Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
What is happening in Kosovo at the moment?
Options
-
10-12-2007 2:02pm#1I gather sometime around now Kosovo was going to decide to go independent or not. The international community doesn't support it and if they do I guess the Russians and Serbs could play silly buggers. Any updates?
A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0
Comments
-
silverharp wrote: »I gather sometime around now Kosovo was going to decide to go independent or not. The international community doesn't support it and if they do I guess the Russians and Serbs could play silly buggers. Any updates?
Russia Spain Greece and a few others have spoken against Kosovo breaking away from Serbia but the USA thinks its peachy !
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7136233.stm
"Russia, a strong backer of Serbia, has warned against a unilateral declaration of independence.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said recognition of a unilateral declaration of independence would "create a chain reaction throughout the Balkans and other areas of the world".
But Kosovo's ethnic-Albanian leaders have support from many European countries and the United States in their push for independence from Serbia. "
"Belgrade also fears discrimination against ethnic Serbs would go unpunished in an independent Kosovo.
Nato was criticised after it failed to prevent riots by ethnic Albanians in 2004 in which Serbs were attacked. Nineteen people died in the violence. "
Oddly on the wiki page for Serbia the ethnic breakdown part for Kosovo shows 'no data'
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1b/Serbiaetno03.png
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/serbia_montenegro_pol_97.jpg0 -
I imagine clip-board mechants proberbly reckoned it was more than thier lives were worth to pose questions on such tricky maters.
Mike.0 -
-
0
-
-
Advertisement
-
Tea drinker wrote: »
According to gordon brown and the beeb apparently now it is indeed 'kosova'. The other part of that which stood out for me was sarkozy - 'everybody knows kosovan independence from serbia is inevitable'. Am I the only person who thinks this is guaranteed to cause a war at some point ? I dont get where carving up countries with centuries of tradition and history in order to appease seperatists minotiries became a sensible thing to do.0 -
According to gordon brown and the beeb apparently now it is indeed 'kosova'. The other part of that which stood out for me was sarkozy - 'everybody knows kosovan independence from serbia is inevitable'. Am I the only person who thinks this is guaranteed to cause a war at some point ? I dont get where carving up countries with centuries of tradition and history in order to appease seperatists minotiries became a sensible thing to do.
Lets hope not! I'm here until the 8th of January and i am not a solider so if Serbia decides to invade it won't be good for me!0 -
Am I the only person who thinks this is guaranteed to cause a war at some point ? I dont get where carving up countries with centuries of tradition and history in order to appease seperatists minotiries became a sensible thing to do.
Your talking about the Balkins here, the area gets its borders redrawn ever half century or so. And the Albanian Kosovons are not the minority in the Kosovo area of Serbia.
besides the last war in Kosovo was because the *separate minorities* were being ethnic cleansed out of the country.
TBH I havnt seen Kosovo since 2002, back then the majority of the country had taken a very sharp knife to cut out every piece of Serbia out of itself, from the currency (at the time they *unofficially used the deutchmark,) to the majority of the infrastructure. Of course this left the area in a state where they relied on the UN and occupying armies to keep the economy turning.
Now that was back in 2002, if the place has finally got itself out of that vicous circle and is got something resembling an economy without neither the Serbian government or the UN/EU, then I wouldn't be against it becoming an independent country. But it was considered at least 10 years away getting back on its feet in 2002 I doubt its ready now.0 -
According to gordon brown and the beeb apparently now it is indeed 'kosova'. The other part of that which stood out for me was sarkozy - 'everybody knows kosovan independence from serbia is inevitable'. Am I the only person who thinks this is guaranteed to cause a war at some point ? I dont get where carving up countries with centuries of tradition and history in order to appease seperatists minotiries became a sensible thing to do.
Why not? The main issue is creating fair borders. Look at the mess with the Kurds split between 3 different countries. These so called separatist movements, tend to be people who weren't consulted when borders were drawn up in the first place. So why ignore the centuries of culture and tradition of the Kosovans in this case? They don't like the borders and weren't asked about them when they were made. So why should they abide by them?
I rarely agree with Sarkozy, but he is dead on the money with this one.0 -
Why not? The main issue is creating fair borders.
The main issue is maintaining peace and stability in the region not creating a new map to accomodate some minotiries who want a new country.Look at the mess with the Kurds split between 3 different countries.
And you support a new country there too - I would bet money you are all for the chechnyans breaking away from russia too.These so called separatist movements, tend to be people who weren't consulted when borders were drawn up in the first place.
What a stupid point. There is nothing 'so called' about seperatist movements - thats what they are. They werent consulted when the borders of their country were drawn up - wooo.So why ignore the centuries of culture and tradition of the Kosovans in this case? They don't like the borders and weren't asked about them when they were made. So why should they abide by them?
Nobody is talking about ignoring the ethnic albanian tradition - its that as they are a minority in the country (majority in that part of the country but minority in the country) their interests should not outweigh the majority (in the country). Put it this way if birmingham and bradford had an ethnic majority of musims that wanted to break away from the uk (or say, introduce sharia law) because 'they were never consulted about the borders' and so on would you be in support of that too ? You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. If that made sense most european borders would change every year or so reflect majority shifts caused by population movements near border regions.0 -
Advertisement
-
The main issue is maintaining peace and stability in the region not creating a new map to accomodate some minotiries who want a new country.
The fighting tends to break out over borders people don't want. The border are the problem. If people don't like them conflict is inevitable. A more accommodating border will minimize conflict.And you support a new country there too - I would bet money you are all for the chechnyans breaking away from russia too.
The Russian conquered Chechnya in the 18th century. So it should be a part of Russia forever? Just imagine if people had that kind of attitude to Ireland, we would all be bowing to the queen.
As for the current situation in Chechnya, they have some autonomy if I remember right and there is peace in the region. I really don't know much else.What a stupid point. There is nothing 'so called' about seperatist movements - thats what they are. They werent consulted when the borders of their country were drawn up - wooo.
So thats alright then? People should be given the choice on how they want to live. If they never wanted to be apart of a nation, its hardly gonna work out in the long term isn't it. People have the right to self determination.Nobody is talking about ignoring the ethnic albanian tradition - its that as they are a minority in the country (majority in that part of the country but minority in the country) their interests should not outweigh the majority (in the country). Put it this way if birmingham and bradford had an ethnic majority of musims that wanted to break away from the uk (or say, introduce sharia law) because 'they were never consulted about the borders' and so on would you be in support of that too ? You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. If that made sense most european borders would change every year or so reflect majority shifts caused by population movements near border regions.
The comparison to the UK hardly makes sense. The Scottish government seem dead set on breaking away from the UK. That would be a far better example, as opposed to the straw man you present.
The current version of Serbia is fairly recent creation itself. The Kosvans were not consulted on the borders after the break up of the former Yugoslavia. They want to separate state. I see no reason why they shouldn't have one. Its not like Serbia has done much to make them feel welcome in Serbia now is there? Attempts at ethnic cleansing is hardly gonna convince the Kosovans that being apart of Serbia is a great idea now is it.0 -
The fighting tends to break out over borders people don't want. The border are the problem. If people don't like them conflict is inevitable. A more accommodating border will minimize conflict.
This seems to miss the point entirely and contradict itself. You think that a new border will be popular in serbia or is it that you think the minority albanians wishes are more important than the majority serbian in an instance where there is a conflict of ideas and only one side can be accomodated.I don't know enough about the Chechyan conflict to comment. So I won't.
Its another case where the 'minority werent consulted about the borders' which seems to be a general area you have a problem with - that was why I thought you might have an opinion on it.People should be given the choice on how they want to live. If they never wanted to be apart of a nation, its hardly gonna work out in the long term isn't it. People have the right to self determination.
Since when ? You cant give every single person the power of veto - and in the same way you cant give every single minority the right to break away. As mentioned above - demographic anomalies should not be grounds for breaking up countries that have stood for hundreds of years. Another point you conveniently ignored.The comparison to the UK hardly makes sense. The Scottish government seem dead set on breaking away from the UK. That would be a far better example.
I think the comparison of birmingham/bradford makes perfect sense - its an ethnic minority that have never properly integrated and in many cases speak a different language and would claim discrimination and religious opression. They are a minority in europe who can not practice their religion freely (ie introduce sharia law). Why would you discriminate against the bradford/birmingham muslims by saying they are not entitled to a break away but not the ethnic albanians - why are the ethnic albanians entitled to break away into a new country but the muslims of the north of england not ?The current version of Serbia is fairly recent creation itself. The Kosvans were not consulted on the borders after the break up of the former Yugoslavia. They want to separate state. I see no reason why they shouldn't have one. Its not like Serbia has done much to make them feel welcome in Serbia now is there? Attempts at ethnic cleansing is hardly gonna convince the Kosovans that being apart of Serbia is a great idea now is it.
What would be the problem with a referendum before breaking the country up ? Isnt that the least that can be done ? If the majority of people in serbia (including albanians and serbs) want to dissolve and cede kosovo then it should go ahead. If not by referendum then its intentionally and knowingly against the wishes of the majority. This will be the direct cause of future conflict imo. I dont doubt for a second that the reason there is no referendum is because the majority are NOT in favour of it - so all your talk of people being given a choice is total and utter nonsense.0 -
Put it this way if birmingham and bradford had an ethnic majority of musims that wanted to break away from the uk (or say, introduce sharia law) because 'they were never consulted about the borders' and so on would you be in support of that too ? You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. If that made sense most european borders would change every year or so reflect majority shifts caused by population movements near border regions
Except the borders within the United Kingdom (the island itself) have been unchanged for well over a century, while in comparison Serbia has gone through at least 3 changes in the last 100 years alone.0 -
The current state of Serbia is a recent creation after the fall of Yugoslavia. The countries there have not stood for 100's of years as they are. There borders have changed quite a bit during those times. So why should Serbia border be set in stone, when the current states creation was fairly recent.
Remember the fall of Yugoslavia was not 100's of years ago, but very recent.
Then there are the various attempts of ethnic cleansing to create a greater Serbia, Why would the Kosovans want to live in a state that until very recently was trying to violently get rid of them? Can hardly blame them for wanting to break away. They know there not wanted in Serbia, so they decided to break away.0 -
since 1918 serbia has gone through 5 different states
(wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia#Kingdom_of_Yugoslavia_.28.22First_Yugoslavia.22.29)0 -
The current state of Serbia is a recent creation after the fall of Yugoslavia. The countries there have not stood for 100's of years as they are. There borders have changed quite a bit during those times. So why should Serbia border be set in stone, when the current states creation was fairly recent.
Remember the fall of Yugoslavia was not 100's of years ago, but very recent.
Then there are the various attempts of ethnic cleansing to create a greater Serbia, Why would the Kosovans want to live in a state that until very recently was trying to violently get rid of them? Can hardly blame them for wanting to break away. They know there not wanted in Serbia, so they decided to break away.
Wow - do you deliberately ignore every point made to rush in with a response of no substance - then re-edit it later ?
The above points stand imo -
1)
The main issue is maintaining peace and stability in the region not creating a new map to accomodate some minotiries who want a new country. If you carve up stable countries to create new ones you are not creating peace or stability you are destroying the national aspirations of the majority serb population who consider kosovo as a key part of their already reduced territory.
2)
You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. If that made sense most european borders would change every year or so reflect majority shifts caused by population movements near border regions. The comparison to birmingham/bradford stands in my view.
3)
Is is that you think that a new border will be popular in serbia or is it that you think the minority albanians wishes are more important than the majority serbian in an instance where there is a conflict of ideas and only one side can be accomodated.
4)
You cant give every single person the power of veto - and in the same way you cant give every single minority the right to break away.
5)
What would be the problem with a referendum before breaking the country up ? Isnt that the least that can be done ? If the majority of people in serbia (including albanians and serbs) want to dissolve and cede kosovo then it should go ahead. If not by referendum then its intentionally and knowingly against the wishes of the majority. This will be the direct cause of future conflict imo. I dont doubt for a second that the reason there is no referendum is because the majority are NOT in favour of it0 -
BlitzKrieg wrote: »since 1918 serbia has gone through 5 different states
(wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia#Kingdom_of_Yugoslavia_.28.22First_Yugoslavia.22.29)
Nobody is aruging that it is not a turbulent region - the argument seems to be which option will bring the highest chance of stability and peace.
I would reckon for a breakaway kosovo to be acceptable it needs to be passed by majority in a referendum.0 -
I thought the current Serbia very closely resembles that post WW2?The current state of Serbia is a recent creation after the fall of Yugoslavia. The countries there have not stood for 100's of years as they are. There borders have changed quite a bit during those times. So why should Serbia border be set in stone, when the current states creation was fairly recent.
There were many attempts for greatness in the area, none succeeded. There were big desires on the Croatian and somewhat on the Bosnian side.Then there are the various attempts of ethnic cleansing to create a greater Serbia, Why would the Kosovans want to live in a state that until very recently was trying to violently get rid of them? Can hardly blame them for wanting to break away. They know there not wanted in Serbia, so they decided to break away.
There were big attrocities on all sides here not just Serbian side.
More recently, the separatist terrorists in Kosovo expelled many non albanian ethnic individuals. The heavy handed crackdown (similar to what happens every day in Iraq by US/UK forces) wasn't accepted by NATO. This was engineered to result in a war, Just like the previous Balkan war.
http://author.nationalreview.com/latest/?q=MjI2MQ==
Check out this black ops credentials:
http://www.covertaction.org/content/view/85/75/0 -
Wow - do you deliberately ignore every point made to rush in with a response of no substance - then re-edit it later ?
The above points stand imo -
1)
The main issue is maintaining peace and stability in the region not creating a new map to accomodate some minotiries who want a new country. If you carve up stable countries to create new ones you are not creating peace or stability you are destroying the national aspirations of the majority serb population who consider kosovo as a key part of their already reduced territory.
The current borders are the cause of conflict. Until recently Serbia was trying to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans. What do you expect them to do? Not fight back and let themselves be ethnically cleansed at the worst or become a hated minority within Serbia. The border are the cause of the conflict.
Kosovo being apart of Serbia will not result in peace or stability. Kosovo as part of Serbia has resulted in the exact opposite. So why do you think it will magically make peace in the region.2)
You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. If that made sense most european borders would change every year or so reflect majority shifts caused by population movements near border regions. The comparison to birmingham/bradford stands in my view.
No it doesn't. Serbia as it stands is a recent creation. It is not a state that has stood for 100's of years. The border in the region have never been set in stone. Serbia's claim to Kosovo is just that a claim. The people who live there have a greater right to self determination imo.3)
Is is that you think that a new border will be popular in serbia or is it that you think the minority albanians wishes are more important than the majority serbian in an instance where there is a conflict of ideas and only one side can be accomodated.
Do you think the Kosvans will be treated like equal citizens? Why do you ignore the recent attempt by Serbia to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans? What people would want to stay apart of a country that wanted to get rid of them very recently?
To give you a example, the splitting of East and West Pakistan into 2 countries. West Pakistan decided to wipe out the Bengali's of East Pakistan and Bengali's did the sensible thing and created there own country.4)
You cant give every single person the power of veto - and in the same way you cant give every single minority the right to break away.
Who said anything about a single person?
Also, again I point out the recent attempt by Serbia to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans. Being apart of Serbia has hardly worked out well for them. So why wouldn't they want to break away?
Also, why should the recent creation of Serbia be set in stone? Why were the Kosovans not consulted after the break up of Yugoslavia? Oh wait, I know why, Milosovitch decided that driving them out would be a better idea.5)
What would be the problem with a referendum before breaking the country up ? Isnt that the least that can be done ? If the majority of people in serbia (including albanians and serbs) want to dissolve and cede kosovo then it should go ahead. If not by referendum then its intentionally and knowingly against the wishes of the majority. This will be the direct cause of future conflict imo. I dont doubt for a second that the reason there is no referendum is because the majority are NOT in favour of it
We already know that the Serbians want to claim Kosovo. The majority of Serbs don't live in Kosovo. The majority in Kosovo want independence. They have lived there for 100's of years. Why should the recent creation of the current Serbia have any say? Kosovo wasn't alway a part of Serbia. In fact until recently there was no Serbia.0 -
Tea drinker wrote: »I thought the current Serbia very closely resembles that post WW2?
It was part of Yugoslavia, if I remember correctly after WW2.Tea drinker wrote: »There were many attempts for greatness in the area, none succeeded. There were big desires on the Croatian and somewhat on the Bosnian side.
There were big attrocities on all sides here not just Serbian side.
More recently, the separatist terrorists in Kosovo expelled many non albanian ethnic individuals. The heavy handed crackdown (similar to what happens every day in Iraq by US/UK forces) wasn't accepted by NATO. This was engineered to result in a war, Just like the previous Balkan war.
http://author.nationalreview.com/latest/?q=MjI2MQ==
Check out this black ops credentials:
http://www.covertaction.org/content/view/85/75/
There no denying there were crimes on all sides. The recent crimes against Serbs in Kosovo are completely wrong.
Are you saying the US engineered the war or something. You post is unclear on that.0 -
Advertisement
-
Wow - do you deliberately ignore every point made to rush in with a response of no substance - then re-edit it later ?
The above points stand imo -
1)
The main issue is maintaining peace and stability in the region not creating a new map to accomodate some minotiries who want a new country. If you carve up stable countries to create new ones you are not creating peace or stability you are destroying the national aspirations of the majority serb population who consider kosovo as a key part of their already reduced territory.
If you think a Kosovo under Serbian control and a part of Serbia will mean stability you are either the greatest optimist or you didn't watch the news over the last 15 years.2)
You cant just carve up a country whenever a demographic anomaly presents itself. .... The comparison to birmingham/bradford stands in my view.
How can you compare Ksova with Bradford or Birmingham or do you just see a link between all people of Muslim faith?3)
Is is that you think that a new border will be popular in serbia or is it that you think the minority albanians wishes are more important than the majority serbian in an instance where there is a conflict of ideas and only one side can be accomodated.
The problem is that the Albanians are not a minority within Kosovo but actually the majority. This area has similiarities to the Krajina area of Croatia.
You can not compare the Balkans to other areas in Western Europe, such as Spain regarding ethnic groups wanting to break free.
Within what used to be Yugoslavia you had Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Slavic Muslims, Slovenes, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Albanians, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Romanians and Roma spread across three major religious groupings.
The Balkans are a mixture of states created by treaties, disembodiment of crumbling empries (Ottoman, Austro-Hungary) and various wars including WWII, WWI and the Balkans war 1912-1913.
The problem often with the borders of these countires were that they were drawn up by people who were never near the place.
It is a bit like the mess made of drawing up the border between India and Pakistan or the mess of the borders in Africa which had nothing to do with the ethnic groups on the ground but had to do with who previously owned the area or who grabs it in a war.
Serbia's attachment to Kosovo has a lot to do with fact their biggest victory over the Ottomans was there in fourteen century.
Serbia over the years acquired, bit by bit, what is today Kosovo.
Serbia had two autonomous provinces: Vojvodina and Kosovo.
Why if it was so much part of Serbia was an autonomous area?I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
The current borders are the cause of conflict. Until recently Serbia was trying to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans. What do you expect them to do? Not fight back and let themselves be ethnically cleansed at the worst or become a hated minority within Serbia. The border are the cause of the conflict.
When you refer to albanians as 'fighting back' you mean how the albanians recently tried to ethnically cleanse the serbs even further from kosovo ? ie the 19 serbs recently killed in riots ?
Atrocities were commited on all sides cherrypicking one side and portraying them as the wronged innocents doesnt work imo. Just because america sided against the serbs in the last war doesnt mean that the serbian army were the worst or only offenders in the warcrimes stakes - it just means that their misdeeds got the most publicity.
'The border are the cause of the conflict' - this tends to be true a lot of the times but it would take a magic leap to come from that to the conclusion that changing the border on the basis that 'someone' disagrees with it is not a good idea. Especially if its done against the wishes of the majority which brings me back to the point you ignored.No it doesn't. Serbia as it stands is a recent creation. It is not a state that has stood for 100's of years. The border in the region have never been set in stone. Serbia's claim to Kosovo is just that a claim. The people who live there have a greater right to self determination imo.
Your talking about making a destructive change against the wishes of the already oppressed majority. Removing kosovo from serbia and creating a new country on serbia's borders is not going to result in peace or stability. As mentioned earlier. I dont understand why you would magically expect that breaking up serbia against the wishes of the serb majority will result in peace ? So what you think will happen ? The serbs will be in a bad mood for a week or two - and then go - 'ah well it was a good country while it lasted - time to move on'.No it doesn't. Serbia as it stands is a recent creation. It is not a state that has stood for 100's of years. The border in the region have never been set in stone. Serbia's claim to Kosovo is just that a claim. The people who live there have a greater right to self determination imo.
If your 'point' made any sense then Englands claim to birmingham/bradford is just a claim too. No border is set in stone - obviously island nations are at an advantage but no border is set in stone. The non serbian people who live in kosovo (ie albanians) have a greater right to self determination than the serb majority of serbia - um - no they dont.Do you think the Kosvans will be treated like equal citizens? Why do you ignore the recent attempt by Serbia to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans? What people would want to stay apart of a country that wanted to get rid of them very recently?
This just serves to ignore even more recent attempts at ethnic cleansing by the ethnic albanians who hold a demographic majority in that part of serbia.Also, again I point out the recent attempt by Serbia to ethnically cleanse the Kosovans. Being apart of Serbia has hardly worked out well for them. So why wouldn't they want to break away?
Again you point out one side did something bad.We already know that the Serbians want to claim Kosovo. The majority of Serbs don't live in Kosovo. The majority in Kosovo want independence. They have lived there for 100's of years. Why should the recent creation of the current Serbia have any say? Kosovo wasn't alway a part of Serbia. In fact until recently there was no Serbia.
Until recently there was no serbia? The republic of ireland is less than 100 years old.0 -
If you think a Kosovo under Serbian control and a part of Serbia will mean stability you are either the greatest optimist or you didn't watch the news over the last 15 years.
I am the optimist and yet your solution is to re-draw the map expressly against the wishes of the majority.How can you compare Ksova with Bradford or Birmingham or do you just see a link between all people of Muslim faith?
The comparison relates to any pockets of demographic imbalance. Any country where a minority dominate a specific limited region and then look for autonomy or independence on that basis. Birmingham and bradford were used as they are more familiar examples.The problem is that the Albanians are not a minority within Kosovo but actually the majority.
No one is saying that albanians are not in the majority in kosovo (in part due to ethnic cleansing). Kosovo is part of serbia and as such it should not be split against the wishes of the majority in serbia - including albanians and serbs. Any other solution is unfair and discriminatory and bound (imo) to lead to conflict. To clarify - I have no issue with kosovo declaring independence from serbia - I do think that it this is forced through against the democratic wishes of the majority of serbian people then it is very very likely to cause conflict.You can not compare the Balkans to other areas in Western Europe, such as Spain regarding ethnic groups wanting to break free..
The same principles apply.0 -
When you refer to albanians as 'fighting back' you mean how the albanians recently tried to ethnically cleanse the serbs even further from kosovo ? ie the 19 serbs recently killed in riots ?
The people involved should be arrested and tried in a court of law. Any independence should gurantee minority rights.Atrocities were commited on all sides cherrypicking one side and portraying them as the wronged innocents doesnt work imo. Just because america sided against the serbs in the last war doesnt mean that the serbian army were the worst or only offenders in the warcrimes stakes - it just means that their misdeeds got the most publicity.
True, Bosnian and other Balkan nation war criminals are being tried in the Hague.
As far as I know (i am open to correction on this), other Balkan nations aren't hiding war criminals like Serbia is at present, with Kardiz and Maladic.'The border are the cause of the conflict' - this tends to be true a lot of the times but it would take a magic leap to come from that to the conclusion that changing the border on the basis that 'someone' disagrees with it is not a good idea. Especially if its done against the wishes of the majority which brings me back to the point you ignored.
The majority in the autonomous region of Kosovo no longer want to be part of Serbia. It wouldn't be the first time an autonomous region decide to become independent.
I am pretty sure I said this earlier, but I will say this again. The majority of Serbs don't live in Kosovo, they live in Serbia. The people in Kosovo both Serb and Albanian are the opinions that matter, not other who live elsewhere.
The situation when Kosovo was part of Serbia was hardly stable. Returning to that would hardly mean peace. We already seen where that option went and that was war and instability. How does going back to a situation, which quite frankly didn't work going to result in peace and stability?Your talking about making a destructive change against the wishes of the already oppressed majority. Removing kosovo from serbia and creating a new country on serbia's borders is not going to result in peace or stability. As mentioned earlier. I dont understand why you would magically expect that breaking up serbia against the wishes of the serb majority will result in peace ? So what you think will happen ? The serbs will be in a bad mood for a week or two - and then go - 'ah well it was a good country while it lasted - time to move on'.
Thats pure Hyperbole. Serbia will still be there, if Kosovo become independent. Its basically been independent for a while now and Serbia is there doing just fine.If your 'point' made any sense then Englands claim to birmingham/bradford is just a claim too. No border is set in stone - obviously island nations are at an advantage but no border is set in stone. The non serbian people who live in kosovo (ie albanians) have a greater right to self determination than the serb majority of serbia - um - no they dont.
Again, what your talking about is a straw man. Kosovo is a autonomous region e.g. akin to Scotland. At present the Scottish regional government want Scotland to eventually become independent, which is there right if the people of Scotland to decide. There will be no referendums in the rest of the UK for this, just in Scotland.This just serves to ignore even more recent attempts at ethnic cleansing by the ethnic albanians who hold a demographic majority in that part of serbia.
Ethinic cleansing is wrong regardless who is carrying it out. Both sides don't like each other. So how does put them together in a single country result in peace exactly? Won't it make the situation a 1000 times worse?Until recently there was no serbia? The republic of ireland is less than 100 years old.
Before that we were part of UK for 800 years. People use to have the same attitude towards Ireland, as you do towards Kosovo. If the British decided to keep that kind of attitude we would be subjects of the queen right now. Would you be ok with that? Also, I don't remember Ireland being to bothered what the other members taught when we made our bid for independence. I think most people were of the opinion it wasn't the business of the rest of the UK.0 -
The people involved should be arrested and tried in a court of law. Any independence should gurantee minority rights.
Except you didnt really answer the question. When you refer to 'Albanians fighting back' you are referring to the albanians ethnically cleansing serbs even further from Kosovo then yep ? Any independence should guarantee minority rights - this is pie in the sky and irrelevant. If the albanians promised to put heads on the end of sticks the uk foreign minister is hardly likely to back their calls for a breakaway are they ? Of course the albanians are going to promise minority rights.True, Bosnian and other Balkan nation war criminals are being tried in the Hague.
As far as I know (i am open to correction on this), other Balkan nations aren't hiding war criminals like Serbia is at present, with Kardiz and Maladic.
I have no idea which war criminals are hiding where or who is deciding who to focus their attention on finding. Your point here seems to be 'serbia is a bad country' - which again goes back to your earlier argument of 'one side did bad things'.The majority in the autonomous region of Kosovo no longer want to be part of Serbia. It wouldn't be the first time an autonomous region decide to become independent.
I am pretty sure I said this earlier, but I will say this again. The majority of Serbs don't live in Kosovo, they live in Serbia. The people in Kosovo both Serb and Albanian are the opinions that matter, not other who live elsewhere.
When you look at one part of a country and say 'the majority' you are not referring to 'the majority' but to 'the minority' as you have excluded the wishes of the majority. Again you make the same point - there is a demographic blip where there is a majority of albanians who have (in part due to ethnic cleansing) make up the majority in the south of serbia (kosovo). You seem to keep falling back on this point like it has the slightest relevance. No one is arguing that there is a albanian majority in the kosovan region of serbia.The situation when Kosovo was part of Serbia was hardly stable. Returning to that would hardly mean peace. We already seen where that option went and that was war and instability. How does going back to a situation, which quite frankly didn't work going to result in peace and stability?
I am not even sure there is a point in here - it seems to mean the rights of the albanian minority are worth more than the rights of the serbian majority. Again I disagree.Thats pure Hyperbole. Serbia will still be there, if Kosovo become independent. Its basically been independent for a while now and Serbia is there doing just fine.
A decision to carve up established countries on ethnic lines whenever a demographic imbalance arises is at best ridiculously shortsighted.Before that we were part of UK for 800 years. People use to have the same attitude towards Ireland, as you do towards Kosovo. If the British decided to keep that kind of attitude we would be subjects of the queen right now. Would you be ok with that? Also, I don't remember Ireland being to bothered what the other members taught when we made our bid for independence. I think most people were of the opinion it wasn't the business of the rest of the UK.
You made the point that 'serbia is less than a hundred years old' - I replied that technically the irish republic is less than 100 years old too. You then drew some kind of ham fisted / not very convincing comparison between ireland and kosovo which bears no relation to the reality of the situation. I have yet to see how you expect to convince anyone that a european country should be broken up at the whim of a gaggle of eu foreign ministers against the democratic wishes of the majority of that countries people.
Ps I wish you would stop editing your posts after you make them.0 -
I edit post to clarify details and fix spelling errors.
Ever heard of the concept of the tyranny of the majority? That what you are advocating. Kosovo is an autonomous region, it is not an integral part of Serbia. If it was it would never have been autonomous.
If they (the Kosovans) wish to declare independence that is there right. They had an election there and the separatists won hands down. There was a democratic process in Kosovo and it didn't go Serbia's way. The Serbian majority you refer to shouldn't get to decide what an autonomous region wants to do with themselves. The desire for independence in Kosovo is the democratic will of the people of Kosovo. The thing about autonomous region is that things like that will happen.
As for the comparison to Ireland, its apt. Ireland was considered by the UK to be an integral part of it. Serbia considers Kosovo to be an intergral part of Serbia. So the comparison isn't ham fisted at all, there was a point in time where Ireland was considered very much to be a part of the UK.0 -
I edit post to clarify details and fix spelling errors.
To clarify - you also change and add points making responses look out of place. Not saying this is deliberate - but it is annoying.Ever heard of the concept of the tyranny of the majority? That what you are advocating. Kosovo is an autonomous region, it is not an integral part of Serbia. If it was it would never have been autonomous.
Thats called democracy - as in if you want to carve up a country to appease a demographic anomaly you should put it to a national referendum - not a local vote in the area in question where the demographic anomaly is present.If they (the Kosovans) wish to declare independence that is there right. They had an election there and the separatists won hands down. There was a democratic process in Kosovo and it didn't go Serbia's way. The Serbian majority you refer to shouldn't get to decide what an autonomous region wants to do with themselves. The desire for independence in Kosovo is the democratic will of the people of Kosovo. The thing about autonomous region is that things like that will happen.
See above about democracy including all the people voting on crucial issues - like cutting your country in half - democracy does not mean excluding the majority to focus on the exclusive interests of a minority.0 -
To clarify - you also change and add points making responses look out of place. Not saying this is deliberate - but it is annoying.
I add points otherwise a lot mo posts wouldn't make sense.Thats called democracy - as in if you want to carve up a country to appease a demographic anomaly you should put it to a national referendum - not a local vote in the area in question where the demographic anomaly is present.
Demographic anomaly. Is that one of those terms like collateral damage, thats meant to confused the issue or something? It sounds like it.
The Kosovans are hardly an anomaly, they have lived there for a very long time. I would consider Kosovo being apart of Serbia the real anomaly. Certainly another way to look at it don't you think. The anomaly are the current border, which ignore the national aspirations of the Kosvans.See above about democracy including all the people voting on crucial issues - like cutting your country in half - democracy does not mean excluding the majority to focus on the exclusive interests of a minority.
No, an autonomous region can declare independence. There were free and fair elections in Kosovo. The people voted to separate. The only way this happened was due to Kosovo being autonomous.
The opinions of people who don't live in Kosovo don't matter. The majority forcing its will on the minority who want nothing to do with them is as I mentioned the tyranny of the majority. Simply put Kosovo is not an integral part of Serbia, it hasn't been for a long time. The people there decided they wanted nothing to do with Serbia. They did this democratically, by allowing everyone in Kosovo to vote.
The Serbian majority have no right to enforce there will on the Kosovan people, that is tyranny.
There was a situation in Indonesia and East Timor which was very similar. Do you think it would have been a good idea to have the majority (a vast majority) of Indonesians enforce there will on the people of East Timor and force them to be a part of a nation they never wanted to be a part of?0 -
I add points otherwise a lot mo posts wouldn't make sense.
My suggestion would be to do that before you reply and avoid the confusion. Everyone does that once or twice - its just on this thread it has been particularly noticeable. imo.Demographic anomaly. Is that one of those terms like collateral damage, thats meant to confused the issue or something? It sounds like it.
Its a descriptive term so in that sense it does have a similarity to other descriptive terms.The Kosovans are hardly an anomaly, they have lived there for a very long time. I would consider Kosovo being apart of Serbia the real anomaly. Certainly another way to look at it don't you think. The anomaly are the current border, which ignore the national aspirations of the Kosvans.
The anomaly would be where you have a country where in one region there is a demographic imbalance where a national minority through ethnic cleansing become a local majority. Not sure how to make it any clearer than that.No, an autonomous region can declare independence. There were free and fair elections in Kosovo. The people voted to separate. The only way this happened was due to Kosovo being autonomous.
The opinions of people who don't live in Kosovo don't matter. The majority forcing its will on the minority who want nothing to do with them is as I mentioned the tyranny of the majority. Simply put Kosovo is not an integral part of Serbia, it hasn't been for a long time. The people there decided they wanted nothing to do with Serbia. They did this democratically, by allowing everyone in Kosovo to vote.
The Serbian majority have no right to enforce there will on the Kosovan people, that is tyranny.
This bit seems to go back to your earlier point - you think yes the minority (of albanians in serbia) should have more rights than the majority (of serbs in serbia). I dont agree with you on this. I doubt the majority of people in Serbia would agree with you either.0 -
Advertisement
-
My suggestion would be to do that before you reply and avoid the confusion. Everyone does that once or twice - its just on this thread it has been particularly noticeable. imo.
NP, I have done so.The anomaly would be where you have a country where in one region there is a demographic imbalance where a national minority through ethnic cleansing become a local majority. Not sure how to make it any clearer than that.
The Kosovans were the majority even before the ethnic cleansing. Which both sides have engaged in. Unless your talking about the Ottomans, then you may have a case.This bit seems to go back to your earlier point - you think yes the minority (of albanians in serbia) should have more rights than the majority (of serbs in serbia). I dont agree with you on this. I doubt the majority of people in Serbia would agree with you either.
No, of course they wouldn't. I am sure the majority of Kosovans disagree with yourself and Serbia.
Unfortunately (for them), Nato disagrees with them as well.
I think the people living in Kosovo have a better claim than the people who don't live there. The majority of Serbs not living in Kosovo, lose nothing but a group of people who don't want to be part of there country. The only people who lose are the Serbs who live in Kosovo. There situation is what concerns me more than Serbs who don't live in Kosovo.0
Advertisement