One year ago Kosovo became Kosova

[Brenus]

One year ago Kosovo became Kosova,
And nobody care any more of one of the biggest failure in recent history.

As Arafat and Kissinger before him, the man responsible for it gains a Nobel Price for Peace. :help:

Martti Ahtisaari is now so aware of his failure that he just ask the put all Serbia in a big Guantanamo until it recognises the fait accompli: “Only a unified EU position, combined with the knowledge that EU accession for Serbia is unthinkable as long as this conflict has not been fully resolved, may over time lead to a change of attitude on the part of both ordinary Serbs and their government," say Ahtisaari, Rohan and Ischinger”
I am happy to know that this guy is a peace Nobel, because if he was a law enforcement officer (known as copper), I would be scared.:beam:

The pro-independence will hail the fact that against all fear mongering no Serbian exodus took place, ignoring the fact it had happened before when 200,000 Serbs and Roma forced to flee and no violence irrupted in this territory, ignoring that security is still maintained by 15,000 NATO-led troops and 3,000 EU-led police (for around 2,000.0000 inhabitants)…

So, what now?
Well, usual Balkans business: Politician talk and the people do business.
US got their base and US Army is manoeuvring (and train) the Serbian Army…
Serbia will never recognise Kosovo but will do business.
Kosovo will pretend to be independent but will never take what is suppose be part of it territory.
And both will go in Europe and all this would make no sense anymore…
:sweatdrop:

[Subotan]

Serbia will eventually come around. The economic embargo by the EU will eventually force the majority of them to reconsider their position on Kosovo.

[Furunculus]

i sympathise deeply with serbia in this.

[CountArach]

i sympathise deeply with serbia in this.
Because they lost the territory of people who didn't want to be there anyway? :inquisitive:

Anyway, here's (http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/kosovo-and-serbia-one-year-after-a-quiet-compromise) a n interesting and optimistic article about what Kosovar independence has done.

[Furunculus]

because i don't believe kosovo had any right to secede from serbia, and it sets a dangerous precedent.

we will all be more vulnerable if every bunch of muppets decides it doesn't want to be part of their country any more.

[CountArach]

because i don't believe kosovo had any right to secede from serbia, and it sets a dangerous precedent.

we will all be more vulnerable if every bunch of muppets decides it doesn't want to be part of their country any more.
Are you personally going to be at risk... at all?

[Sarmatian]

Because they lost the territory of people who didn't want to be there anyway? :inquisitive:

If they didn't want to be there, why didn't they simple leave? Who or what gave them the right to take my land? Yes, it's mine as much as it is theirs, if not more so. There wasn't a year since WW1 where Kosovo made ends meet. In Vojvodina, where I live, there has been a surplus, so money from here was used in Kosovo. A nice portion of Serbia's foreign debt is from foreign loans in the eighties taken specifically and exclusively to be invested in Kosovo. We're not talking millions, we're talking billions here. That kind of money is not a joke in any country and especially not in a relatively poor country like Serbia. What now? Now I'm supposed to repay that debt? What about all the investments that were made there in the past, using the money of all citizens of Serbia? Industry, schools, hospitals... ? Should we just forget about it? But, it's only money. There are more important principles. What about my countrymen and my relatives who bled for Kosovo several times during the last century? Doesn't matter? And now you're telling me that in spite of all this, I should just say "meh, okay, whatever" because a bunch of people (of which a good chunk were there illegally in the first place) feel they want to live in a separate country???

Kosovo is lost, that's a fact, I know. I've known it for a long time, much before 17.02.2008. Americans are there now and there's not a force in this world that can get them out. We can bitch around, to the UN, to various international courts and organizations, but that won't change the fact the battle is over.

I can accept that, just don' tell me it's normal, legal, moral or just. If you're forcing me to eat poop, please don't force me to praise the chef.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

because i don't believe kosovo had any right to secede from serbia, and it sets a dangerous precedent.

we will all be more vulnerable if every bunch of muppets decides it doesn't want to be part of their country any more.

Agreed. I can see, a bit, why some people want independence - but the examples of Québec, and to a [much] lesser extent even that of Bavaria, concern me.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Was the genocide ethical? I think not. Every person have the right to self-determination. Of course, there are channels/talks to go through to find a compromise if the country that is going to loose land isn't happy, but, if that isn't satisfactory, then the region should be permitted to secede anyhow with the people's consent.

In truth, I think it when a country shouts "this secession is illegal"/"we want our land back" it is just imperialistic and nothing more. The new country has left your union with the will of the people (who are the most important things here) and resistance is anti-democratic. Dangerous president? What dangerous president? If anything this is positive and a victory for self-determination.

Unfortunately, due to the rather... inconsistent nature of NATO/EU/US foreign policy, people who do this elsewhere are not quite as lucky as Kosovo. Think South Ossetia and that other state which I can never spell. Situation was the same as Kosovo essentially, but because it was Georgia, the US said no and instead Russia decided to get involved (not for the benefit of the people, but for its own gain mind - that makes it imperialistic in my eyes). That war should never have happened, Georgia should have accepted its land loss and have done with it - it wasn't even as if the area was remotely wealthy after years of trade embargoes.

I've used the word imperialist and its derivatives more times than an average communist in this post - not sure whether a left-ward shift is good or bad ~:)

[Brenus]

“Serbia will eventually come around. The economic embargo by the EU will eventually force the majority of them to reconsider their position on Kosovo.”
There is NO economic embargo… And if one would be enforced, it will be against Kosovo which trade mainly with Serbia…:beam:

“Because they lost the territory of people who didn't want to be there anyway?” The Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia were bomb because they had to respect the “internationally recognised” borders inherited from the Tito administrative borders…
The Serbs were forced by the Erdut Agreement to be part of Croatia but this was all right…:inquisitive:

“then the region should be permitted to secede anyhow with the people's consent” And if so, why the Serbs from Kosova can’t be in Serbia, and The Croats and Serbs to separate from Bosnia?:inquisitive:

“Was the genocide ethical” What Genocide? Did the Serbs systematically killed Albanian in Kosovo?
No. Nowadays, without the need of propaganda, victims of this war are roughly evaluated to 10 000 on each side… And even these figures are probably exaggerated…

“The new country has left your union with the will of the people (who are the most important things here) and resistance is anti-democratic.”
Did the Serbian people have a say on this? Did the Serbian people voted on this? They were bombed, and forced to accept that a part of their territory populated by a minority which was a regional majority separate… :no:
You have the right to support this but you can’t pretend it was democratic…:beam:
Or you have a other definition of democratic process than I.
:book:
“Unfortunately, due to the rather... inconsistent nature of NATO/EU/US foreign policy”
It is a perfectly consistent policy: we do what we have to do in order to reinforce our positions…
It is a pure real politic, pragmatic approach and ignoring, twisting and adapting the facts and the ethic to it own goal. One day you have to respect borders, the day after you have to respect the right people to separate…:2thumbsup:
You bluntly lie then pretend it is past and no more relevant anyway…
Different circumstances, you know, unique case, exceptional etc…

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

“Was the genocide ethical” What Genocide? Did the Serbs systematically killed Albanian in Kosovo?
No. Nowadays, without the need of propaganda, victims of this war are roughly evaluated to 10 000 on each side… And even these figures are probably exaggerated…It's not technically a genocide, but crimes against humanity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War#War_crimes) - equally as bad in my book.
“The new country has left your union with the will of the people (who are the most important things here) and resistance is anti-democratic.”
Did the Serbian people have a say on this? Did the Serbian people voted on this? They were bombed, and forced to accept that a part of their territory populated by a minority which was a regional majority separate… :no:
You have the right to support this but you can’t pretend it was democratic…:beam:
Or you have a other definition of democratic process than I.
:book:The Serbian people were not living there and so they have (and should have) no real command over what happens in the area. They have power in their region, the people of Kosovo in theirs.
“Unfortunately, due to the rather... inconsistent nature of NATO/EU/US foreign policy”
It is a perfectly consistent policy: we do what we have to do in order to reinforce our positions…
It is a pure real politic, pragmatic approach and ignoring, twisting and adapting the facts and the ethic to it own goal. One day you have to respect borders, the day after you have to respect the right people to separate…:2thumbsup:
You bluntly lie then pretend it is past and no more relevant anyway…
Different circumstances, you know, unique case, exceptional etc…It's inconsistent in the way it will consider one circumstance as "fine" while another where the principles are exactly the same as "illegal" or "wrong" because it is going against the will of a country that they are trying to be friendly with. If they are going to decide that Kosovo is right, then they should do the same to South Ossetia and similar small de-facto independent states. If they are going to decide that South Ossetia/similar de-facto independent states are wrong, they should do the same to Kosovo (although I would rather they didn't). I do see your point though - they are unfortunately consistent in that regard.

~:)

[Furunculus]

Was the genocide ethical? I think not. Every person have the right to self-determination. Of course, there are channels/talks to go through to find a compromise if the country that is going to loose land isn't happy, but, if that isn't satisfactory, then the region should be permitted to secede anyhow with the people's consent.

In truth, I think it when a country shouts "this secession is illegal"/"we want our land back" it is just imperialistic and nothing more. The new country has left your union with the will of the people (who are the most important things here) and resistance is anti-democratic. Dangerous president? What dangerous president? If anything this is positive and a victory for self-determination.

Unfortunately, due to the rather... inconsistent nature of NATO/EU/US foreign policy, people who do this elsewhere are not quite as lucky as Kosovo. Think South Ossetia and that other state which I can never spell. Situation was the same as Kosovo essentially, but because it was Georgia, the US said no and instead Russia decided to get involved (not for the benefit of the people, but for its own gain mind - that makes it imperialistic in my eyes). That war should never have happened, Georgia should have accepted its land loss and have done with it - it wasn't even as if the area was remotely wealthy after years of trade embargoes.

I've used the word imperialist and its derivatives more times than an average communist in this post - not sure whether a left-ward shift is good or bad ~:)

The genocide question has been answered quire satisfactorily.

You are getting hung up on big words that have little meaning. If you recognise that civil war is one of the nastiest forms of human activity, brutal beyond normal war conducted by state actors and with the potential to spread civil instability to neighbours, then you should respect the westphalian principle that nation states are sovereign within their borders.

By backing Kosovo whilst ignoring the plight of serbian minorities in neighbouring territories the west has:
a) knackered the westphalian principle (a dangerous precedent)
b) done so in a patently unjust and unprincipled way that will cause chaos for decades to come

If you like the idea of hordes of ravening people running around with machetes butchering their neighbours then yes, you may be very pleased that the poor kosovars got their right to self-determination.

Nothing in what i have said above should be interpreted as a hard and fast rule that forever binds the status-quo of national borders, there are many examples within existing legal frameworks for territories or parts of territories to change possession.

But there was nothing principled or legal about the secession of kosovo!

[rasoforos]

Each story needs to have a good guy and a bad guy. Serbia was chosen to be the 'bad guy' in this one. It doesnt matter that Bosnians and Croats commited warcrimes too (and they deeply hate eachother because of that) it was the Serbians only to blame. Croat and Bosnian war criminals pass as small news on the media.

Same, in Kosovo, no-one mentions the ethnic cleansing of Serbs. A half-half community is now 95%-5% IIRC.

What saddens me the most is that Serbia fought against the oppressor in the Balkans in all major wars. In Both Balcan war the Serbs fought against the Ottomans while the Albanian and Bosnian populations were providing troops to the Ottoman army and Bulgaria allied with them in the second one. In WWI again Serbia paid a heavy price and again in WW II (When Bulgaria fought for the Nazis, Albania for the Italians and Croatia got themselves a nice Nazi state) they fought for the Allies and paid a heavy toll. Now, for me, history counts a fair bit. I do not justify the Serbian war-crimes (but I do not turn a blind eye to the other war crimes either), but I believe that Serbia was treated unfairly, from a historical point of view. The least we can do is to make sure that the Kossovo Serbs return to Kossovo and remain unharmed, but frankly I do not see this happening. Kossovo was ethnically cleansed and it will remain this way.


'Divide and conquer' strategies never went out of fashion. By creating Kossovo, the US is holding Serbia and Albania by the balls and can promote its political dogma easily. It also (and Europe) makes good money by selling weapons. I believe that, if Russia gets back to Superpower status, Kossovo will be a huge focal point.

Kossovo will always be a failed state. It is landlocked, corrupted, and was never meant to be a nation. The only way it could possibly (assuming that the ethnic cleansing will remain) is for Albania to annex it, since the population is now ethnically Albanian. Of course Albania is not what you would exactly call stable...

[Furunculus]

I would laugh myself silly if the serbs in northern kosovo in turn annexed that part of the country, and then opted to return the 'liberated territory to serbia.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

It is not as if ever since Kosovo declared independence millions of secessionists internationally have gone berserk and started chopping each others heads off. Indeed this "westphalian" principle is more likely to cause war than giving into the demands of the people and allowing individuals to pursue their right to live in their own region with their own national identity should they want to.

Maybe it has set a dangerous president in the respect that you are discussing though Furunculus. It wouldn't, however, if the nations of the world were a little less (and here I go again) imperialistic and/or NATO and company were a little more consistent in their ethical attitudes. I doubt that this will change them, but that is the awful world of manipulative diplomacy for you.

~:)

[rvg]

Serbs have been severely wronged by the EU, and they most certainly did not deserve that kind of treatment.

[Kralizec]

Serbs have been severely wronged by the EU, and they most certainly did not deserve that kind of treatment.

:inquisitive:

[Furunculus]

It is not as if ever since Kosovo declared independence millions of secessionists internationally have gone berserk and started chopping each others heads off. Indeed this "westphalian" principle is more likely to cause war than giving into the demands of the people and allowing individuals to pursue their right to live in their own region with their own national identity should they want to.

Maybe it has set a dangerous president in the respect that you are discussion though Furunculus. It wouldn't, however, if the nations of the world were a little less (and here I go again) imperialistic and/or NATO and company were a little more consistent in their ethical attitudes. I doubt that this will change them, but that is the awful world of manipulative diplomacy for you.

~:)

we disagree then. however this is not simply about head-hackers, but also about the principle that one nation does not mess around with the affairs of others as happened recently when russia used kosovo as an excuse for interfering in georgia's affairs.

i am not claiming to preside over the discussion dangerously or otherwise, i am talking about an event that precedes and which has consequences on similar future events. i.e. that as long as the westphalian principle was inviolate then it was virtually impossible one nation to publicly justify interfering with the internal affairs of another nation, but having been broken any number of nations may attempt to do just such a thing.

F.Y.I. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westphalian_sovereignty :)

[Brenus]

“The Serbian people were not living”: So, who build the churches? Was it the Ottoman Empire, the Muslim Albanian or the very Communist Tito?:beam:
Do you know that the official name (I mean before the seizure) of Kosovo was Kosovo I Metohija. Metohija means land of the Church.
I don’t care too much about the historical claim on land which belonged to populations few centuries ago, but to claim that Serbs were not living there is a little bit too far…
True, they were not any more the majority, various ethnic cleansing having taken their toll and the Albanisation of Kosovo by Tito when he was dreaming of a Balkanic Federation (with the Ever Hodja’s Albania) just was the final shot.
And the fact that Kosovo is just a pile of stones…

The reality is Kosovo is lost for Serbia, but Kosova will have difficulty to exist. I think it will never exist as a state…

Thanks to the genius Martti Ahtisaari we have now people living in limbo, having to earn their money on others good will. Hostage of US and EU, and even of the Serbs, the Kosovars have no real future as a country.
Of course, they can’t go back in Serbia. Of course, the Serbs will not join Kosova… Thanks to the politic initiated under Clinton and Madeleine Albright, the USA have now a powerful base in the Balkans with a population which just can’t expel then in the future.
Imagine what could happen without US soldiers… Albanians from Kosovo and Serbs face to face, without any others players… So, unlike others countries, Kosovo will have to keep the US base just to stay alive…
And you have to admire the US politicians who know how to see then to create an opportunity...:2thumbsup:

[Sarmatian]

The reality is Kosovo is lost for Serbia, but Kosova will have difficulty to exist. I think it will never exist as a state…


Well, it is, in a way a sustainable solution for the US. Kosovo doesn't have to be recognized as a sovereign state for Bondsteel to exist and money that will have to be pumped into Kosovo is marginal by American standards. Bosnia exists on the same principle for over a decade now. It still doesn't have a sustainable economy (especially the Muslim-Croat part) and it is still ruled from Brussels/Washington...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

An independent or at least quasi independent Kosovo suits the interests of the USA on two particulars:

1. It allows the USA to argue that it is at war with islamic terrorists, and not with Islam, since we are supporting Kosovo. How many people buy into this, and how many think it is self-serving "window-dressing" is debatable.

2. It serves to limit Serbian power. This is not aimed as a "divide and conquer" strategy AT Serbia, so much as it is a tool to limit Serbia's ability to be a powerful ally for a resurgent Russia. The goal is not to limit Serbia except as a means to curbing potential Russian expansionism. Obviously, the practical utility of this approach is arguable.

Another note:

US sentiment very clearly labels Serbia as the "bad guys" in Bosnia and in Kosovo. Once you get painted as a non-socialist "black hat" the US media is more than willing to use you as a "whipping boy." Since most yanks are pretty ignorant about the Balkans, this gives the media a great deal of influence regarding the subject. It would take a good deal of political courage for a US leader to run counter to public sentiment -- and most won't willingly expend the political "coin" over what is viewed as a "sideshow" by most in the USA.

Finally:

I think you may be mis-interpreting EU intent. They aren't going to take disputes over control of Kosovo seriously because they view ANY such nationalist sentiments as counter-productive to the new Europe. Remember, they're internationalist progressives. They would like to see national borders in Europe reduced to nothing more than areas of cultural influence with one currency, one court system, one integrated defense force. With THAT as an objective, the only thing they see in anyone bickering over territory is somebody who's not "mature" enough to join the collective.

I actually loathe that progressive internationalism stuff, but you have to get a sense of it to understand the game the EU plays.

[Furunculus]

cheers, never seen the idiocy of the EU group-think expressed as a political ideology before, reading it all together only makes it, and its adherents appear more loathsome.