Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

[Mos]

Well there are two sides to the Kosovo issue which we pertain to:

1) Serbia does not want Kosovo's independence and they are one of our best friends.

2)The independence of Kosovo will be a good move for the status and the indepence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Now which side do we really want?

[Artsakh]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

Well there are two sides to the Kosovo issue which we pertain to:

1) Serbia does not want Kosovo's independence and they are one of our best friends.

2)The independence of Kosovo will be a good move for the status and the indepence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Now which side do we really want?

we want what best suits our nation's interests. let's not worry about other nations' interests; when was the last time any nation worried about our interests?

[Mos]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

well yes but with Kosovo's independence that might help with the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh and the friendship with Serbia will bring economical advantages.

[skhara]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

Armenians play absolutely no part in Kosovo independence discussions. Kosovo was already stolen from Serbs in 99. Whether or not its recognized, will not change the fact that is soon as conducive, Serbs will move to retake Kosovo, and completely ethnically cleanse Albanians from there. Armenians main concern is Armenian lands.

[Armenian]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

well yes but with Kosovo's independence that might help with the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh and the friendship with Serbia will bring economical advantages.

Stop talking stupid, the people in Washington DC that want "independence" for Kosovo are the same ones who want Artsakh to be given to Azeris.

Kosovo was Serbian land that was stolen from Serbs, Artsakh was Armenian land the was stolen from Armenians - that is the similarities between the two situations.

Armenians were lucky enough to liberate Artsakh with Russian and Diasporan help. Serbia lost Kosovo because its only ally in the region, Russia, was severely weakened by the late 90s and Serbia at the time was being run by a corrupt dictator and not united. As a result, the west, like a pack of hungry dogs, attacked Serbia and imposed their will. Eventually, the kaka is going to hit the fan and Serbia with strong Russian support will reclaim the stolen territories - and then you will see a "real" genocide of Albanians, not the BS stories of genocide that the western public was fed during the 90s.

This will not make sense to most of you but the current war in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan, as well as the impending wars in Iran, the Caucasus, south America and Central Asia - are attempts by the west to undermine the Russian Federation and secure Chinese dependence.

[Siamanto]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

Well there are two sides to the Kosovo issue which we pertain to:

1) Serbia does not want Kosovo's independence and they are one of our best friends.

2)The independence of Kosovo will be a good move for the status and the indepence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

Now which side do we really want?

Considering that hypocrisy is the golden rule in foreign policy - and in politics, to a slightly lesser degree - I doubt than the resolution of one of the conflicts will have a noticeable impact on the other; however, nothing is impossible.

I don't know what should be Armenia's official - or officious - position; but, I am against the independence of Kossovo only because Serbs are - or can be - friends or allies.

[Siamanto]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

Considering that hypocrisy is the golden rule in foreign policy - and in politics, to a slightly lesser degree - I doubt than the resolution of one of the conflicts will have a noticeable impact on the other; however, nothing is impossible.

Correction:

"Considering that hypocrisy is the golden rule in foreign policy - and in domestic politics, to a slightly lesser degree - I doubt that the resolution of one of the conflicts will have a noticeable impact on the other; however, nothing is impossible.

[Siamanto]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

RUSSIA HINTS AT SECURITY COUNCIL VETO OF KOSOVO RESOLUTION
By Peter Fedynsky

Voice of America
July 9 2007

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says any resolution on
independence for Kosovo will fail in the U.N. Security Council,
unless it gains the backing of Serbia, a close Kremlin ally. As VOA
Moscow Correspondent Peter Fedynsky reports, Russia has a specific
interest in opposing an independent Kosovo.

Speaking after a ministerial meeting in Bishkek, the capital of
Kirghizstan, the Russian Foreign Minister told reporters that
his country's position on Kosovo is well known, and is backed by
international law.

Any decision on Kosovo, says Lavrov, is possible only on the basis
of agreement between the two sides directly involved in the matter.

Complex historical forces have pitted ethnic Albanians, who became
Kosovo's majority in the 20th century, against Serbians, who trace
important elements of their past to the province, where they were
once the majority.

The United States and its European allies have drafted a resolution
to give the two sides four months to reach agreement on Kosovo's
status. If they fail to reach agreement, those allies would support
Kosovo independence under international supervision.

Foreign Minister Lavrov says no U.N. resolution on the province can
pass without the agreement of Serbia, a traditional Russian ally.

While he did not openly say Russia would exercise its Security Council
veto, he made clear that his country would do exactly that.

Moscow is dealing with a number of so-called frozen conflicts, violent
intractable disputes involving ethnic minorities in and around Russia.

Vyacheslav Nikonov, the president of the Politika Foundation, a Moscow
research organization, says the Kremlin does not want Kosovo to be
used by secessionists in a number of areas to violate the interests
or territorial integrity of Russia.

Among these areas, says Nikonov, are Moldova's Transdnistria region,
as well as Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Nagorno-Karabakh in the
Caucasus. The analyst adds that for residents of all those unrecognized
states, Kosovo will obviously become a precedent.

In a related development, the prime minister of Abkhazia, Alexander
Ankvab, was slightly injured in an attack on his vehicle as he traveled
to the regional capital, Sukhumi. Abkhazia is seeking independence
from Georgia, which resents the presence of Russian troops in the
area. Moscow says its forces are there strictly as peacekeepers.

Last week, one of Foreign Minister Lavrov's deputies, Andrei Denisov,
told the Interfax News agency that the international community needs
to formulate a legally-binding document on which principle to apply in
Kosovo-type conflicts, respect for a country's territorial integrity
or the right of a people to self-determination.

U.S. President George Bush and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin
discussed Kosovo at their meeting last week in Kennebunkport, Maine.

They did not announce any breakthrough.

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg195551.html

[Siamanto]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

HAS COLD WAR II COMMENCED?
By Vojin Joksimovich

Serbianna.com, MI

http://www.serbianna.com/columns/joksimovich/008.shtml

July 9 2007

Lectures

Vojin Joksimovich has served as the first Vice President of the San
Diego North County Chapter of the World Affairs Council in charge
of the program for the last three years. The Council meets weekly
on Thursdays throughout the year (about 50 sessions per year) and
covers a spectrum of foreign affairs subjects. The speakers are either
distinguished guests or members. On June 28, 2007 (the Vidovdan day)
a San Diego State University professor was supposed to address the
Council on the subject of Central Asia. He cancelled and Vojin proposed
instead, reflecting the outcome of the G-8 meeting in Germany, a debate
on the subject has Cold War II commenced? The Council accepted and the
debate was initiated by a three member panel of speakers addressing
the following subjects: (a) Missile shield in Poland and the Czech
Republic or Euro-ABM program; (b) Kosovo independence issue; and (c)
Other U.S./Russia hot issues as authored in an essay by the former
Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko published in the May/June
2007 issue of Foreign Affairs. The members participated in the second
part of the program. Vojin Joksimovich notes on the subject of Kosovo
independence are reproduced below.

Today marks the 618 anniversary of the Kosovo battle between the
Serbs and the Ottoman Empire; battle between Christianity and Islam
which led to the loss of Serbian sovereignty in 1463 and enabled the
Turks to march on to Budapest and Vienna. In 2007 we are experiencing
another Kosovo battle. This time the battle has been a diplomatic one
thus far. A battle between the U.S. and Serbia. The battle between
adherences to foundations of international law vs. force.

The Ottoman records of 1445 show that Kosovo & Metohija population
consisted almost exclusively of Serbs (~99%) as the Serbs started
populating Kosovo in the 6th century and created there the Serbian
kingdom and the Serbian holy land with some 1300 churches and
monasteries.

Over 5 centuries of Serb ethnic cleansing followed first by the
Ottomans, then Austro-Hungarian Empire, then Hitler-Mussolini Axis,
then communist dictator Tito and now U.S./NATO using Albanians as
their proxies.

Serb-Albanian conflict, which is almost 130 yrs old was reignited
in 1990s as the Islamist and U.S./NATO interests merged leading to
a jihad against the Serb-Orthodox Christians

In 1994 Osama bin Laden established a base in Albania after his
phenomenal success in Bosnia and started to arm and infiltrate
the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), which was then classified by the
State Department as terrorist organization. Subsequently the Western
intelligence agencies (CIA, MI6, and BND) joined in support of the
KLA. After the KLA insurrection from Albania was defeated by the
Serbian police, Clinton/Blair decided to go to war against Serbia
and in the process hijacked holocaust to wrest Kosovo from Serbia.

UN Resolution 1244 ended the war, created UN/NATO protectorate but
reaffirmed the commitment of member states to the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Serbia.

After 8 years the UN/NATO protectorate has dismally failed (as
discussed in Peace at any Price: How the World Failed Kosovo by Iain
King and Whit Mason) and in the process grossly violated the UN 1244.

Having created a royal mess so called international community started
looking for the way out. A centerpiece of the program: human rights
eight point package ahead of status approach was jettisoned. In 2003,
a UN police spokesman said that Kosovo "is not a society affected by
organized crime, but a society founded on organized crime."

Former Finnish President, Marti Ahtisaari was appointed in 2005 as the
special UN envoy to "mediate" the interethnic conflict. He has been the
wrong man for the job from day one as illustrated with his statement
that Serbia must give in because it is guilty as a nation-nobody must
be allowed to pin a feeling of national guilt on any group of people
only individuals proclaimed by many including the ICTY. Recently BND
sent the documentation to the UN Secretary General accusing Ahtisaari
that he took the bribe from the Albanian mafia.

On March 26, 2007 Ahtisaari submitted a report to the UN Security
Council recommending Kosovo independence supervised by the EU with
continued presence of the NATO troops on the ground. In my humble
opinion, the Ahtisaari approach has been designed to shift the
intractable situation to somebody else and if it provokes either the
Serbs or Albanians, or both, so be it. Then they would be blamed for
the impending disaster. Turning water into wine is nothing compared
to transforming the republic of heroin, black hole of Europe, into a
model democratic multi-ethnic state. But that is the miracle Ahtisaari
has come up with.

The U.S./GB/France/Germany jumped on Ahtisaari recommendation and
drafted a UN resolution which would annul the UN 1244 and thus would
detach Kosovo from Serbia.

Serbia with help from resurgent Russia and some other countries
has opposed the Ahtisaari plan as well as the three drafts of the
Western sponsored UN resolution. In the second draft only a few
words were changed. The third draft filed on June 20 sponsored by the
U.S./UK/France proposed the postponement of supervised independence
for 120 days, this time would be given to the Serbian and Albanian
negotiators to reach an agreement with automatic imposition of the
Ahtisaari plan if the parties cannot agree. In Moscow and Belgrade the
third draft was dead on arrival. Russia opposes artificial deadlines
and automatism and Serbia is not interested in the negotiations
when the final outcome is predetermined and amounts to violation of
the UN charter and the Serbian constitution. Serbia is looking for
a sustainable solution. Imposed solution is not sustainable as it
would plant the seed for the next conflict.

Russia and Serbia, as well as a number of UN Security Council members
such as China, Indonesia and South Africa, believe that the rule
of law should be the keystone of the international order using WWII
experiences as an example. Kosovo independence established on the 15%
of the Republic of Serbia territory would violate the UN Charter,
Helsinki Accords, Badinter Commission and the UN 1244 as well as the
previous UN Kosovo resolutions. Kosovo independence would be the first
time in post WWII history that the boundaries of a nation state had
been drawn against its will. Why would the UN violate own Charter to
create the second Albanian state in Europe?

Russia and Serbia, as well as some neighboring countries, point out
that Kosovo independence would destabilize the region. Hence they
are looking for a sustainable solution which would preserve Serbia's
territorial integrity and sovereignty with everything else being
negotiable and subject to agreement between Belgrade and Pristina. A
Serbian plan is now in Putin's hand that supposedly he will put on the
table when he meets with President Bush on July 1&2 at Kennebunkport.

In addition Kosovo independence would establish a far-reaching
precedent for many separatists round the world. Why does Kosovo
deserve independence while South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transniestria
and Nagorno-Karabakh and others do not? The UN Resolution sponsors
make the case that Kosovo is a sui generis case using the argument
that Serbia has lost the right to rule the Kosovo because Milosevic's
regime opposed NATO and committed acts of ethnic cleansing. The ethnic
cleansing arguments stated are, by and large, based on half truth
and outright falsehoods. Besides the logic is that the history both
before Milosevic (millennium old) and after Milosevic does not count.

Indonesia, a Muslim country and a UN Security Council member, is
not sold on the Ahtisaari plan and the sui generis Kosovo case and
proposed that the Kosovo issue be deferred to the EU at the time when
the EU is ready to accept both Serbia and Kosovo as members.

For radical Islamists Kosovo represents a jihad. Why the US on one
hand is fighting jihadists in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere but is
in the business of creating the Islamist states in the Balkans is
paradoxical. Part of the "strategic concept" for dismemberment of
former Yugoslavia has been the appeasement of the Islamist world,
which started under president Bush 41 and then was embraced by
the Clinton administration and now by Bush 43. As early as 1992,
the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) demanded independence
for Bosnia and Kosovo and division of Macedonia. The U.S./NATO has
essentially complied with these wishes. Bush announced yesterday,
at the rededication ceremony of the Islamic Center of Washington DC,
that he will appoint a special U.S. envoy to the OIC. This speaker
considers the OIC to be Islaminterna analogous to what cominterna was.

Since announcement of the Ahtisaari plan I must have read over 100
columns and editorials on the subject. Here are some headlines:
"Russia still opposed, Russia digs in heels, and Russia refuses
to budge." After exercises in bullying these articles ad nauseam
reiterated that Russia was supporting its co-religionist and Slavic
historic ally. There was hardly any appreciation that Yeltsin's Russia
is history and resurgent Putin's Russia is the reality. Kosovo was
one of the reasons why Yeltsin had to go. Here is what Putin said in
Zagreb and Istanbul this weekend at the Balkans Energy Summit and the
Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization meetings: "The Balkans and
the Black Sea have always been a sphere of our special interests and
it is natural a resurgent Russia is returning here." If Putin gave in
on Kosovo his efforts to re-establish Russia as a great power would
be severely undermined.

Last week in Washington we witnessed a heated exchange on Kosovo issue
between members of the Russian Duma Foreign Relations committee and
their U.S. colleagues. Natalia Narochnitskaya, a Russian lawmaker,
made a strong case against independence while Congressmen Lantos
and Engel, long-time advocates of Kosovo independence and major
recipients of contributions from the Albanian lobby, threatened that
the UN might be bypassed in case of a Russian veto, and that Kosovo
could unilaterally declare independence. They went as far as claiming
that the U.S. would recognize Kosovo next day after declaration of
independence and even to be followed by the EU members. However,
the EU ministers have reiterated again this week their support for
a UN resolution but will not back unilateral declaration as it would
divide the EU like the Iraq war did.

Some expect much in the way of compromise from the Bush/Putin
meeting this coming weekend. I am personally skeptical especially
after reading the statement from the American ambassador to Serbia:
"We believe that a compromise has already been achieved."

I will conclude with an analogy between Kosovo and the U.S. Southwest
where we live. If Bush were to deliver 15% of the Serbian territory to
Kosovo Albanians, who had never owned Kosovo, he would then establish
a precedent for the return of the U.S. Southwest to Mexico. There
are numerous organizations which are attempting to annex California,
Arizona, New Mexico, Texas plus Southern Colorado to create "Republica
Del Norte."

[melikianAvak]

Re: Kosovo's Independence: Thorn on both sides?

Stop talking stupid, the people in Washington DC that want "independence" for Kosovo are the same ones who want Artsakh to be given to Azeris.

Kosovo was Serbian land that was stolen from Serbs, Artsakh was Armenian land the was stolen from Armenians - that is the similarities between the two situations.

Armenians were lucky enough to liberate Artsakh with Russian and Diasporan help. Serbia lost Kosovo because its only ally in the region, Russia, was severely weakened by the late 90s and Serbia at the time was being run by a corrupt dictator and not united. As a result, the west, like a pack of hungry dogs, attacked Serbia and imposed their will. Eventually, the kaka is going to hit the fan and Serbia with strong Russian support will reclaim the stolen territories - and then you will see a "real" genocide of Albanians, not the BS stories of genocide that the western public was fed during the 90s.

This will not make sense to most of you but the current war in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan, as well as the impending wars in Iran, the Caucasus, south America and Central Asia - are attempts by the west to undermine the Russian Federation and secure Chinese dependence.

Enker Armenian

I for one am interested, can you expand your thoughts please.

Avak