IAP Political Forum

Today was declared the independance of Kosovo
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080217/wl_nm/kosovo_serbia_dc;_ylt=AvTWiJbxgsLQupc6FzsCHexm.3QA)

IMO, they should have let the Serbian enclave back to Serbia and let serbians live in Serb-controled area.
What is not right is that some Serbs will have to live in an a Little Albania. The real Albania is the poorest of the poorest countries in Europe, well below Turkey's level. Kosovo will be the same unless the West pours huge amount of money for political reason but I doubt they will.

But why unilaterally?

What do you mean?

I heard this on the news earlier today but what does this mean for Serbia?

Turkish minister of foreign affairs Babacan has stated that Turkey will recognize Kosovar independence. I am glad that we will be among the first to recognize the newest European state.

mic,
For Serbia it means a large symbolic loss: Their territory loses one third of its surface but most of kosovar are ethnic albanian anyway, so they were already ethnicaly separated.
The symbolic loss is greater because of historical meanings of Kosovo for the Serb.

Now the social issue is that you have a Serb minority (christian orthodox) living among Kosovar Albanians (secular muslims) and they hate each others.

Since it's basicaly an ethnic independance it's not fair that the Serb enclave in Kosovo can't return to Serbia.

I seem to recall that the last time around, when the Serbian Orthodoxs were in power they were more or less trying to ethnically cleanse the Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo, and the Catholics in Slovenia and Croatia. I'm pretty sure that the serbs living in any of the above countries are at least alive and not in danger of being put in concentration camps and massacred in forests. If they really don't like their situation they can always pack up an move to Serbia.

That's true, the loss of Kosovo was caused mainly by Milosevic's violent and stupid politic of war.
But they have been punished enough.
That's exactly what they did: Two thirds of the Kosovo Serbs have left Kosovo.

good. next to come...will it be Basc...Kurdistan...South Sudan...let's keep it rolling.

Every decent Eurowussie country should have its own Amerikosovo.

(http://static.oper.ru/data/gallery/l1048752510.jpg)

I mean that this decision has been taken unilaterally by people from kosovo, but they are part of a country, so it seems to me an illegal decision.
Let's imagine London, Paris or Madrid deciding their own independence from the rest of the UK, France or Spain without the consent of the whole country.

Quite predictable that Spain is against independance.
Can anyone explain why Slovakia is against?

The mistake is that they have made a partition based on ethnic ground but they don't respect ethnic boundaries, and not the geographical boundaries neither. It won't work smoothly.

 source (http://"http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080219/wl_nm/kosovo_serbia_dc;_ylt=Aswx.31wEJzEwFve27qLJmdm.3QA")

And now that Kosovo Albanians have theirs, Serbs from Bosnia also want their independance.
That would be the next logical step.


No idea. Where is COS when we need him?

You mix things up, Fred.
Slovekia and Slovania are two different countries.

They still celebrate their "independence" shouting : "thank you, America! Allah Akbar!" ;D

Ho, yes you'r right. I didn't read properly.

Of course it's an illegal decision, as all revolutions are, but why are Kosovar Albanians any more Serbian than Catalonians are Spaniards or Chechens are Russians?   

Because ethnic group should learn to live toghether, forget a little bit about their ethnicity and more about the country where they live and work.

If we had to divide everybody along ethnic lines, we would spend all our working time to that, it would cost enormous sums of money and there will borders every 5 Km or miles.
It would be an endless process as every region could claim a diferent ethnicity than their neighbourgs.

There were no reason to split Yugoslavia into 5 and now 6, mini-states, none of which have an integrated economy.
There were no reason for any war, like say in Iraq where huge oil resources are at stake or vengeance from a Saddam's oppression.
But the Milosevic's governement operated like a mafia network, exploiting retarded notions of nationalism just good for ww1 and in the meantime, the albanians of Kosovo where also operating their mafia ring, which grew into an army of liberation, yet no less a mafia ring.
The region is so rotten with mafias-above-the-state that it takes 17,000 KFOR soldiers (one third of what is in Afghanistan) to ensure order.

So Kosovars don't have more rights to independance than Chechens or Basques, but because they were stupid enough, they fought, died, destroyed their economy and gained their independance in a Pyrrhic victory.

If all these groups, alabanians, serbs, bosniacs, macedonians etc, had a viable form of governement an mechanism to avoid corruption and favoritism and if everyone overthere had agreed to create a union of balkan states with no border, everything would have been better.

Multicultural multiethnic and multireligious communities tend to be more open to foreign interference. In these type of societies there are so many differences that can be used as line of division. As we all know from our life experiences it is much easier to destroy something than it is to build. A simple anology would be marriage. In most instances the process leading up to a marriage between two people is much longer and painstaking than a process that leads up to divorce. Also similar to a mariiage outsider mingling in inneraffairs is one of the surefire ways to break things up. In former Yugoslavia, nationalism, once its fuse was lit was sure to divide the place up. After things got out of hand and neighbors started fighting and killing each other it effectively ensured that no viable ways of coexistance could be attained. Kosova is just another link in a long chain of intercommunal strife in what was itself the artificial state of Yugoslavia. There was no unified Yugoslav identity to begin with, it was a patchwork country made up in from territories of two former E. European empires, the Austria-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires... The fact that Kosova got independance while Chechnians don't has more to do with who is behind them (US and Nato) and is opposing them (Russia vs Serbia).

Well, when Serbian genocided 18,000 kosovars, that was quite a unilateral decission too... ::)

That's what I don't understand.  Why should they have to stay with a country which did this to them if they can possibly help it?

Where did you get this number? Who counted them?
Any data on genocided Serbs?

Hi folks!

I've read that Kosovo has been always a Serbian province, perhaps the poorest one. It is a Serbian province at least since one century before Italy got it reunification. But even being so poor, Kosovo was richer than people in the other side of the border: Albanians. So many Albanians saw Kosovo as a place to get a better life. After the years there are more kosovars with an Albanian heritage than Serbians. Is this reason enough for independence? I mean, you let people come to your country because life is better and at the end they finally throw you away and declare that part of your soil is theirs. It is not fare IMO.

On the other hand, how is Kosovo  going to survive?

Saludos

A century short of Italian reunification is always?

A century before that Kosova, Bosnia and Serbia itself were Ottoman provnices. Does that mean that they should be reunified under Turkish rule? Or way before that they were under East Roman empire (Byzantine) do we give the lands to Greeks. Or even before that they were Roman lands, should Italy get the place?

What matters is today and tomorrow, not yesterday. If they don't want to live together and an accomodation can be reached then hey why the hell not? Let them split.

The question was not to whom which land belong, that was a false problem, because every 5 km, another ethny could claim its own land.
All this cascade of independances and new borders was stupid and useless. All these poeple were mixed and had evrything to live toghether. They could express and maintain their cultural inheritage and pride through dance festivals, folk concerts and dialect spoken theater plays. Not through wars.
The source of the problem was not History, but the retardation of a rotten political class on every sides.
Nationalism was a cover up for grey or black business, from illegal weapon traficking to cigarette factories.
That's why mafia-styled politicians could agree with those of the other clan. No one wanted the other to put their nose in their business.

And that was working that way because, for some reason, this region had stayed with the same mentality as that before ww2, maybe ww1. They stayed 100 years backward until they woke in the 90's. Just like these two world wars had never existed for them. In the 90's Croatia was still sympathetic to Nazi ideas, Serbia saw itself as a slavian fortress against Ottoman invasion, Makedonians as the descendants of Alexander the Great etc... Realy absurd in a place like Europe.
While the European Union where borders are abolished, surrounds them, they go the opposite road.

The idea of independance, because they have a majority of muslim albanians and the other a majority of slavs is not bad if you do it peacefuly and in a structured economical cooperation, Not in a non-sensical confrontation where everyone wants the maximum.
The best example was the partition of Czechoslovakia. They new they had part but did it in acivilized manner.
Why Yugoslavia couldn't do the same. Ask Milosevic.

I assume that would go for Kurds too.

If an accomodation can be reached then hey. But the problem will be that Iran, Syria, Turkey and even Iraq will not just sit by while their countries are carved up. Just like Yugoslavia did not just sit by and Nato had to intervene.... If the powers that be decided to grant Kurds a state then I am sure they would try, but at the end might would prevail. Unfortunately the cost of a Kurdistan would be greater than the cost of Kosova.......

Fredledingue wrote:
The best example was the partition of Czechoslovakia.
Why Yugoslavia couldn't do the same. Ask Milosevic.

Religious fanatics?

Yilmaz101 wrote:
What matters is today and tomorrow, not yesterday.

That's your opinion but I just can't share it. IMO not only tadya and tomorrow matters, but yesterday too. History is there to show us what not to do...........once again


Yilmaz101 wrote:
If they don't want to live together and an accomodation can be reached then hey why the hell not? Let them split.

But is there any limit? Only regions can unilaterally declare independence or are towns and villages  allowed too?

Saludos

I'm not one of those that live in a fairy tale where peoples right to self determination is by itself enough. But when groups of people decide it is no longer viable for them to live together they tend to engage in warfare and other forms of struggle. This struggle sometimes leads to self determination and nationhood and sometimes it ends up in failure. There is a price for freedom and land, and it is usually in blood.......

Hi,
My previous post disappeared :) ...
To clarify Serbians were in Kosovo much earlier than you think :). In the 11th-12th century Raska was the most powerful Serbian state. To remind you Raska is in Kosovo!
Today I read on Google news, afp news, etc.
"Many Serbs consider Kosovo, which has dozens of Serbian churches and monasteries, the cradle of their history, culture and religion."
Gee, it is proven that Kosovo is the craddle of Serbian Kingdom, it is written in every history book. I do not understand why so many press agencies try to be too politically right :). I would say that may people consider Kosovo as the craddle of their culture, history, religion, etc.
Greetings
philY

Your post didn't show...

Looks like the transition for independence is not going as smoothly as we thought.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080221/ap_on_re_eu/serbia_kosovo_independence

In Allah we trust!
 ;D ;D :-\

Did you really expect Serbs to be happy? Why doesn't G.W.Bush understand this? On another hand UN didn't help Kurds to have own country, because it would make Turks angry, actually US was very much against. Many EU countries never accepted Taiwan as an independent country either. Why some countries are better?
Greetings
philY

I don't think so.
The Balkan wars were not that relgiousely colored.
IMO, it was more a mafia affair spreading large and involving complex networks of nearly or entirely private militias.
Each mafia clan being naturaly bod through family link, language and cult place meetings.
But it had nothing to do with religion, at least not at the high level.
Al Qaida tried to make their way into the Balkan but with little success and the Orthodox Church distanced itself cautiousely from Milosevic and other ultra nationalists.

It is not the first time I hear about that mafia stuff you talk about.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former Reagan Administration official and outspoken paleoconservative, takes a seering look at the arrogant and impudent actions of the U.S. in re Serbia and Kosovo. The U.S. embassy was attacked by outraged Serbian patriots who dare stand up to the American Empire. From VDARE.com.

OswaldTheOsprey

http://www.vdare.com/asp/printPage.asp?url=http://www.vdare.com/roberts/080224_empire.htm

Kosovo is a classic case of American Imperialism interfering where they least have any clue what is going on. Same like their interference into sectarian clashes into Iraq.
I mean, why do you support the split of Bosnia-Hertzegovina from motherland Yugoslavia, but don't support the idea of two states: Palestine and Israel, side by side. Because there are striking similarities between both scenarios: Bosnia are muslims, Palestine are muslims, so why you support those muslims but not the others? Just because Serbs don't kiss ass to America, let's just show them who's the boss!

And back to the Kosovo problem: this is called collective punishment for Serbs who dared to stand against US and even gave US a lesson in how the real tough people know how to fight.

So genocide isn't an issue?  Why should they stay with people who tried to annihilate them?  What has Serbia done for the victims?

Yes, genocide should be an issue. So let's talk first about the Palestinian genocide, when we finish we can continue with the serb.
Or, you don't agree with the priorities?

Politics is the art of the possible.  I don't deny the wrongs of the Israeli government (genocide seems a little strong a word nevertheless given the wrongs on both sides) but a territorially contiguous Kosovo is more easily disentangled than a fragmented Palestinian state and the complications the over the top use of strikes by the Israeli's government and unconscionable use of terrorism by some Palestinian militants present.

In purely theoretical terms disengagement of Palestinian and Isareli people and borders is more clearcut than those of the former Yugoslavia. The pre 1967 borders are clearly defined where as in Yugoslavia multi ethnicity prevailed even in smaller communities......

I am sorry for my poor English...

I agree completely with the given statement!!!

I want to ask once again: why allocation of Kosovo is legitimately
And
Palestine - Israel
Ireland - England
Bask - Spain
Abkhazia - Georgia
Prednestrovye - Moldova
East Timor - Indonesia
Northern Cyprus - Turkey
and others (it is possible to continue)

The first allocation - is NOT legitimately !!!!!!!
Why????

Because so have considered in USA?  >:(

Here is one American who agrees wholeheartedly with your post.

OswaldTheOsprey

I would use the phrase "American foreign policy" instead of "American Imperialism" and Yugoslavia has never been the Motherland of anyone (even Serbs) and it's not because Serbia doesn't lick american's **** (in fact actualy they do it now) but because Milosevic licked Russian's **** (a move that NEVER pays off).
Except these little details I agree with you.

So "Imperialism" tickles your senses, but "Foreign Policy" fits your agenda?
Tell me, how thick are your glasses? Maybe we should increase your prescription?

Fredledingue,

I don't mean to be rude with my previous comment, rather my sarcasm is intended to question if you are really thinking that maybe 90% of the world population is wrong about America's intentions worldwide.

Well, I am an old fashioned isolationist. I wish nothing but the best for all nations, but having said that, they should look out for themselves and we likewise should look out for ourselves.

OswaldTheOsprey

America's intention worldwide is the same intention the Spanish had in the 17th century, the Brits in the 19th century, the Julio Cesar's Rome, Napoleon.......no democracy in international relationships between countries. 

You are absolutely right about America as an empire. Some Americans, particularly Pat Buchanan have been saying this for years.

OswaldTheOsprey

I'm partial to the term "hegemony", since it captures our specific role better than "empire".  Either way, I'm uneasy about it.

The independence of Kossovo is not legitimate.

Through the present petition, we urge the countries which have recognized Kossovo's independence to rescind their decision.

In the eyes of international law, this independence is neither legitimate nor legal with regard to the minorities living in the cradle of Serbian culture.

History has taught us that poking one's nose in the Balkanic powder keg always leads to dire internationational consequences.

http://1883.lapetition.be/

It might be interesting if you provided what the basis of your particular view is.

Also, posting the exact same post in multiple thread constitutes spamming and the posts will be deleted.

First policy or not, it doesn't fit my agenda.

Second, in the case of Kosovo, we can't talk of American imperialism. I don't see how a military strike done by Clinton is serving Bush's Imperium.
It's not very important, but if you want to keep a certain level in this conversation you have to use such word carefuly and explain why you use this word.

Imperialism or whatever is called, the fact is that U.S is getting closer to Russia's border, through the Baltic ex-soviet states from the north, Afghanistan from south (while at the same time tackling Iran)

So this Kosovo move is the latest attempt to get closer through Eastern-Europe, they already got Romania, Bulgaria, Poland former Warsaw-pact now brand new NATO-pact members.

That's why I'm asking: how else can you see this coming?

Do you play chess? That's the same thing. If you're a smart player you see it coming a few moves ahead.

Well, wherever you land on the Eurasian continent, unless you carefuly choose South Thailand or Portugal, you are likely to find yourself close to the Russian border. :D
It's realy funny: You can't cross two countries without stumbling on a Russia border in this region...

Here is an interesting article, in the March 24 issue of The American Conservative, on the general situation in the Balkans. William S. Lind asks "What would Bismarck do?".

OswaldTheOsprey

http://amconmag.com/2008/2008_03_24/print/articleprint2.html

I am not Serbian or Albanian, but I think that Serbia should have been given the predominantly Serbian part of Kosova, it should have been divided and part given to both. I am in support of Kosova independence though (contrary to what I "should" believe), maybe this will encourage Albania to get out of their economic slump (its a very poor country), and better itself.  I don't understand why the US cares so much, I am not an expert at American politics (I just move here), but it seems irrational that they support Albania so much.   

I agree.
The US has made a huge moral mistake by using violence against violence.
They criticized Milosevic for the war, but went there and did the same.
First the americans killed poeple in their air bombing campain, second they partitioned a country regardless of ethnic division and local opinions.

There is a banned/censored Czech documentary about Kosovo, that everyone should see, especially those particularly interested in the issue. It can be viewed here (in six parts):

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp6C18Jb-Dg
Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZHkgpmkF2w
Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu-4J59mGaA
Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJtCoajfdQc
Part 5:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tku3ujWxi8
Part 6:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=779qk8ZbCKY

or entire documentary on Megavideo Kosovo, stolen (http://www.megavideo.com/?v=IWEHXW0W)

Those who use brute force to oppress or annihilate must be met with force to end such violence.  Yes, a few innocent people were lost, but far fewer than that which a continued license for genocide (our inaction was that in effect) created.  Our actions were justifiable and humane when we finally took them.  Less defensible was the inaction which enabled genocide like that in Srebrenitsa.

You can't always draw territorial lines by ethnicity...in fact, I think its rather uncivilized in most cases to use such methods today.  Should we draw up new borders every time the demographics change?