? The ratio of victims does somewhat mirror the population distribution now.
Joe, I’m having a really hard time following your line of argument on the Vojvodina issue? Are you suggesting that there is institutionalized violence being committed against the Hungarian population by the Serbian government? Are you suggesting the Hungarian population is demanding independence? Personally, I’m all for dividing the Balkans by ethnicity, it would most certainly be a net gain for both Albanians and Serbs, why the hell are we fighting anyway? EU membership with voting districts that are evaluated every 10 years is the answer to the regions problems, not silly map writing games. Seriously, WTF is the EU doing?
49 Komentari
Sortiraj po: