Post by Ja Ona i Pivo on Jul 3, 2009 16:12:24 GMT -5
How wise is this?
KJELL MAGNUSSON does not celebrate Kosovo's independence.
Albanians in Kosovo on Sunday declared its independence, which is expected to be recognized by the U.S. and the EU. So the scenario described in Swedish media and the majority leader writers believe that the process is inevitable and natural. Although complications, such as Serbia's irrational resistance and opportunistic Russia's refusal to allow the UN to recognize the new state. The international legal consequences of recognition usually dismissed with the Kosovo case is unique.
That there is something deeply problematic with the recognition shown by Carl Bildt's statement that Kosovo can not become independent in the same sense as Denmark or Sweden, and that the EU is a limited independence under international supervision. Although this runs counter to the UN Resolution 1244 and UN Charter principles: one can, as here, not with violence, break off part of a state against the state will.
Driven by the U.S., the EU's leading states yet fallen to little. The solution being proposed is actually a continuation of the current protectorate and could eventually give Kosovo the status of the area had in the Yugoslav Federation between 1974 and 1989: in practice an independent state - which lacks important attributes to the UN's independent member nations.
Two main reasons usually given for an independent Kosovo. The first is that you can not go against 90 percent of people. Such an argument is hardly serious, since you are not willing to apply the principle of Bosnia and Herzegovina and parts of Macedonia. The second reason is that you can not expect the Kosovo Albanians, after what they had suffered, would accept to become a part of Serbia. In this case, you must show that the situation in Kosovo, in comparison with similar cases were so exceptional that in Serbia will have to isolate the province. This is not obvious.
It is repeated constantly to NATO intervened militarily in 1999 to prevent a humanitarian disaster, perhaps genocide. A false allegation. NATO began its wars since Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet. The humanitarian disaster was the result of the war, not vice versa.
The conflict in Kosovo shows that a national movement that deliberately use violence to achieve their goals quickly can achieve success if you are allied with the superpower USA. In the case of Kosovo is unique.
An independent Kosovo means that the formation of another Albanian nation in close proximity to Albania. USA has been, without much success, tried to popularize the term "Kosovars" in the Kosovo Albanian population, in order to downplay their Albanian identity. It would have been more logical to the principle of national self-determination let Kosovo, or rather parts of the area, amounting in Albania. In view of the ideas that pushed the Albanian national movement in the Balkans during the last hundred years, it is naïve to believe that an independent Kosovo is the end point. Why should the Albanians in Macedonia make do with less? Why would also Croats and Serbs in Bosnia do not have the same right? And what about the groups who did not have their own state: Basques, Catalans, to say nothing of the Kurds?
It would have been possible for the EU to point out to the USA, the nation-building at the expense of others hardly calls to emulate, to the time when new states are formed in Europe. Instead, various public interest groups resolved by far-reaching autonomy, especially if you already have their own state.
There is reason to fear that the EU's principle solve attitude proves to be a fundamental mistake, especially since the Albanians' demands are not met. Perhaps the most clear example of that this is an artificial state, is Kosovo's flag. The red flag with the black eagle, which symbolized Albanians' struggle for freedom and independence and which today flies everywhere in Kosovo must not become the new State's national symbol.
It is almost impossible for Serbia to integrate a nationally mobilized Albanian population who are opposed to any ties to the Serbian state - but the respect for international law and all parties involved should have required real bargaining and principled solutions. There is a strong case against the recognition of Kosovo in the near future.
Despite eight years of international presence in Kosovo is neither a functioning government or a law. Basic respect for human rights is lacking and nowhere in Europe is the Roma situation as precarious. As the Serb minority living in enclaves outside which for security reasons can not move freely. After NATO's arrival in Kosovo were driven a short time over two hundred thousand Serbs, Roma, bosnjaker, Turks and other non-Albanians. Probably lost more civil life than in the bloody fighting in 1998. Since then, the persecution continued, and in 2004 occurred POGROM with murder, displacement and burnt churches.
In any other situation, this would be a reason for tough sanctions, rather than rewarded with independence.
Kjell Magnusson
Fil.dr sociologi, universitetslektor
PhD in sociology, senior lecturer
KJELL MAGNUSSON does not celebrate Kosovo's independence.
Albanians in Kosovo on Sunday declared its independence, which is expected to be recognized by the U.S. and the EU. So the scenario described in Swedish media and the majority leader writers believe that the process is inevitable and natural. Although complications, such as Serbia's irrational resistance and opportunistic Russia's refusal to allow the UN to recognize the new state. The international legal consequences of recognition usually dismissed with the Kosovo case is unique.
That there is something deeply problematic with the recognition shown by Carl Bildt's statement that Kosovo can not become independent in the same sense as Denmark or Sweden, and that the EU is a limited independence under international supervision. Although this runs counter to the UN Resolution 1244 and UN Charter principles: one can, as here, not with violence, break off part of a state against the state will.
Driven by the U.S., the EU's leading states yet fallen to little. The solution being proposed is actually a continuation of the current protectorate and could eventually give Kosovo the status of the area had in the Yugoslav Federation between 1974 and 1989: in practice an independent state - which lacks important attributes to the UN's independent member nations.
Two main reasons usually given for an independent Kosovo. The first is that you can not go against 90 percent of people. Such an argument is hardly serious, since you are not willing to apply the principle of Bosnia and Herzegovina and parts of Macedonia. The second reason is that you can not expect the Kosovo Albanians, after what they had suffered, would accept to become a part of Serbia. In this case, you must show that the situation in Kosovo, in comparison with similar cases were so exceptional that in Serbia will have to isolate the province. This is not obvious.
It is repeated constantly to NATO intervened militarily in 1999 to prevent a humanitarian disaster, perhaps genocide. A false allegation. NATO began its wars since Yugoslavia refused to sign the Rambouillet. The humanitarian disaster was the result of the war, not vice versa.
The conflict in Kosovo shows that a national movement that deliberately use violence to achieve their goals quickly can achieve success if you are allied with the superpower USA. In the case of Kosovo is unique.
An independent Kosovo means that the formation of another Albanian nation in close proximity to Albania. USA has been, without much success, tried to popularize the term "Kosovars" in the Kosovo Albanian population, in order to downplay their Albanian identity. It would have been more logical to the principle of national self-determination let Kosovo, or rather parts of the area, amounting in Albania. In view of the ideas that pushed the Albanian national movement in the Balkans during the last hundred years, it is naïve to believe that an independent Kosovo is the end point. Why should the Albanians in Macedonia make do with less? Why would also Croats and Serbs in Bosnia do not have the same right? And what about the groups who did not have their own state: Basques, Catalans, to say nothing of the Kurds?
It would have been possible for the EU to point out to the USA, the nation-building at the expense of others hardly calls to emulate, to the time when new states are formed in Europe. Instead, various public interest groups resolved by far-reaching autonomy, especially if you already have their own state.
There is reason to fear that the EU's principle solve attitude proves to be a fundamental mistake, especially since the Albanians' demands are not met. Perhaps the most clear example of that this is an artificial state, is Kosovo's flag. The red flag with the black eagle, which symbolized Albanians' struggle for freedom and independence and which today flies everywhere in Kosovo must not become the new State's national symbol.
It is almost impossible for Serbia to integrate a nationally mobilized Albanian population who are opposed to any ties to the Serbian state - but the respect for international law and all parties involved should have required real bargaining and principled solutions. There is a strong case against the recognition of Kosovo in the near future.
Despite eight years of international presence in Kosovo is neither a functioning government or a law. Basic respect for human rights is lacking and nowhere in Europe is the Roma situation as precarious. As the Serb minority living in enclaves outside which for security reasons can not move freely. After NATO's arrival in Kosovo were driven a short time over two hundred thousand Serbs, Roma, bosnjaker, Turks and other non-Albanians. Probably lost more civil life than in the bloody fighting in 1998. Since then, the persecution continued, and in 2004 occurred POGROM with murder, displacement and burnt churches.
In any other situation, this would be a reason for tough sanctions, rather than rewarded with independence.
Kjell Magnusson
Fil.dr sociologi, universitetslektor
PhD in sociology, senior lecturer