Serbia going to ICJ is mistake

The article is your typical EUrocratic arrogance. It begins with one of those sweeping "once upon a time..." recollections of a concert of European nations that never existed. That there could ever be a time when Central and Eastern Europe were ever regarded as "equals" with the West has about as much truth as a John McCain political ad. Pardon me, Mr. Ambassador, but you may recall a former PM of yours carving up another Central European state for the sake of "peace in our time"? Hardly indicative of a country being your "equal".

But never mind the revisionist history. The main article insinuates all the meaningless respect for Serbia as a nation, but quickly warns it to fall into line with the prevailing attitudes of Western Europe: join NATO, forget Kosovo, stop being stuck in a past the West created for you.

Now obviously we're not really expected to read anything insightful here. Wordsworth is just another bureaucratic talking head mimicking the lines and phrases of the government he represents. Yet I wonder when people like him will realize that the actions of his country and the countries of Western Europe and North America are the largest catalysts for Serbian support for parties like DSS and SRS. To carve out a statelet with the same legality as a $3 bill and then shut your eyes and ears to the repercussions of said actions is both irresponsible and half-baked. To constantly push the NATO agenda on countries that a) do not want to join, and b) increase instability in various regions shows a lack of understanding international relations. And finally, to rob somebody of their possessions, and then protest the victim taking the matter to court destroys any last shreds that Western-based diplomacy has any special moral standing in the world. I see very little difference between the foreign policies of Washington and London on one side, and Moscow and Tehran on the other. Each side candy coats their strategies with some sort of ideological moral reasoning, but very few people are unable to see through the shoddy craftsmanship anymore.

Serbia is not treated as an "equal" as you may want to insinuate. Serbia is considered an upstart little country that continues to thumb its nose at compliance and refuses to tow the line of the policies of a few Western countries. True Croatia was just as nationalistic as Serbia, and true Croatia harbors latent Fascist tendencies among many of its leaders, but it bowed to the West, and so gets a free pass. What about Serbia? Is it inat? Probably. Is it stubborness? I've never met a single Serbian pushover. But is it a rejection of democracy and Western European values as you seem to believe? No. Please stop thinking Milosevic is still in power. Please stop assuming every single Serb wants to create Greater Serbia, which never existed, and never received more than 5% of any popular vote. Please stop thinking that Serbs have this need to dominate others. Your constant attempts at breaking this dog only show your own self-serving interests and your apparent disregard for the international law you claim to uphold.

Perhaps you and your government should take advantage of Serbia's proposal to the ICJ. Then you can explain to the world how Kosovo is legal and just. Showing resistance to Serbia's move, and giving veiled threats against the country if it continues this path doesn't convince me that Kosovo was that special legal case you're trying to sell us. and it isn't helping mollify Serbian public opinion that they're an "equal" player either.

"Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law."

... and tell me, Ambassador, how Serbia has been characterized in the halls of diplomacy, in the press, and in the public discourse of your country (and mine) - not only recently, but for the past 17 years? What a double standard.

Serbia has every right to pursue its claim through the ICJ. If the UK's feelings are hurt by the suggestion that its recognition of Kosovo wasn't in alignment with international norms, so be it. As we say in the US, "man up" - you made your decision, now stand behind it and accept responsibility for it.

"The consequences of [Serbia not joining NATO" in few years' time would be to leave Serbia as the only country in south-east Europe outside the Alliance, isolated from the many benefits that membership offers."



NO THANKS !

"[Serbia] isolated from the many benefits that [NATO] membership offers"
This phrase is rather typical of the article: full of vague suggestions and insinuations but never concrete.

"the EULEX mission, whose main role will particularly benefit minorities in Kosovo"
EULEX head Mr. Feith consistently repeats that Kosovo's Serbs are fine and there are no special measures needed to guarantee their welfare. How can you expect the rule of a man with such a vision to benefit Kosovo's Serbs?

[Going to the ICJ] "would only force us to continue to focus on what divides us, rather than on what we can do together"
The Kosovo question divides Serbia from the part of the EU to which mr. Wordsworth belongs. But that is not Serbia's fault, it is the fault of the US led Western coalition that didn't want to talk about Kosovo and instead imposed a "solution".
Ambassador, your country was one of those who employed a partial mediator to solve the Kosovo problem (Ahtisaari, whose opinions were well known) and now you object against Serbia asking it to a truly impartial institution?

"the UK suggested [...] to 'agree to disagree' over Kosovo's status and focus [...] to make life better for all the people living in Kosovo"
Kosovo's status is not an abstraction without practical meaning. It is about the quality of life of the people who live there. Recognizing Kosovo's independence in the present situation means very probably recognizing that in a few decades there will be no Serb left inside Kosovo.

«isolated from the many benefits that membership offers."»
M.Wordworth forgot to tell what kind of benefits already NATO brought to Serbia: 78 days of bombing civilians and robed the kosova from Serbia!?And may be the benefits will come back again if Serbia will move forward to ICJ!Any way there is no more international law for US-UK...Right?

Markovic of Jagodina might have ben duped but I very much doubt the people of Jaodina just as the rest of Serbia will be giving much attention to those who give any credence to wordsworth - the fact that the EU have reneged SAA shows how worthless the likes of wordsworth words are and to those who were so easily duped!!!

"the many benefits that (NATO) membership offers"

such as...in Afghanistan;

Military deaths by Country
Australia 6
Canada 97
Czech 3
Denmark 16
Estonia 3
Finland 1
France 22
Germany 26
Hungary 2
Italy 12
Latvia 1
Lithuania 1
NATO 1
Netherlands 17
Norway 3
Poland 8
Portugal 2
Romania 8
South Korea 1
Spain 23
Sweden 2
UK 120
US 591
Total 966
http://icasualties.org/oef/

- need one mention the benefits gained in Iraq???

For an article this explicitly threatening to come from an actual serving ambassador, shows that Serbia is definetly in for stormy weather.

If I read the ambassador correctly, we need to stop being a "problem" or else.

By "problem", between the lines, they mean our latent potential to be a Russian proxy in the middle of the NATO "backyard".

Even as a "neutral" state sticking up for itself (that is what the ICJ case is really about) in the NATO "backyard" is not acceptable.

It's all about consolidating the NATO rear area... as he points out, we are one of the last points of "resistance".

No other explanations make sense. Today, just seeking a legal opinion (in a western court) still tags us as some sort of "trouble maker".... God help us.

Even more disturbing, what is their actual strategic objective?

Conquest of Russia? There seems to be an explicit pattern of late (Georgia, Ukraine, missile "defense" etc).

Has NATO's arrogance reached such heights they believe they can win a nuclear war?

As I said - God help us.

The Ambassador and other people like him need to realise that the issue of Kosovo is not about the past but about the present and future of Serbia. Kosovo is a province of Serbia-end of story. Why doesn't England just let Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales go?

I think Wordworth basically sums up the Colonialists' frustrations with Serbia - they are a nation of free and independent people, they don't want to join NATO and buy needless weapons from the military industrial complex (and make yanks/brits richer while they get poorer), all nations around Serbia are playing along and want to join NATO and Serbia sets a 'bad example' for them, Serbs love Russians and the colonialists can't stomach a strong Russian ally in the middle of Europe, Serbs actually want to be treated with respect and fairness....These are just some of the reasons Wordsworth is upset. Also, Serbia going to the ICJ just further exposes his own government's immorality and double standards on the Kosovo issue.

"At the same time neighbouring former Yugoslav countries - Slovenia, Macedonia, Croatia -were each set on developing their relationship with NATO and clearly coming to see that their future lay in that organisation.

The absent partner in this process was Serbia. I won't go into the entire historical context, but the legacy of the conflicts still hangs over Serbia now, ..."

There you have it, from the horse's mouth.
Legacy of the conflict... What conflict?
Serbia was absent partner in NATO integration, it wanted to keep it's public companies, people didn't buy into this Latin-American style free-market thing, etc.
That's the real conflict behind all other conflicts in former Yugoslavia in 90's.

If any Serb had doubts about what our darling Europe thinks of us, Wordsworth set the record straight.
Is there a better proof(are you listening Jeremic?)of a talking of the Master to his slave? Yes,'slave', not a servant, which comes higher in the hierarchy of the subjugated.
A slave is denied the right of complaint, a servant is not.Listen to our plantation owner:
"Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law".
There you are, fellow Serbs, the "Massa" says shut up and do what you are told, or you won't enter in his 'brilliant future'.

You do not have to be a radical to reject the UDI for Kosovo.

It was a foolish thing to recognise the mono-ethnic ambitions of the Kosovo Albanians - that is what most of the EU has done, and the EU is now stuck in that rut.

Serbia will be stronger in the long term if it refuses to cooperate with EULEX.

The EU will realise in due time that it cannot continue to punish the people of Serbia for something done a decade or more ago.

It is not enough to blame the rejection of the loss of Kosovo on nationalism - many right thinking democratic people reject the Kosovo UDI too.

It is the EU and US politicians who have created the partial impasse - the fact that it is partial is a problem of their making. They should have stuck with 1244 instead of deliberately lying when they signed it.

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..
(Denis, 16 September 2008 16:02)
no conspiracy, just good old-fashioned conflict of interests. mr ambassador said it all - serbia was going against the trends in the region, that was the problem. it is true that serbia was pursuing wrong policies, but everything that happened was exaggerated in order to make serbia look worse than it was the case. and the west doesn't have a problem working with oppressive regimes if it suits their interests.

one of the results of getting a free ride on western propaganda train is that albanians now seriously believe that america and the west are about democracy and human rights. so albanians are so deluded that they welcome bush as a hero even though most people including the ones in the west have been "welcoming" him with protests.

countries that understand well what western bullying and arm-twisting means are the ones that are least likely to recognise kosovo's udi. and if you look at the map you can clearly see that this could turn into a stand-off between the north and the south rather than the east and the west. it's former colonies against their former colonial masters. they may be poor and weak, but they represent the majority of world's nations and majority of the world's population. if they resist kosovo will never get the recognition by the un.

Can I say that you are part of the machine that belongs to the Blairites. ‘The Project For a New Blair Century’ that has developed a parallel policy to the US truly amazes me, with the fact that Albanian criminals and their affiliates alike have become the spearhead of our beloved islands survival…What planet are you aristocrats on…you don’t represent my Island or my countrymen in the Atlantic.

Anyway, to get back on the track of your opinion, my opinion is as follows, and by jove my fellow, you and the other lot have made a flawed calculation, whilst forgetting some important equations.

1. You won’t go back to the 14th century or the 80’s, well fine, is that because it would prove you wrong. By the end of the 80’s in Kosovo, yes, forget the Berlin wall, and Russia’s grip on its neighbours, which had no sway on the things going on in this once beautiful province, meaning, if you care to read western media from 1980 to 89’, when from new York to Berlin, newspapers were churning out articles about the crimes committed by Albanian criminals and village idiots against their own, the Catholics and the Slavs.

2. Serbia will neither get into the EU or desire (you said it yourself at dinner) to join an organisation led by the same very people (equals) who tried to bleed Serbia to submission, regardless of WW1 and WW2. We supported communism for the future to dismantle the Balkans. Churchill’s memoirs say it all, you remember, the ones he wrote on the Orient regarding the United States of Europe.

3. The only Serbs who find it exciting to join the EU are the lost students who want some honey, with complete lack of vision to what the future is actually painted for Serbs.

4. The conflict would not hang over Serbia if Tony Blair had not gained power in Britain, and provided complete support to the US agenda of completely TRYING to destroy the lands and mindsets of the Serb people.

5. Going back to NATO, if Serbia did join NATO, they would be the spearhead of NATO for two reasons, one: they can fight, but defensively; two:would be another way to decrease the population of slavs. I won’t say more because it will give my position away.

6. War crime, will Tony Blair ever receive an indictment along with Americans!

7. Change, that definitely is the word, but how was Serbia changed? Why was Serbia and Montenegro not invited to the meeting in Washington in 1990, with regards to the dismantling of Yugoslavia? Was it because you only wanted to invited Catholics and your future hybrid Muslims of Europe?

8. “Life punishes those who come to late”, typical morbid mumbo jumbo. How about this for a livelier factor.
To Good Guys Dead
They sucked us in;
King and country,
Christ Almighty
And the rest.
Patriotism,
Democracy,
Honor--
Words and phrases,
They either bitched us or killed us.
c. 1922
9. When the UK government could not agree on which path to take regarding Kosovo, unfortunately we had Americans running the place, so, naturally we supported the criminals. However, too late to cry over spilt milk. The hasty moves and decisions will be more apparent in the weeks and months to come.
10. History is about to repeat itself !

So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..
(Denis, 16 September 2008 16:02)


Hi Denis,

I said nothing about a world conspiracy. My point is that the concept of "justice" permits both sides to be heard and judged. BiH got its day in front of the ICJ, as did Croatia. I believe that Serbia deserves the same. It's as simple as that.

I find it sadly humorous that a country as influential as the UK should find its feelings hurt by a small country like Serbia. That's the price of being a world leader. Systems like the ICJ (1) ultimately promote an order that's in the interests of powerful countries like the UK, and (2) represent the culmination of years of effort and precedent promoted by countries like the UK to create binding legal norms for the international community. It's hypocritical, then, to whine when a small country tries to leverage the legitimacy of the ICJ against the UK. No less hypocritical than the USA's refusal to accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ - because (gasp!) it may not rule exclusively in its favor.

My dear Denis: Please spare me the condescending lecture, "my dear." I worked in Drvar, and I worked in Bugojno, and I worked in Sarajevo for years. I've earned, and am perfectly entitled to my opinion. That it respectfully disagrees with yours is neither my fault nor yours.

Cheers,

Ivan

RE:
To those commenting from US, UK and EU is really despicable to advocate Serbia's isolation while you yourselves will not suffer under those circumstances. If you hate the West, go live in the East.
The west brought down an entire Soviet Union, do you think Serbia would be a problem?
(miri, 16 September 2008 15:26)

Those Serbians commenting from the UK, US, Canada , Australia and other countries forefathers fought and died for Serbia and Yugoslavia. Per Capita, the Serbian nation lost more civilians and soldiers during both world wars' except for Russia. Those graves include the desecrated graves in Kosovo bare witness to the fact. If you think the KLA thugs and criminals under Thaci are going to get away with stealing the heart of Serbia and Montenegro as [Kosovo & Metohia is the birthplace of both Serbs and Montenegrins], you are sadly mistaken. We will not stop because Kosovo is Serbia.

Kosovo Albanians were always welcome in Serbia, but they are not welcome in trying to steal a country.

The US & UK has always been Serbia's ally, and educated people in those nations have seen the mistake made upon Serbia by it's political leadership.

The Ambasador bemoans the fact that '...it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law'. The solution is simple. The UK should support actively Serbia's initiative through the IJC. After all, if the UK is all right and wise in its approach, it would have nothing to fear from the decision of the court.

Denis

"It has been characterized as a butcher factory of the Balkans that committed the worst massacre in Europe since WWII for which the Dutch government resigned. BTW, it was not the Dutch gov. who conducted it."

The ICJ concluded Serbia wasn't involved in the Srebrenica massacre.

"Furthermore, characterized as a state who killed innocent women, children and elderly, put them in auto-refrigerators, and through them in Belgrade’s Danube."

The truck was never found, and neither were the bodies, nor were any other trucks found.

"No single protest was conducted in ‘civilized’ Belgrade. I wonder where was the civic society that disliked Milosevic."

Milosevic was otherthrown by protestors.

"Additionally, characterized as an awkward country where a democratically elected Prime-minister gets murdered."

Serbia is not the first and won't be the last to have had a head of government assassinated.

"A country where the biggest party is run by a war criminal."

Seselj is on trial and innocent for the foreseeable future.

"A country that burns western embassies, but yet wants to join their clubs."

It wasn't the state that burnt the embassies any more than it was the US that blew up the Alfred Morrow building in Oklahoma or the UK government bombing its own underground.

"So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence….."

Most of the violence in this period in Serbia was caused by NATO and the KLA.


At the end of the day the people of Serbia just like the people of Ukraine don't want to join NATO. Therefore Wordsworth shouldn't be putting any pressure on the Serbian goverment about this.

""Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law". "

well, he´s obviously not getting it!

Mr.Wordsworth if you don´t like to hear that, there is just on solution: don´t break the law!

Serbia must be on the right path, if an ambassador is writing in that fashion...

indeed, Serbia´s future is bright.

UK´s future...well, better let´s not talk about it. your zenith was in the last century, and you´re gonna go downhill with your big brother on the other side of the ocean... China, Russia, Brasil and others are the coming powers, and you know that.

and Serbia knows it too.

Mike, Wim, Peggy, Chris

If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?

Hvala.
(Denis, 16 September 2008 22:27)

Gee, looks like I am drawn into this discussion.
I have answered this question many times but it seems to be popping up repeatedly.
If ICJ rules that UDI (not CDI) as you put it was legal then yes, Serbia will accept that and so will all of us as well. But, by the same token, ICJ will also have to rule that Republika Srpska, North Kosovo etc. can also declare independence. The same reason can be given and cannot be rejected.
Serbia wins whatever happens.

Now let me ask you. If ICJ declares tha UDI was not legal, will you abanden this nonsense? I have answered this question many times but I have NEVER received an answer for mine. Please be the first.

Ivan NYC
"... and tell me, Ambassador, how Serbia has been characterized in the halls of diplomacy, in the press, and in the public discourse of your country (and mine) - not only recently, but for the past 17 years"

May I answer dear Ivan? It has been characterized as a butcher factory of the Balkans that committed the worst massacre in Europe since WWII for which the Dutch government resigned. BTW, it was not the Dutch gov. who conducted it.
Furthermore, characterized as a state who killed innocent women, children and elderly, put them in auto-refrigerators, and through them in Belgrade’s Danube. No single protest was conducted in ‘civilized’ Belgrade. I wonder where was the civic society that disliked Milosevic.
Additionally, characterized as an awkward country where a democratically elected Prime-minister gets murdered. A country where the biggest party is run by a war criminal. A country that burns western embassies, but yet wants to join their clubs.

So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..

1 - "But don't worry - I am not going back to the fourteenth century, only to the 1990s." On the contrary, in the South-East Europe, history cannot be understood unless you go back to the fourteenth century. Don't shy away and try that, for a change.

2 - People don't like comments in bold letters. Your article is full of sentences in bold. Could you please review the formatting, as it gives the impression that you're shouting, like giving orders to someone.

mr Wordsworth doasn't do much justice to his surname, does he?

I fear his words and the world he is promoting:
the world in which rhetorics and politisation can be more important and valued than justice

obviously, everything is open for interpretation and polititians and diplomats job is to manipulate that possiblility to their advantage

but justice?
justice shouldnt be questioned or debatable.

there is a law ( in this case International Law )
there is a court ( in this case International Court of Justice )
how can search for justice be "a mistake" mr Wordsworth?
and who is to fear from that justice, freed from the context you, or anybody else, is putting it in?

I can understand mr. Wordsworth worries. It is not just that the ICJ might declare Kosovo's UDI illegal and put him and his country in an awkward position. Actually - if he wins this may mean even more trouble. As a court, the ICJ will have to motivate its decision. And one can be sure that South Ossetia, the Republika Srpska, North Mitrovica and many others will read its motivation closely. It is hardly possible to think of a motivation that grants Kosovo this right while not automatically giving it to some other areas too.

Yet many other countries will want to make sure that there is a ruling. Kosovo's first "unique" precedent was the unprovoked attack on Serbia in 1999. And everybody knows that it stayed unique for only 4 years. At that point the US used it as an excuse to attack Iraq. So there is no reason to expect Kosovo's UDI to stay unique once the world has consented to it.

"If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?"

First, nice slip of the keyboard getting that CDI thing in there - you're probably more right than you know, what with the US coaching Ceku and Sejdiu at the negotiating table to keep tight lipped and all. Yes, in many cases, Kosovo's self-perceived independence would be a dead issue if not for the United States. But on to your question.

I doubt the ICJ is going to come up with a ruling as definitive as legal/illegal. They'll probably fudge the answer to say that Kosovo's secession, while regrettable, controversial, and outside the principles of SOME legal grounds, is a special case of some sorts. But if it actually says it was perfectly justified, I see no cause for withholding further recognitions.

Yet at the same time, I see no reason for withholding recogntions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Nor do I see any reason for RS staying in Bosnia, Zubin Potok, Zvecan, and Leposavic staying in Kosovo, and yes, Presevo from staying in Serbia etc etc etc. The ICJ may very well know that it's ruling, however effective it may be, could very well give the green light to dozens of other would-be breakaway parastates.

In all likelihood, the ICJ will not rule in favor of Kosovo, but the US and others will just ignore it. Better to have one semi-legal parastate than open the floodgates and destroy sovereignty all around.

Why doesn't the pro-albanian B92 reprint today's opinion in the british Guardian Unlimited on how the west has lost influence in the UN and could not stop Serbia's ICJ initiative from reaching the General Assembly agenda. The albo posters here will have heart attacks when the GA votes to send the initiative to the ICJ and massive strokes when an ICJ ruling in favor of Serbia leads to withdrawals of recognition.

For an ambassador of a country the trumpets its democratic tradition, Mr. Wordsworth's comment that Serbia is a 'problem' because it disagrees with the theft of its land by NATO and has exercised its right to object is hypocritical as well as neo-imperialistic. Of course there is precedent: English and Scottish immigrants colonized and stole the northern part of Ireland with Britain's blessing in the past.

Denis wrote:
"So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation….."
Dear Denis,
for those 17 years of violence - rests a grave responsibility also on hands of so called - international community. You know that very well - so your irony is pritty much hollow...
As somebody said - there were some good intentions in mustering Kosovo and Iraq intervention - but major motive was - craving for power and greed... So lets not mix humanism and greed.
And Serbia is certainly not isolated case - that is all part of "new world order" sham. Good only for naive.

A couple of quick points. While all along many assumed that the US was the reason for Kosovo's independence, I have to dissagree. I belive the real force behind the EU's decision was the UK. Just look back at Mr. Milliband's address to the US Congress regarding the UK's concerns about the growing Russian aggressive influence in EU's back yard. Accordingly, the UK wanted to send a clear message, it was not Germany as in the case of Slovenia and Croatia, and it was not the US as in the case of Bosnia. Although the Clinton administration was instrumental in initiating the Nato intervention in 1999, the Bush administration really took a back seat until they were proded into action by the British.

The fact is that Serbia was always a problem for the West, because of it's continuous alliance with Russia, accordingly you have been punished and will continue to be punished while pursuing those policies. The missile shield initiated by the US was clearly to defend itself and its allies from an attack by a rogue state. The defense system is clearly not sophisticated or robust enough to pose any threat to Russia's military capabilities. Yet, Russia used this issue as a reason to begin to bully first Poland by banning their agricultural products from Russia, then Germany by blackmailing them with the natural gas need for heating during the winter months. Then, the Russian oligarchs led by Putin, decided to assasinate their target in the middle of London!!! This was a clear insult to a proud British nation, and it almost seems like the last straw, as insignificant as the act may seem in the large scheme of things.

So Russia's intention to exert it's influence to the surrounding regions, including Gorgia and Ukrain was unavoidable. Whether or not Kosovo's independence was recognized by the West or not, it was clear to the West that Russia had it's intentions set. Of course, all of these chess moves are part of the larger picture, mostly related to energy and national security. The point is this, Serbia's decision to align itself with Russia and pursue thes court's opinion again is a bet that you have to think very hard about. In other words, is it in your best long term interest to again align yourself with a political system that already failed, and if you analyze it closely will not be able to last longterm (i.e. Russia)? Or, do you align yourself with the West as has the rest of the region your country is located in?

The underlying problem with Russia is that it doesn't have a viable long-term system. In other words, it's held together by the strongmen (oligarchs and Putin). What happens after they are gone? Russia would be at the mercy of fate that the next dictator would be as effective as Putin. Yet, even Puting will run out of luck once the energy resources picture is clearer. While in the West, the system is set up so that it is continuous. Think of it like McDonald's, no matter where you go you get the same Big Mac, same tasting fries, at almost the same price. This is the "turn-key" model, and it is inherent in the American and British political fabric. Even when we get an ineffective leader like Bush, the country can only be subjected to a maximum of 8 years of damage, and the damage is limited by the balance of power between the various government branches and even the private sector. In relatively a short period of time, the people get to choose again, and if they don't like the driver, they can change him or her. While in Russia, Putin is still pulling the strings behind the scene as the PM. On another note, the reason why I believe he moved to a position as the PM is because of his long term strategy, and the fact that their aggressions against Georgia and Ukrain maybe will get worst, and even begin to resemble war crimes. So, he doesn't want to take the chance of having to face an international criminal justice court, and legally it is almost impossible for a court to find a PM guilty of anything beacuse at the end of the day he is only one of hundreds of ministers, but the buck stops with the president. Medvedev is set up and he doesn't even know it. Yikes.

Indeed, I think as well that searching for a non-binding advice is a big error of Serbian policies. Better would have been to sue individual countries who committed illegal acts against serbian sovereignty by recognizing illegal UDI !!!

The very idea that Milosevic's Socialist Party "changed" and that this is why the ambassador agreed to recognize and validate is quite laughable. Apparently, the former reformer Kostunica is now the revanchist, and the nationalist Socialists are the good guys.

And people wonder why the double talk of ambassadors and politicians in so-called Democratic countries is ignored. This was a matter of convenience. Let's face it. The side that stood on principle has been ostracized, and it's no surprise, I guess, that the unprincipled ones would band together.

The whole flip flop reminds me of the US's dance with Saddam Hussein, first our friend, then not our friend, then our friend, then not our friend. Where is he now? Oh yeah, he's dead. I guess that settles it.

Very good article.
What Mr. Ambassador is essentially saying is that Serbia will achieve NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING other that hurt itself. It might make the point of dissagrement over Kosova's independence known to international community( as if it's not known already) but it will not get Kosova back. It will only disappoint more than half of Serbian population that voted for "An European Serbia". As Mr. ambassador clearly says, Serbia is being seen as "problem" and not a "partner". To those commenting from US, UK and EU is really despicable to advocate Serbia's isolation while you yourselves will not suffer under those circumstances. If you hate the West, go live in the East.
The west brought down an entire Soviet Union, do you think Serbia would be a problem?

Too sad Serbian media publishes this kind of anti-Serbian advertising.

With all due respect, Mr. Wordsworth, this kind of demagoguery is what has kept Serbia (and many other peoples) kidnapped for so long to serve the "West's" interests (as a matter of fact, why do we still talk about East and West when that confrontation ended almost two decades ago?).

I believe in diplomacy, but the underlying hipocresy leads us nowhere.

Serbia's actual situation hardly can't be described more modest. the policy of has brought nothing for Serbia.

I fear, this political dance will continue for some decades, accompanied by the whining melodies which were already heard last decade.

Mike, Wim, Peggy, Chris

If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?

Hvala.

Same question as Denis made, but I will rather give a pre-answer to this question from the Serbian point of view:

1. If the ICJ rules that the Kosova's declaration of independence was illegal, they will praise that decision.

2. If the ICJ rules that the Kosova's declaration of independence was legal... well, you all probably know what will the Serbian reaction be - biased and untrustworthy organization, backed and funded by USA and Great Britain, etc. etc.

Mr. Jeremic recently stated that if the ICJ rules that Kosova's declaration of independence was legal, even Serbia might recognize it. I don't have to provide you with a link, because each and everyone of you have seen and read it.

Greets from Prishtina!

To the contrary, Serbia going to the ICJ puts Serbia in a win-either-way situation.

Either the ICJ rules that Kosovo-and-Metohija cannot be snatched away from Serbia, and that means the purported proclamation of a so-called independence by the minority Albanian population (and NOT all citizens) of that southern province of Serbia will be gradually eroded in the world.

Or, on the other hand, the ICJ rules that provinces can proclaim independence,a nd the Republika Sprska, but also Quebec, Flanders, Wales, Cornwall, Scottish Highlands, Scottish Lowlands, Lake District, Hawai'i, Texas, California, Basque Country, Catalunya, Lusatia/Sorbenland, Brittany, Provence, Corsica, northern Italian provinces ... follow suit, as do Kurdistan, at least 5 regions in Iraq, Kashmere, Tibet, Xingjian/Uyghurstan, Moslem parts of the Philippines, norther Sri Lanka... you name it.

And that would mean a chaos that comes as a revenge. And that would be a satisfaction enough.

But do you imagine ICJ would ever dare say the silly charade of pretending to be "independent" by naroc-mobsters in Prishtina was legal? Hmmm...

Very good article.
What Mr. Ambassador is essentially saying is that Serbia will achieve NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING other that hurt itself. It might make the point of dissagrement over Kosova's independence known to international community( as if it's not known already) but it will not get Kosova back. It will only disappoint more than half of Serbian population that voted for "An European Serbia". As Mr. ambassador clearly says, Serbia is being seen as "problem" and not a "partner". To those commenting from US, UK and EU is really despicable to advocate Serbia's isolation while you yourselves will not suffer under those circumstances. If you hate the West, go live in the East.
The west brought down an entire Soviet Union, do you think Serbia would be a problem?

Ivan NYC
"... and tell me, Ambassador, how Serbia has been characterized in the halls of diplomacy, in the press, and in the public discourse of your country (and mine) - not only recently, but for the past 17 years"

May I answer dear Ivan? It has been characterized as a butcher factory of the Balkans that committed the worst massacre in Europe since WWII for which the Dutch government resigned. BTW, it was not the Dutch gov. who conducted it.
Furthermore, characterized as a state who killed innocent women, children and elderly, put them in auto-refrigerators, and through them in Belgrade’s Danube. No single protest was conducted in ‘civilized’ Belgrade. I wonder where was the civic society that disliked Milosevic.
Additionally, characterized as an awkward country where a democratically elected Prime-minister gets murdered. A country where the biggest party is run by a war criminal. A country that burns western embassies, but yet wants to join their clubs.

So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..

Serbia's actual situation hardly can't be described more modest. the policy of has brought nothing for Serbia.

I fear, this political dance will continue for some decades, accompanied by the whining melodies which were already heard last decade.

Mike, Wim, Peggy, Chris

If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?

Hvala.

Same question as Denis made, but I will rather give a pre-answer to this question from the Serbian point of view:

1. If the ICJ rules that the Kosova's declaration of independence was illegal, they will praise that decision.

2. If the ICJ rules that the Kosova's declaration of independence was legal... well, you all probably know what will the Serbian reaction be - biased and untrustworthy organization, backed and funded by USA and Great Britain, etc. etc.

Mr. Jeremic recently stated that if the ICJ rules that Kosova's declaration of independence was legal, even Serbia might recognize it. I don't have to provide you with a link, because each and everyone of you have seen and read it.

Greets from Prishtina!

"Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law."

... and tell me, Ambassador, how Serbia has been characterized in the halls of diplomacy, in the press, and in the public discourse of your country (and mine) - not only recently, but for the past 17 years? What a double standard.

Serbia has every right to pursue its claim through the ICJ. If the UK's feelings are hurt by the suggestion that its recognition of Kosovo wasn't in alignment with international norms, so be it. As we say in the US, "man up" - you made your decision, now stand behind it and accept responsibility for it.

Markovic of Jagodina might have ben duped but I very much doubt the people of Jaodina just as the rest of Serbia will be giving much attention to those who give any credence to wordsworth - the fact that the EU have reneged SAA shows how worthless the likes of wordsworth words are and to those who were so easily duped!!!

A couple of quick points. While all along many assumed that the US was the reason for Kosovo's independence, I have to dissagree. I belive the real force behind the EU's decision was the UK. Just look back at Mr. Milliband's address to the US Congress regarding the UK's concerns about the growing Russian aggressive influence in EU's back yard. Accordingly, the UK wanted to send a clear message, it was not Germany as in the case of Slovenia and Croatia, and it was not the US as in the case of Bosnia. Although the Clinton administration was instrumental in initiating the Nato intervention in 1999, the Bush administration really took a back seat until they were proded into action by the British.

The fact is that Serbia was always a problem for the West, because of it's continuous alliance with Russia, accordingly you have been punished and will continue to be punished while pursuing those policies. The missile shield initiated by the US was clearly to defend itself and its allies from an attack by a rogue state. The defense system is clearly not sophisticated or robust enough to pose any threat to Russia's military capabilities. Yet, Russia used this issue as a reason to begin to bully first Poland by banning their agricultural products from Russia, then Germany by blackmailing them with the natural gas need for heating during the winter months. Then, the Russian oligarchs led by Putin, decided to assasinate their target in the middle of London!!! This was a clear insult to a proud British nation, and it almost seems like the last straw, as insignificant as the act may seem in the large scheme of things.

So Russia's intention to exert it's influence to the surrounding regions, including Gorgia and Ukrain was unavoidable. Whether or not Kosovo's independence was recognized by the West or not, it was clear to the West that Russia had it's intentions set. Of course, all of these chess moves are part of the larger picture, mostly related to energy and national security. The point is this, Serbia's decision to align itself with Russia and pursue thes court's opinion again is a bet that you have to think very hard about. In other words, is it in your best long term interest to again align yourself with a political system that already failed, and if you analyze it closely will not be able to last longterm (i.e. Russia)? Or, do you align yourself with the West as has the rest of the region your country is located in?

The underlying problem with Russia is that it doesn't have a viable long-term system. In other words, it's held together by the strongmen (oligarchs and Putin). What happens after they are gone? Russia would be at the mercy of fate that the next dictator would be as effective as Putin. Yet, even Puting will run out of luck once the energy resources picture is clearer. While in the West, the system is set up so that it is continuous. Think of it like McDonald's, no matter where you go you get the same Big Mac, same tasting fries, at almost the same price. This is the "turn-key" model, and it is inherent in the American and British political fabric. Even when we get an ineffective leader like Bush, the country can only be subjected to a maximum of 8 years of damage, and the damage is limited by the balance of power between the various government branches and even the private sector. In relatively a short period of time, the people get to choose again, and if they don't like the driver, they can change him or her. While in Russia, Putin is still pulling the strings behind the scene as the PM. On another note, the reason why I believe he moved to a position as the PM is because of his long term strategy, and the fact that their aggressions against Georgia and Ukrain maybe will get worst, and even begin to resemble war crimes. So, he doesn't want to take the chance of having to face an international criminal justice court, and legally it is almost impossible for a court to find a PM guilty of anything beacuse at the end of the day he is only one of hundreds of ministers, but the buck stops with the president. Medvedev is set up and he doesn't even know it. Yikes.

"The consequences of [Serbia not joining NATO" in few years' time would be to leave Serbia as the only country in south-east Europe outside the Alliance, isolated from the many benefits that membership offers."



NO THANKS !

For an article this explicitly threatening to come from an actual serving ambassador, shows that Serbia is definetly in for stormy weather.

If I read the ambassador correctly, we need to stop being a "problem" or else.

By "problem", between the lines, they mean our latent potential to be a Russian proxy in the middle of the NATO "backyard".

Even as a "neutral" state sticking up for itself (that is what the ICJ case is really about) in the NATO "backyard" is not acceptable.

It's all about consolidating the NATO rear area... as he points out, we are one of the last points of "resistance".

No other explanations make sense. Today, just seeking a legal opinion (in a western court) still tags us as some sort of "trouble maker".... God help us.

Even more disturbing, what is their actual strategic objective?

Conquest of Russia? There seems to be an explicit pattern of late (Georgia, Ukraine, missile "defense" etc).

Has NATO's arrogance reached such heights they believe they can win a nuclear war?

As I said - God help us.

"[Serbia] isolated from the many benefits that [NATO] membership offers"
This phrase is rather typical of the article: full of vague suggestions and insinuations but never concrete.

"the EULEX mission, whose main role will particularly benefit minorities in Kosovo"
EULEX head Mr. Feith consistently repeats that Kosovo's Serbs are fine and there are no special measures needed to guarantee their welfare. How can you expect the rule of a man with such a vision to benefit Kosovo's Serbs?

[Going to the ICJ] "would only force us to continue to focus on what divides us, rather than on what we can do together"
The Kosovo question divides Serbia from the part of the EU to which mr. Wordsworth belongs. But that is not Serbia's fault, it is the fault of the US led Western coalition that didn't want to talk about Kosovo and instead imposed a "solution".
Ambassador, your country was one of those who employed a partial mediator to solve the Kosovo problem (Ahtisaari, whose opinions were well known) and now you object against Serbia asking it to a truly impartial institution?

"the UK suggested [...] to 'agree to disagree' over Kosovo's status and focus [...] to make life better for all the people living in Kosovo"
Kosovo's status is not an abstraction without practical meaning. It is about the quality of life of the people who live there. Recognizing Kosovo's independence in the present situation means very probably recognizing that in a few decades there will be no Serb left inside Kosovo.

«isolated from the many benefits that membership offers."»
M.Wordworth forgot to tell what kind of benefits already NATO brought to Serbia: 78 days of bombing civilians and robed the kosova from Serbia!?And may be the benefits will come back again if Serbia will move forward to ICJ!Any way there is no more international law for US-UK...Right?

The Ambassador and other people like him need to realise that the issue of Kosovo is not about the past but about the present and future of Serbia. Kosovo is a province of Serbia-end of story. Why doesn't England just let Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales go?

If any Serb had doubts about what our darling Europe thinks of us, Wordsworth set the record straight.
Is there a better proof(are you listening Jeremic?)of a talking of the Master to his slave? Yes,'slave', not a servant, which comes higher in the hierarchy of the subjugated.
A slave is denied the right of complaint, a servant is not.Listen to our plantation owner:
"Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law".
There you are, fellow Serbs, the "Massa" says shut up and do what you are told, or you won't enter in his 'brilliant future'.

"At the same time neighbouring former Yugoslav countries - Slovenia, Macedonia, Croatia -were each set on developing their relationship with NATO and clearly coming to see that their future lay in that organisation.

The absent partner in this process was Serbia. I won't go into the entire historical context, but the legacy of the conflicts still hangs over Serbia now, ..."

There you have it, from the horse's mouth.
Legacy of the conflict... What conflict?
Serbia was absent partner in NATO integration, it wanted to keep it's public companies, people didn't buy into this Latin-American style free-market thing, etc.
That's the real conflict behind all other conflicts in former Yugoslavia in 90's.

"the many benefits that (NATO) membership offers"

such as...in Afghanistan;

Military deaths by Country
Australia 6
Canada 97
Czech 3
Denmark 16
Estonia 3
Finland 1
France 22
Germany 26
Hungary 2
Italy 12
Latvia 1
Lithuania 1
NATO 1
Netherlands 17
Norway 3
Poland 8
Portugal 2
Romania 8
South Korea 1
Spain 23
Sweden 2
UK 120
US 591
Total 966
http://icasualties.org/oef/

- need one mention the benefits gained in Iraq???

The article is your typical EUrocratic arrogance. It begins with one of those sweeping "once upon a time..." recollections of a concert of European nations that never existed. That there could ever be a time when Central and Eastern Europe were ever regarded as "equals" with the West has about as much truth as a John McCain political ad. Pardon me, Mr. Ambassador, but you may recall a former PM of yours carving up another Central European state for the sake of "peace in our time"? Hardly indicative of a country being your "equal".

But never mind the revisionist history. The main article insinuates all the meaningless respect for Serbia as a nation, but quickly warns it to fall into line with the prevailing attitudes of Western Europe: join NATO, forget Kosovo, stop being stuck in a past the West created for you.

Now obviously we're not really expected to read anything insightful here. Wordsworth is just another bureaucratic talking head mimicking the lines and phrases of the government he represents. Yet I wonder when people like him will realize that the actions of his country and the countries of Western Europe and North America are the largest catalysts for Serbian support for parties like DSS and SRS. To carve out a statelet with the same legality as a $3 bill and then shut your eyes and ears to the repercussions of said actions is both irresponsible and half-baked. To constantly push the NATO agenda on countries that a) do not want to join, and b) increase instability in various regions shows a lack of understanding international relations. And finally, to rob somebody of their possessions, and then protest the victim taking the matter to court destroys any last shreds that Western-based diplomacy has any special moral standing in the world. I see very little difference between the foreign policies of Washington and London on one side, and Moscow and Tehran on the other. Each side candy coats their strategies with some sort of ideological moral reasoning, but very few people are unable to see through the shoddy craftsmanship anymore.

Serbia is not treated as an "equal" as you may want to insinuate. Serbia is considered an upstart little country that continues to thumb its nose at compliance and refuses to tow the line of the policies of a few Western countries. True Croatia was just as nationalistic as Serbia, and true Croatia harbors latent Fascist tendencies among many of its leaders, but it bowed to the West, and so gets a free pass. What about Serbia? Is it inat? Probably. Is it stubborness? I've never met a single Serbian pushover. But is it a rejection of democracy and Western European values as you seem to believe? No. Please stop thinking Milosevic is still in power. Please stop assuming every single Serb wants to create Greater Serbia, which never existed, and never received more than 5% of any popular vote. Please stop thinking that Serbs have this need to dominate others. Your constant attempts at breaking this dog only show your own self-serving interests and your apparent disregard for the international law you claim to uphold.

Perhaps you and your government should take advantage of Serbia's proposal to the ICJ. Then you can explain to the world how Kosovo is legal and just. Showing resistance to Serbia's move, and giving veiled threats against the country if it continues this path doesn't convince me that Kosovo was that special legal case you're trying to sell us. and it isn't helping mollify Serbian public opinion that they're an "equal" player either.

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..
(Denis, 16 September 2008 16:02)
no conspiracy, just good old-fashioned conflict of interests. mr ambassador said it all - serbia was going against the trends in the region, that was the problem. it is true that serbia was pursuing wrong policies, but everything that happened was exaggerated in order to make serbia look worse than it was the case. and the west doesn't have a problem working with oppressive regimes if it suits their interests.

one of the results of getting a free ride on western propaganda train is that albanians now seriously believe that america and the west are about democracy and human rights. so albanians are so deluded that they welcome bush as a hero even though most people including the ones in the west have been "welcoming" him with protests.

countries that understand well what western bullying and arm-twisting means are the ones that are least likely to recognise kosovo's udi. and if you look at the map you can clearly see that this could turn into a stand-off between the north and the south rather than the east and the west. it's former colonies against their former colonial masters. they may be poor and weak, but they represent the majority of world's nations and majority of the world's population. if they resist kosovo will never get the recognition by the un.

Can I say that you are part of the machine that belongs to the Blairites. ‘The Project For a New Blair Century’ that has developed a parallel policy to the US truly amazes me, with the fact that Albanian criminals and their affiliates alike have become the spearhead of our beloved islands survival…What planet are you aristocrats on…you don’t represent my Island or my countrymen in the Atlantic.

Anyway, to get back on the track of your opinion, my opinion is as follows, and by jove my fellow, you and the other lot have made a flawed calculation, whilst forgetting some important equations.

1. You won’t go back to the 14th century or the 80’s, well fine, is that because it would prove you wrong. By the end of the 80’s in Kosovo, yes, forget the Berlin wall, and Russia’s grip on its neighbours, which had no sway on the things going on in this once beautiful province, meaning, if you care to read western media from 1980 to 89’, when from new York to Berlin, newspapers were churning out articles about the crimes committed by Albanian criminals and village idiots against their own, the Catholics and the Slavs.

2. Serbia will neither get into the EU or desire (you said it yourself at dinner) to join an organisation led by the same very people (equals) who tried to bleed Serbia to submission, regardless of WW1 and WW2. We supported communism for the future to dismantle the Balkans. Churchill’s memoirs say it all, you remember, the ones he wrote on the Orient regarding the United States of Europe.

3. The only Serbs who find it exciting to join the EU are the lost students who want some honey, with complete lack of vision to what the future is actually painted for Serbs.

4. The conflict would not hang over Serbia if Tony Blair had not gained power in Britain, and provided complete support to the US agenda of completely TRYING to destroy the lands and mindsets of the Serb people.

5. Going back to NATO, if Serbia did join NATO, they would be the spearhead of NATO for two reasons, one: they can fight, but defensively; two:would be another way to decrease the population of slavs. I won’t say more because it will give my position away.

6. War crime, will Tony Blair ever receive an indictment along with Americans!

7. Change, that definitely is the word, but how was Serbia changed? Why was Serbia and Montenegro not invited to the meeting in Washington in 1990, with regards to the dismantling of Yugoslavia? Was it because you only wanted to invited Catholics and your future hybrid Muslims of Europe?

8. “Life punishes those who come to late”, typical morbid mumbo jumbo. How about this for a livelier factor.
To Good Guys Dead
They sucked us in;
King and country,
Christ Almighty
And the rest.
Patriotism,
Democracy,
Honor--
Words and phrases,
They either bitched us or killed us.
c. 1922
9. When the UK government could not agree on which path to take regarding Kosovo, unfortunately we had Americans running the place, so, naturally we supported the criminals. However, too late to cry over spilt milk. The hasty moves and decisions will be more apparent in the weeks and months to come.
10. History is about to repeat itself !

""Indeed, it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law". "

well, he´s obviously not getting it!

Mr.Wordsworth if you don´t like to hear that, there is just on solution: don´t break the law!

Serbia must be on the right path, if an ambassador is writing in that fashion...

indeed, Serbia´s future is bright.

UK´s future...well, better let´s not talk about it. your zenith was in the last century, and you´re gonna go downhill with your big brother on the other side of the ocean... China, Russia, Brasil and others are the coming powers, and you know that.

and Serbia knows it too.

The Ambasador bemoans the fact that '...it is not always easy to think of a country as a partner when its representatives, almost daily, publicly accuse us and most of the rest of the EU of violating international law'. The solution is simple. The UK should support actively Serbia's initiative through the IJC. After all, if the UK is all right and wise in its approach, it would have nothing to fear from the decision of the court.

You do not have to be a radical to reject the UDI for Kosovo.

It was a foolish thing to recognise the mono-ethnic ambitions of the Kosovo Albanians - that is what most of the EU has done, and the EU is now stuck in that rut.

Serbia will be stronger in the long term if it refuses to cooperate with EULEX.

The EU will realise in due time that it cannot continue to punish the people of Serbia for something done a decade or more ago.

It is not enough to blame the rejection of the loss of Kosovo on nationalism - many right thinking democratic people reject the Kosovo UDI too.

It is the EU and US politicians who have created the partial impasse - the fact that it is partial is a problem of their making. They should have stuck with 1244 instead of deliberately lying when they signed it.

Denis

"It has been characterized as a butcher factory of the Balkans that committed the worst massacre in Europe since WWII for which the Dutch government resigned. BTW, it was not the Dutch gov. who conducted it."

The ICJ concluded Serbia wasn't involved in the Srebrenica massacre.

"Furthermore, characterized as a state who killed innocent women, children and elderly, put them in auto-refrigerators, and through them in Belgrade’s Danube."

The truck was never found, and neither were the bodies, nor were any other trucks found.

"No single protest was conducted in ‘civilized’ Belgrade. I wonder where was the civic society that disliked Milosevic."

Milosevic was otherthrown by protestors.

"Additionally, characterized as an awkward country where a democratically elected Prime-minister gets murdered."

Serbia is not the first and won't be the last to have had a head of government assassinated.

"A country where the biggest party is run by a war criminal."

Seselj is on trial and innocent for the foreseeable future.

"A country that burns western embassies, but yet wants to join their clubs."

It wasn't the state that burnt the embassies any more than it was the US that blew up the Alfred Morrow building in Oklahoma or the UK government bombing its own underground.

"So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence….."

Most of the violence in this period in Serbia was caused by NATO and the KLA.


At the end of the day the people of Serbia just like the people of Ukraine don't want to join NATO. Therefore Wordsworth shouldn't be putting any pressure on the Serbian goverment about this.

Mike, Wim, Peggy, Chris

If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?

Hvala.
(Denis, 16 September 2008 22:27)

Gee, looks like I am drawn into this discussion.
I have answered this question many times but it seems to be popping up repeatedly.
If ICJ rules that UDI (not CDI) as you put it was legal then yes, Serbia will accept that and so will all of us as well. But, by the same token, ICJ will also have to rule that Republika Srpska, North Kosovo etc. can also declare independence. The same reason can be given and cannot be rejected.
Serbia wins whatever happens.

Now let me ask you. If ICJ declares tha UDI was not legal, will you abanden this nonsense? I have answered this question many times but I have NEVER received an answer for mine. Please be the first.

So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation…..
(Denis, 16 September 2008 16:02)


Hi Denis,

I said nothing about a world conspiracy. My point is that the concept of "justice" permits both sides to be heard and judged. BiH got its day in front of the ICJ, as did Croatia. I believe that Serbia deserves the same. It's as simple as that.

I find it sadly humorous that a country as influential as the UK should find its feelings hurt by a small country like Serbia. That's the price of being a world leader. Systems like the ICJ (1) ultimately promote an order that's in the interests of powerful countries like the UK, and (2) represent the culmination of years of effort and precedent promoted by countries like the UK to create binding legal norms for the international community. It's hypocritical, then, to whine when a small country tries to leverage the legitimacy of the ICJ against the UK. No less hypocritical than the USA's refusal to accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ - because (gasp!) it may not rule exclusively in its favor.

My dear Denis: Please spare me the condescending lecture, "my dear." I worked in Drvar, and I worked in Bugojno, and I worked in Sarajevo for years. I've earned, and am perfectly entitled to my opinion. That it respectfully disagrees with yours is neither my fault nor yours.

Cheers,

Ivan

1 - "But don't worry - I am not going back to the fourteenth century, only to the 1990s." On the contrary, in the South-East Europe, history cannot be understood unless you go back to the fourteenth century. Don't shy away and try that, for a change.

2 - People don't like comments in bold letters. Your article is full of sentences in bold. Could you please review the formatting, as it gives the impression that you're shouting, like giving orders to someone.

mr Wordsworth doasn't do much justice to his surname, does he?

I fear his words and the world he is promoting:
the world in which rhetorics and politisation can be more important and valued than justice

obviously, everything is open for interpretation and polititians and diplomats job is to manipulate that possiblility to their advantage

but justice?
justice shouldnt be questioned or debatable.

there is a law ( in this case International Law )
there is a court ( in this case International Court of Justice )
how can search for justice be "a mistake" mr Wordsworth?
and who is to fear from that justice, freed from the context you, or anybody else, is putting it in?

I can understand mr. Wordsworth worries. It is not just that the ICJ might declare Kosovo's UDI illegal and put him and his country in an awkward position. Actually - if he wins this may mean even more trouble. As a court, the ICJ will have to motivate its decision. And one can be sure that South Ossetia, the Republika Srpska, North Mitrovica and many others will read its motivation closely. It is hardly possible to think of a motivation that grants Kosovo this right while not automatically giving it to some other areas too.

Yet many other countries will want to make sure that there is a ruling. Kosovo's first "unique" precedent was the unprovoked attack on Serbia in 1999. And everybody knows that it stayed unique for only 4 years. At that point the US used it as an excuse to attack Iraq. So there is no reason to expect Kosovo's UDI to stay unique once the world has consented to it.

"If ICJ rules that CDI (coordinated declaration of independence) was indeed in line with the international law, will Serbia , the defender of intl. law recognize Kosovo?"

First, nice slip of the keyboard getting that CDI thing in there - you're probably more right than you know, what with the US coaching Ceku and Sejdiu at the negotiating table to keep tight lipped and all. Yes, in many cases, Kosovo's self-perceived independence would be a dead issue if not for the United States. But on to your question.

I doubt the ICJ is going to come up with a ruling as definitive as legal/illegal. They'll probably fudge the answer to say that Kosovo's secession, while regrettable, controversial, and outside the principles of SOME legal grounds, is a special case of some sorts. But if it actually says it was perfectly justified, I see no cause for withholding further recognitions.

Yet at the same time, I see no reason for withholding recogntions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Nor do I see any reason for RS staying in Bosnia, Zubin Potok, Zvecan, and Leposavic staying in Kosovo, and yes, Presevo from staying in Serbia etc etc etc. The ICJ may very well know that it's ruling, however effective it may be, could very well give the green light to dozens of other would-be breakaway parastates.

In all likelihood, the ICJ will not rule in favor of Kosovo, but the US and others will just ignore it. Better to have one semi-legal parastate than open the floodgates and destroy sovereignty all around.

RE:
To those commenting from US, UK and EU is really despicable to advocate Serbia's isolation while you yourselves will not suffer under those circumstances. If you hate the West, go live in the East.
The west brought down an entire Soviet Union, do you think Serbia would be a problem?
(miri, 16 September 2008 15:26)

Those Serbians commenting from the UK, US, Canada , Australia and other countries forefathers fought and died for Serbia and Yugoslavia. Per Capita, the Serbian nation lost more civilians and soldiers during both world wars' except for Russia. Those graves include the desecrated graves in Kosovo bare witness to the fact. If you think the KLA thugs and criminals under Thaci are going to get away with stealing the heart of Serbia and Montenegro as [Kosovo & Metohia is the birthplace of both Serbs and Montenegrins], you are sadly mistaken. We will not stop because Kosovo is Serbia.

Kosovo Albanians were always welcome in Serbia, but they are not welcome in trying to steal a country.

The US & UK has always been Serbia's ally, and educated people in those nations have seen the mistake made upon Serbia by it's political leadership.

I think Wordworth basically sums up the Colonialists' frustrations with Serbia - they are a nation of free and independent people, they don't want to join NATO and buy needless weapons from the military industrial complex (and make yanks/brits richer while they get poorer), all nations around Serbia are playing along and want to join NATO and Serbia sets a 'bad example' for them, Serbs love Russians and the colonialists can't stomach a strong Russian ally in the middle of Europe, Serbs actually want to be treated with respect and fairness....These are just some of the reasons Wordsworth is upset. Also, Serbia going to the ICJ just further exposes his own government's immorality and double standards on the Kosovo issue.

Why doesn't the pro-albanian B92 reprint today's opinion in the british Guardian Unlimited on how the west has lost influence in the UN and could not stop Serbia's ICJ initiative from reaching the General Assembly agenda. The albo posters here will have heart attacks when the GA votes to send the initiative to the ICJ and massive strokes when an ICJ ruling in favor of Serbia leads to withdrawals of recognition.

Denis wrote:
"So in short my dear…. For 17 years……an image of A Country of Violence…..

P.S. how sad….world conspiracy against a small and proud nation….."
Dear Denis,
for those 17 years of violence - rests a grave responsibility also on hands of so called - international community. You know that very well - so your irony is pritty much hollow...
As somebody said - there were some good intentions in mustering Kosovo and Iraq intervention - but major motive was - craving for power and greed... So lets not mix humanism and greed.
And Serbia is certainly not isolated case - that is all part of "new world order" sham. Good only for naive.

Indeed, I think as well that searching for a non-binding advice is a big error of Serbian policies. Better would have been to sue individual countries who committed illegal acts against serbian sovereignty by recognizing illegal UDI !!!

For an ambassador of a country the trumpets its democratic tradition, Mr. Wordsworth's comment that Serbia is a 'problem' because it disagrees with the theft of its land by NATO and has exercised its right to object is hypocritical as well as neo-imperialistic. Of course there is precedent: English and Scottish immigrants colonized and stole the northern part of Ireland with Britain's blessing in the past.

The very idea that Milosevic's Socialist Party "changed" and that this is why the ambassador agreed to recognize and validate is quite laughable. Apparently, the former reformer Kostunica is now the revanchist, and the nationalist Socialists are the good guys.

And people wonder why the double talk of ambassadors and politicians in so-called Democratic countries is ignored. This was a matter of convenience. Let's face it. The side that stood on principle has been ostracized, and it's no surprise, I guess, that the unprincipled ones would band together.

The whole flip flop reminds me of the US's dance with Saddam Hussein, first our friend, then not our friend, then our friend, then not our friend. Where is he now? Oh yeah, he's dead. I guess that settles it.

Too sad Serbian media publishes this kind of anti-Serbian advertising.

With all due respect, Mr. Wordsworth, this kind of demagoguery is what has kept Serbia (and many other peoples) kidnapped for so long to serve the "West's" interests (as a matter of fact, why do we still talk about East and West when that confrontation ended almost two decades ago?).

I believe in diplomacy, but the underlying hipocresy leads us nowhere.

To the contrary, Serbia going to the ICJ puts Serbia in a win-either-way situation.

Either the ICJ rules that Kosovo-and-Metohija cannot be snatched away from Serbia, and that means the purported proclamation of a so-called independence by the minority Albanian population (and NOT all citizens) of that southern province of Serbia will be gradually eroded in the world.

Or, on the other hand, the ICJ rules that provinces can proclaim independence,a nd the Republika Sprska, but also Quebec, Flanders, Wales, Cornwall, Scottish Highlands, Scottish Lowlands, Lake District, Hawai'i, Texas, California, Basque Country, Catalunya, Lusatia/Sorbenland, Brittany, Provence, Corsica, northern Italian provinces ... follow suit, as do Kurdistan, at least 5 regions in Iraq, Kashmere, Tibet, Xingjian/Uyghurstan, Moslem parts of the Philippines, norther Sri Lanka... you name it.

And that would mean a chaos that comes as a revenge. And that would be a satisfaction enough.

But do you imagine ICJ would ever dare say the silly charade of pretending to be "independent" by naroc-mobsters in Prishtina was legal? Hmmm...