The resolution of Serbia’s Parliament
By BabelParis on
Friday, January 11 2008, 18:13 -
With a very large majority (220 for, 13 against and 1 abs.), Serbia’s Parliament has adopted a
resolution on the preservation of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. All international treaties signed by Serbia with the European Union, including the Stabilization and
Association Agreement, will have to respect these principles. Serbia will break its diplomatic relations with any country that recognizes Kosovo’s statehood. The army “is ready to defend the
citizens of Kosovo” reports the Balkan Post.
A resolution with no consequences for the UNO temporary administration in Kosovo (…). Their spokesman
indicated: “what the Serbian Parliament does depends on its deputies. Their orientations cannot influence Kosovo in any ways since Kosovo is under the United Nations control.”
Read on B92.net, Fatmir Sejdu, President of the Province of Kosovo judged that “this resolution reminds
the past Serbian methods. It is a constitutional aggression towards Kosovo that has no legal bases. Kosovo’s fate cannot be decided by Serbia and in fact, the policy Serbia is actually pursuing
is exactly the one that led us to the worst from clashes and bloodshed to the tragedy that befell not only the peoples of Kosovo but the others too.”
This resolution occurs after the meeting of the Security Council that heard Serbia Prime Minister,
Vojislav Kostunica and the President of Kosovo. In a long and solemn speech, the Serbian Prime Minister declared his attachment to international law and more specifically to the respect of
frontiers integrity and States sovereignty. President Sejdiu said he was prepared to form a new government and when questioned on a possible declaration of independence, he answered in favor of
it, “alongside his friends”.
Beyond the differences between Serbians and Albanians, the Russian and American stances keep diverging.
The Russian ambassador to the UNO, Vitali Tchourkine, submitted to the UN Security Council a declaration bill to extend the negotiations between Pristina and Belgrade on the status of Kosovo;
when through their Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice, the Americans retort that “Kosovo and Serbia will never a united state anymore. I think there is no question about that.”
According to Ria Novosti, the head of the American diplomacy stated: “we will speak with Serbians and
Kosovo Albanians, we will talk with every interested parties, including the Russians, since we have to carry out measures to stabilize the situation while closing the tragic pages of the Balkan
States history so the European construction will definitely be achieved 17 years after the end of the “Cold War”.
The UN Security Council will re-open the debates on the Kosovo status next January.
Snejana Jovanovic Translation : Cécile Zandzvliet
An impartial document
By BabelParis on Tuesday, December 11 2007,
10:49 -
According to news agencies, the Russian-American-European
“Troika” charged with negotiating the outline of the future statute of Kosovo will submit on 7th December next year an impartial document to the Secretary General of the United
Nations. A text without proposals, but which will contain suggestions made as much with the Albanians in mind as the Serbians, as well as ideas from the “Troika”.
“As far as I can see, it is an impartial document. We are relying on the UN Security Council to analyse
this document with objectivity and to then enter into objective discussions based upon it. In spite of current,
and foreseeable, disagreements surrounding the future statute of Kosovo, within the “Troika” we are committed to
working off the same page, taking into consideration that which is urgent and essential for all”, said the Russian mediator Bocan-Harčenko.
According to Tom Casey, a spokesman for the US State Department, the United States consider it necessary to go further with the
actual defining of the Statute, referring to Martti Ahtisaari’s plan. Nevertheless, they are happy that the two parties involved “have wholeheartedly agreed to renounce the use of force and
violence”. “We are expecting all parties to demonstrate a certain level of responsibility and reserve so that we can start moving forward”, he added.
Statements by the current Prime Minister of the Albanian Government of Kosovo support this, so much so that Agim Ceku wished to
reassure Brussels by saying, “certain people are worried about a unilateral declaration of independence, however, independence will be declared in full cooperation with our international partners
given the United Nations, NATO and the people of Kosovo have worked that way for 8 years”. He is convinced that will have no violent repercussions.
As far as Belgrade is concerned, it is far from over. During the “Les Carrefours des Balkans” Conference held in Brussels, Deputy Minister
Bozidar Djelic stated that “it is never too late to arrive at an agreement”, citing the cases of Belgium, Northern Ireland and Palestine. While the Serbs have ruled out the use of force in the event of a declaration of independence, the Minister for Foreign Affairs Vuk Jeremic explained that there has always been an extensive set of measures available ranging from “the
hardest to the softest in terms of diplomacy”.
On the ground, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is ready for any eventuality. John Craddock,
Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said that their plans included the possible reinforcement of the 16,000 soldiers already deployed in Kosovo. During a press conference in Washington, he repeated
that he is ready to defend the application of Resolution 1244 “given that this Resolution forms, for NATO, the legal framework of our presence in Kosovo” and he hopes that NATO Diplomats will
support this.
The United Nations Security Council will examine the report from the “Troika” mediators, following their
four months of negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina, on 19th December, in the company of representatives from both Serbia and the Albanian population of Kosovo. The following
day, Ambassadors will discuss the issue informally with the Secretary General, Mr Ban Ki-Moon.
Snejana Jovanovic Translation : Neil Saddington
Last round : No miracle !
By Camelia on Saturday, December 8 2007, 14:22 - Cafebabel Romania -
There has been no miracle after these 120 days of negotiations between Pristina and Belgrade on the definition of a status in Kosovo. No agreement came out
of these three last days of hectic negotiations in Baden near Vienna, Austria. No independence or even autonomy. No settlement on the status. Only remain the international protectorate and fears
for the future.
However, as far as the outcome of this series of meetings is concerned, some nuances can be raised. Primo, we witnessed for the first time direct talks. The
two sides sat face to face and shared their viewpoints. Secondly, another positive result came out which is far from being just a detail for the man in the street; in deed « the two sides have
committed themselves to rule out resorting to force in the search of a solution » as one of the three mediators pointed out. In the name of the inhabitants of Kosovo we can rejoice.
Wolfang Ischinger, the European mediator added: “after the diners that followed the meetings, and we had two of them, Hashim Thaci with Agim Ceku the
minister of Foreign Affairs of Serbia and President Tacic spent hours to talk with no mediation or secretaries on different questions. We hope and wish that this level of communication will be
preserved”. They spoke in Serbian.
In front of the journalists, the delegation from Belgrade repeated that they had made actual propositions in terms of autonomy and the Unity Team restated
that negotiations for independence were useless. Hashim Thaci, winner of the last elections, yet convinced that independence is to come, indicated: “I’ll be doing anything to maintain good
relations with the Serbians living among us. The program of our government, our economy, our development must respect the sake of every single Kosovars, not only Albanians; Kosovo must the
country of all of its inhabitants” reports B92.com.
Besides, the three mediators have dissonant perspectives on the possibility of subsequent negotiations. The Russian mediator, A. Bocan-Harceko considers the
continuation of the mediation after December 12th to be useful when American and European mediators, respectively F. Wisner and W. Ishinger consider their mission to end at this very same
date.
From Madrid, the spokesman of the Secretary of the United Nations, Farthan Hak declared today that “optimism does not define the times we live in; however we
do not want to give up and think that the troika must not renounce and rather that we have time.”
According to him, M. Ban Ki-Moon regards an agreement as being still possible and encourages the troika to remain engaged in the process of negotiations and
do as much as possible before the deadline of December 10th in order to reach a consensus.
The three mediators have still in deed to meet again in Belgrade and Pristina on December 3rd and then write a report to be given to the General Secretary.
It is therefore within the United Nations that the discussions will continue.
by Snejana Jovanovic Translation : Cécile Zandvliet
New proposal, new refusal
By BabelParis on
Monday, November 26 2007, 23:34 -
After the Hong Kong model, Belgrade proposes the idea of autonomy based on the Åland model. The autonomous province of Åland of which the
main part of the population speaks Swedish is under Finnish sovereignty. Pristina refuses this model. The freshly elected Kosovo Prime Minister Ashim Thaci focuses on
modalities of a proclamation of independence and its recognition.
The Åland islands lie between Sweden and Finland. Finland has granted a broad autonomous status to the Swedish speaking Åland on 12
October 1951. The islands were granted the right to retain their language, to collect their own taxes and tariffs as well as preserving their culture and
traditions.
The 20 November negotiations constituted the fifth and penultimate session before the 10 December deadline when the arbitrators of the
Russian American European troïka will have to hand in a report to Ban Ki Moon the Secretary General of the United Nations.
According to the Agence France Presse, the European arbitrator W. Ischinger “seems, unlike Moscow, to set aside the possibility that these
talks carry on after the 10 December deadline’. Thus, he hopes to announce the next step of a scenario thought about for months, but fear by many European countries : the definition of conditions
according to which most European Union member states would be ready to recognise a unilateral proclamation of independence by the Kosovars despite Russia’s hostility.’
The Russian arbitrator A. Bocan-Harcenko has confirmed that during the last negotiation round, the Albanian side was suggested to sign a
document in which they would renounce on the idea of the creation of a “big Albania”. He said that the Albanians have rejected this formulation because “all the parties have agreed right from the
start that such a scenario was not conceivable.” “The fact that some processes cannot be stopped with a piece of paper is something else” told the diplomat to the Russian newspaper
“Izvestija”.
Because of a possible escalation of violence in Kosovo if Albanians self-proclaimed independence, the State Department has ranked
Serbia among the high risk countries in which a “constant danger” diplomacy will be set up in the same way Americans authorities have done so in the past for Pakistan, Afghanistan, Algeria
amongst others reports the Croatian newspaper “vecernji list”;
The next round of talks, which will be the first to last longer than a day, will take place from the 26
to 28 November in Baden, Austria.
Snejana
Jovanovic Translation : Julien de Cruz
W. Ischinger proposes a « neutral status »
By BabelParis on
Wednesday, November 21 2007, 21:47 -
Wolfgang Ischinger, European mediator of the American Russian European troika for finding a solution to the future status of Kosovo,
proposes a ‘neutral status” for the talks that took place on November 20 in Brussels between Belgrade and Pristina. For once, Pristina and Belgrade agree: the two parties rejected the proposition
right away, though for different reason, each one standing for his own conception of the Serbian province mainly inhabited with Albanians
According to agencies, W. Ischinger declared that the purpose of this proposition was to normalize the relationships between Pristina and Belgrade, and that
a possible solution “would mention no word about the status”. “An agreement on a neutral status will be a proposition intended to create some relationships that would not be based on a possible
determination for the status of Kosovo. Today, no relationships do exist between Serbia and Kosovo, and no try for a any collaboration either” a German diplomat underlined.
He explained that it would be an agreement for a collaboration based on economic, trade and fight against criminality issues. The
agreement would define obligations for Kosovo such as, for instance, consulting Serbia on minority and frontier issues, which would, according to the European mediator, “be in the interest of
both parties”.
This proposition draws a turning point in the role undertaken by the troika as, through making a proposition on the status of
Kosovo, it becomes an actor after being a mediator, indicates Javier Solana’s spokeswoman Cristina Gallach in the daily Albanian speaking newspaper Koha ditore.
In Blic Online, a Serbian daily, the Russian mediator, Alesksandar Bocan- Harčenko, underlined straight after W. Ischinger’s
statement that the troika was thinking about many various propositions in order to stimulate both parties for the meeting taking place on November 20.
Nevertheless, the day before, on November 14, the Russian agency RIA Novosti reported that, according to the Russian minister of
foreign affairs, Sergueï Lavrov, the “troika” of the Contact Group for Kosovo had elaborated a solid basis for negotiations on the status of the province, still underlining that we should “avoid
to predetermine the outcome of the negotiations and to stop a date”.
The deputy secretary for political issues working at the American State department, Nicolas Berns, reiterated his support for a
“supervised independence” if the two parties don’t manage to find an agreement on December 10 (date when the troika will issue its report to the general secretary of the United Nations, Ban Ki
Moon), and he warned Serbia against any use of violence.
An astonishing proposition as it has been weeks now since the government of the pro-European Serbia
loudly claimed that in case of any unilateral proclamation of independence from the Albanian party, no Serbian would deploy on Kosovo. Consequently, Serbia made a choice of non violence and
planned to build parallel institutions.
Snejana Jovanovic Translation : Sophie Helbert
Like the two German states
By BabelParis on
Tuesday, November 6 2007, 12:39 -
Agencies report that Wolfgang Ischinger, the EU mediator to the troika, made a new proposal to the Albanian and Serbian delegations
concerning Kosovo's future status, inspired by the agreements between the two German states, the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and the Federal Republic of Germany
(FRG).
The German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger is inspired by the model of the history of the two German states before their reunification: as he explains, the negociation process
about Kosovo is at a standstill, and needs action, because he considers that "the two parts -serbian and albanian- have irreconcilable positions". Vecernje novosti, a Serbian daily
newspaper, wonders: "the question is to know if W. Ischinger is just making experiments or if he seriously intends to divide Serbia like the Americans and the Soviet Union did
for Germany".
The Serbian newspaper Politika puts the stress on the fact that "the German mediator's proposal leads the way to the State for
Serbian province". The idea being that Serbia and Kosovo would organise their relations like two states, as it happened for the two German states. It is chiefly for this reason that Belgrade
refused the proposal, and that Pristina still hasn't given an official answer.
Ischinger isn't inspired by the fall of the Berlin wall, which marked the reunification of Germany, but by what happened 20 years before,
on December the 21st 1972: the "Basic treaty" that normalized relationships between GDR and FRG, signed in Berlin after a year of difficult negociations.
The "Basic treaty" negociated between the two German states contains ten short articles. The elements of this normalization are: the
developement of a normal relationship on neighbourly terms, based on equal rights – each side making a commitment to renounce to any form of violence ; the inviolability of common boundaries and
the respect of territorial integrity; the shared renounciacion to intend to represent the other State on an international scale; and finaly, a permanent interchange of
representation.
It allowed the two States to be admitted together into the United Nations (UN) on September the 18th 1973. Israël only stood against
the international recognition of the GDR. This was the first moment when the possibility of reunifying the two German states was brought up. The treaty was a de facto –but not de
jure- guarantee of the recognition of the GDR. The de jure recognition, spelled out by law, is definitive, full and complete, which means that it produces all the juridic effects of
recognition. Whereas the de facto recognition is provisional and revocable.
This is how Berlin became a major symbol of the Cold War. At a time when the newspaper announces the emergence of a new Cold War between
the Americans and the Russians, what W. Ischinger's proposal principally unveils is the state of the relationships between the two main powers. Besides, the fact that it is not clearly said that
the troika met or not –as it was announced- can let us think that there is an important disagreement between the three mediators, that is to say between the EU representative Wolfgang Ischinger,
Franck Wisner for the US and Alexandre Bocan-Hartchenko for Russia.
Snejana Jovanovic / Translation : Alessia Bertoli
Belgrade proposes Hong Kong
During the fourth round of direct negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina taking place in the Austrian capital, Belgrade officially proposed to take Hong
Kong as a model to define the future status of Kosovo. Pristina declined the offer, the Serbian media B92.com reports.
The Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica and the Serbian President, Boris Tadic said that Hong Kong could serve as a model to find a compromise between the
Albanian and the Serbian parties. "This is a case where all is regulated on a legal basis, this example should not be imitated, the most important is that the message conveys the spirit of
international law", said V. Kostunica who is still convinced that this will pave the way to a compromise whereas keeping in accordance with both the United Nations’ Charter and the Serbian
Constitution.
According to Boris Tardic’s word in Blic Online: "Moreover, no party has the liberty to take unilateral measures as far as constitutional and sovereignty
issues are concerned. With such a ruling, international frontiers don’t change and remain protected thanks to the collaboration with the international community; whereas the deployment of
security forces is strictly limited to the local level, which guarantees order and peace."
According to the daily Albanese newspaper Zeri, the Unity Team’s spokesman, Sender Hyena, said that : "there cannot be any negotiation on Kosovo and Serbia’s
sovereignty. We are for a sustainable solution. The only stable solution is the independence of Kosovo. It cannot be an example as the historical background of Hong Kong and that of Kosovo are
different". Blerim Shala, the coordinator of the Albanese delegation, the "Unity Team", declared in an interview to Voice of America that, more than ever, the last meeting in Vienna proves that
there is no hope for a solution.
Hasim Tachi, chief of the democrat party of Kosovo (DPK) and member of the delegation considers that it is impossible to reach a compromise with Belgrade on
the status of Kosovo, and rejects the proposition: "Shall we keep on negotiating a hundred years with the Serbs, we will never reach any compromise. Belgrade hopes that Kosovo will remain part of
Serbia. Our position doesn’t change. It is our right and our will that Kosovo gains its independence".
Hong Kong had been a British colony from 1842 to its handover to China in 1997. It is governed as a special administrative region under the Basic law of Hong
Kong. The wording of the common Sino-British declaration is that China promises that Hong Kong would keep certain autonomy until 2047 at least, that is to say 50 years after the transfer of
sovereignty. According to the so-called "One country, two systems" policy, Hong Kong would keep its legal system, its currency, its political system, its international sports’ teams and its
immigration laws.
According to Dragoslav Rancic, a specialist of International Affairs working for the Serbian weekly Nin, the proposition cannot be enforced: "First of all,
Hong Kong and China are both inhabited by Chinese people while in Kosovo, 90% of the population is Albanian and doesn’t wish to live with Serbians. The context is different; I was surprised of
such a parallel because the solution was conceived for a country with two systems".
As usual, all the parties considered that the latest negotiation didn’t lead to real improvements, B92.com says. The next date set for pursuing negotiations
will be November 20th in Brussels.
Snejana Jovanovic // Translation : Sophie Helbert
The hardest day
By Jean-Séb 2.0 on
Tuesday, October 30 2007, 11:34 -
On each side, the last round of talks mark a turning-point in the negotiation process. Following the 22 october reunion in Vienna, all the
parties agree to say that it had been tough.
Above all differences, two points of view clash as to what the negotiation objectives are if they are to be considered as negotiations at
all. Belgrade is looking for a settlement, Pristina wants independence.
Belgrade is very attached to form which ,as is widely known, reveals content. Blic On line publishes Belgrade's answer to the 14 points
set out by the troïka named “Belgrade's principles on the pursuit of negotiations in Kosovo and Metohija”. As an example, where the troïka refers to “Belgrade”, the Serbs correct it and use the
term “Serbia”. Further on, at the fourth paragraph, is laid down the same sentence word for word as the one found in the main proposition which reads “there will be no going back to the pre-1999
situation”. On this everyone agrees but things get more complicated after the comma when “as a consequence the futur status of the Province must be resolved on the basis of Resolution 1244 of the
Security Council.”
The two serb ministers present at the talks are very satisfied. “The tone is now exceptionally serious. We are discussing of
the involvment to the negotiation process, of the issue as to whether we can move towards a particular direction or not, of whether a minimal agreement can be found, not only
on paper but also concerning the general direction taken during the pursuit of the talks” explains Foreign Affairs Minsiter Vuk Jeremic.
On the albanian side, anger seems to be the main dominating feeling, as explains Kosovo President Fatmir Sejdjiu “This was not an easy
meeting because there has been an attempt to move the talks to an unreasonable direction with their (the Serbs') dreadful idea of autonomy treating Kosovo as a serb province and the lack of
readiness to recognise Kosovo's independence.” The president refers to “tension, verbal ping-pong and collisions.” He blames the Serbs for carrying on considering Kosovo as a
province.
Hashim Thaçi, the Prime Minister has added : “I never believed in a settlement with Serbia on the future of Kosovo, and I still don't
believe it now. Relations between Serbia and Kosovo are of a particular nature because Serbia came to Kosovo by force and before leaving committed genocide on the albanian population.” He then
carries on to affirm that Kosovo independence will take place after december 10.
In effect, Kosovo is a serbian province majoritarily populated with Albanians. This is well
established in resolution 1244. Still as a matter of fact, there has not been a genocide in Kosovo but war crimes committed on both sides (See Le Monde Diplomatique article “Chroniques d'un
génocide annoncé” dated March 2000). Albanians consider as legitimate their claim to independence because they have been led to believe it would happen because of what the
american State Department told them before the Kosovo war. However, the Americans have voted for resolution 1244 at the Security Council on June 10th 1999. Some might say the serbs are
misinterpreting the letter of the law and use it as a weapon. Against whom ? Against what ? This really what this is all about, the letter of the law, the one voted at the Security Council to
avoid the use of force and institute the rule of law in Kosovo.
Snejana Jovanovic / Traduction Julien de
Cruz
lique » également diffusée par satellite. L’ANA a été classée organisation terroriste par la
mission des Nations Unies au Kosovo (MINUK) et l’agence américaine the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT)
Ban Ki Moon, le secrétaire général
des Nations Unies, met en garde la communauté internationale contre « la paix superficielle » au Kosovo dans un rapport qui sera présenté le 9 ou 10 Octobre au Conseil de Sécurité.
Jusqu’au
dernier moment, l’ordre du jour a été la grande inconnue de la première confrontation en direct de la délégation albanaise du Kosovo et Serbe pour la détermination du statut futur de la province
administrée par les Nations Unies depuis 1999. La réunion interdite au public a durée près de deux heures au 21ème étage du bâtiment des Nations Unies dans l’Est de Manhattan.
Premier face à face entre Serbes, et Albanais du Kosovo à New York aujourd’hui à 15h30 heure de Paris.
La délégation albanaise demande l’indépendance, tandis que la délégation serbe propose une autonomie optimale.
Un proche du Groupe de contact a soufflé à l’oreille du quotidien serbe « Blic » que le modèle hongkongais est l’option
a laquelle réfléchi le plus les milieux internationaux pour le règlement du statut du Kosovo. Cette option prend en compte les positions des deux parties et permet de surmonter leurs
différences.
Vos commentaires