Kosovo Secession Declared Legal

[Greed and Death]

True, but it erred in ruling on the Resolution 1244. As was pointed out in Judge Skotnikov's dissent, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/16001.pdf, on page 3, top indented paragraph: "Only the Security Council, or somebody authorized to do so by the Council, may give an authentic interpretation of a Security Council resolution in the true sense". Skotnikov went on to point out that the Unilateral Declaration of Independence cannot overturn a Security Council resolution.

The Court took the somewhat idiotic approach of claiming that the UDI acted outside of the SC resolution; however, in Russia's view, and Russia is a permanent SC member, the UDI violated it. SC gets to interpret what SC says, not the ICJ. As thus, the ICJ erred. If the ICJ's logic is to be considered, then the majority of the expanded SC can do whatever they wish. However, without the cooperation of Russia and China, the majority of the SC cannot exert its will on those two countries. As a result, because of this ruling, the ICJ became a weakened institution, akin to the US Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott case, when the ruling was simply ignored in the North. Likewise, Russia and China have already informed the ICJ to go fly a kite, on the Kosovo issue. Both will veto any attempt of Kosovo to ever be considered an actual nation.

Bullshit. The International Court of Justice is a branch of the United Nations. The United Nations (specifically the GA) ASKED the ICJ to give an ADVISORY opinion on the question they posed. The ICJ is authorised by the UNSC to give such an interpretation. In fact, the majority of the Justices on the ICJ agreed, as they pointed out in the Opinion. Moreover, Resolution 1244 does nothing to declare Kosovo Serbian or anything like that. In fact, it leaves Kosovo's status to be determined.

The same courts ruled that the United States acted illegally in Nicaragua, this was then overturned by the United States in the UN.

Not overturned, they blocked enforcement of the decision via the security council veto.

ICJ cant do crap still.

Neither can Scotus it is up to the Executive and Legislative branches of government to enforce it.

[Shofercia]

True, but it erred in ruling on the Resolution 1244. As was pointed out in Judge Skotnikov's dissent, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/16001.pdf, on page 3, top indented paragraph: "Only the Security Council, or somebody authorized to do so by the Council, may give an authentic interpretation of a Security Council resolution in the true sense". Skotnikov went on to point out that the Unilateral Declaration of Independence cannot overturn a Security Council resolution.

The Court took the somewhat idiotic approach of claiming that the UDI acted outside of the SC resolution; however, in Russia's view, and Russia is a permanent SC member, the UDI violated it. SC gets to interpret what SC says, not the ICJ. As thus, the ICJ erred. If the ICJ's logic is to be considered, then the majority of the expanded SC can do whatever they wish. However, without the cooperation of Russia and China, the majority of the SC cannot exert its will on those two countries. As a result, because of this ruling, the ICJ became a weakened institution, akin to the US Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott case, when the ruling was simply ignored in the North. Likewise, Russia and China have already informed the ICJ to go fly a kite, on the Kosovo issue. Both will veto any attempt of Kosovo to ever be considered an actual nation.

Bullshit. The International Court of Justice is a branch of the United Nations. The United Nations (specifically the GA) ASKED the ICJ to give an ADVISORY opinion on the question they posed. The ICJ is authorised by the UNSC to give such an interpretation. In fact, the majority of the Justices on the ICJ agreed, as they pointed out in the Opinion. Moreover, Resolution 1244 does nothing to declare Kosovo Serbian or anything like that. In fact, it leaves Kosovo's status to be determined.

Leaves Kosovo's status to be determined by the Security Council. In the UN, the Security Council is Supreme, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. It's just the way it is, primarily because of the power that the five states wield. In an advisory opinion, the Court cannot declare something, that goes against a UN Security Council resolution, as legal. It's like the lawyer for ENRON going, oh yeah, I am advising you to shred subpoenaed documents, what could possibly go wrong? Resolution 1244 clearly states that no Unilateral Actions can take place, and the Unilateral Declaration of Independence is definitely a Unilateral action. The Court issued a fuck you to Russia through Serbia, and Russia responded with a fuck you on their own. It's not very productive, and considering that Russia can veto any decision of the ICJ relating to state matters, (as opposed to civilian matters,) and Serbia is a state last time I checked, Russia's fuck you is more powerful.

And this whole things is just bullshit on its own. By 2015, you'll have Abkhazia buying off countries like Palau and Tuvalu to recognize it. Maybe even Belarus and Kazakstan. And unlike Kosovo, Abkhazia isn't Russia's puppet. Or what about Somaliland? The only stable region of Somalia, and no one's puppet. Or how about Western Sahara? Or Quebec? Or Nagorno-Karabakh? Or, I mean damn, the can of worms has been opened. Also, just a note, Ossetia wants to be joined as one, and since North Ossetia is loyal to Russia, so is South Ossetia. Which is why I'd rather not bring in South Ossetia here, because they don't simply want to secede, but they also want to join. Ossetians living in Ossetia and wanting to be unified - those crazy people!

Also, this vote has been extremely partisan, just like Bush v Gore. The "Yes" voters: US, Germany, France, UK, Japan, Mexico, Jordan - I mean damn, that's 7/9. That's either US, NATO, or US allied judges. I mean Mexico cannot fight it's "War on Drugs" without US funding. The neutrals here were Somalia and Brazil, and after reading the Brazilian's opinion, seems to me he has some of the facts incorrect. And Somalia's bribable. On the No side you had Slovakia, Sierra Leone, Morocco, Russia and New Zealand. And yes, NZ was a not, because NZ stated that the Court was not qualified to answer that question. Russia and Slovakia are friends with Serbia, while Sierra Leone and Morocco have their own secession movements, or are allied with secession movement states. In short, this opinion is a disaster, and it will be the Bush v Gore of the ICJ.

True, but it erred in ruling on the Resolution 1244. As was pointed out in Judge Skotnikov's dissent, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/16001.pdf, on page 3, top indented paragraph: "Only the Security Council, or somebody authorized to do so by the Council, may give an authentic interpretation of a Security Council resolution in the true sense". Skotnikov went on to point out that the Unilateral Declaration of Independence cannot overturn a Security Council resolution.

The Court took the somewhat idiotic approach of claiming that the UDI acted outside of the SC resolution; however, in Russia's view, and Russia is a permanent SC member, the UDI violated it. SC gets to interpret what SC says, not the ICJ. As thus, the ICJ erred. If the ICJ's logic is to be considered, then the majority of the expanded SC can do whatever they wish. However, without the cooperation of Russia and China, the majority of the SC cannot exert its will on those two countries. As a result, because of this ruling, the ICJ became a weakened institution, akin to the US Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott case, when the ruling was simply ignored in the North. Likewise, Russia and China have already informed the ICJ to go fly a kite, on the Kosovo issue. Both will veto any attempt of Kosovo to ever be considered an actual nation.

Bullshit. The International Court of Justice is a branch of the United Nations. The United Nations (specifically the GA) ASKED the ICJ to give an ADVISORY opinion on the question they posed. The ICJ is authorised by the UNSC to give such an interpretation. In fact, the majority of the Justices on the ICJ agreed, as they pointed out in the Opinion. Moreover, Resolution 1244 does nothing to declare Kosovo Serbian or anything like that. In fact, it leaves Kosovo's status to be determined.

The same courts ruled that the United States acted illegally in Nicaragua, this was then overturned by the United States in the UN.

Not overturned, they blocked enforcement of the decision via the security council veto.

ICJ cant do crap still.

Neither can Scotus it is up to the Executive and Legislative branches of government to enforce it.

Erm - except the Exec and Legislative are bound by law. US Constitution has a system of checks and balances. There is nothing to check the SC in the UN on state matters. Presidential veto is overridden by 2/3rds. Try that with an SC veto, and get laughed it. Presidents can be impeached. Try impeaching US, France, UK, Russia or China.

The Court's job is to interpret the law, not to make up the law, as they did in the Kosovo case. While SCOTUS in the US gets away with it, ICJ simply does not have that much power. Try having the ICJ declaring something unconstitutional, and watch the SC laugh at that.

There's a huge amount of power in the SC, whereas the Exec or Leg in US don't wield that much power, such as the Supreme Veto power.

[Greed and Death]

Erm - except the Exec and Legislative are bound by law. US Constitution has a system of checks and balances. There is nothing to check the SC in the UN on state matters. Presidential veto is overridden by 2/3rds. Try that with an SC veto, and get laughed it. Presidents can be impeached. Try impeaching US, France, UK, Russia or China.

The Court's job is to interpret the law, not to make up the law, as they did in the Kosovo case. While SCOTUS in the US gets away with it, ICJ simply does not have that much power. Try having the ICJ declaring something unconstitutional, and watch the SC laugh at that.

There's a huge amount of power in the SC, whereas the Exec or Leg in US don't wield that much power, such as the Supreme Veto power.

Scotus can be overridden by a president saying " The court has made its ruling let them enforce it"
Courts by their nature are the least powerful as they have absolutely zero means of enforcing their rulings.
The SC is unbalanced especially with the veto power.

[Shofercia]

Erm - except the Exec and Legislative are bound by law. US Constitution has a system of checks and balances. There is nothing to check the SC in the UN on state matters. Presidential veto is overridden by 2/3rds. Try that with an SC veto, and get laughed it. Presidents can be impeached. Try impeaching US, France, UK, Russia or China.

The Court's job is to interpret the law, not to make up the law, as they did in the Kosovo case. While SCOTUS in the US gets away with it, ICJ simply does not have that much power. Try having the ICJ declaring something unconstitutional, and watch the SC laugh at that.

There's a huge amount of power in the SC, whereas the Exec or Leg in US don't wield that much power, such as the Supreme Veto power.

Scotus can be overridden by a president saying " The court has made its ruling let them enforce it"
Courts by their nature are the least powerful as they have absolutely zero means of enforcing their rulings.
The SC is unbalanced especially with the veto power.

That's true, and I know you refer to Andrew Jackson. However, the Congress can impeach the president, if the latter is not popular enough, for saying "Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it". The General Assembly cannot impeach the SC for ignoring the ICJ.

Additionally, not a single country recognized Kosovo as a result of the ICJ ruling, which shows how powerless the ICJ truly is. And the ICJ doesn't need respect from Western Europeans, who view it with sort of credibility. It needs respect from Eastern Europeans, most of whom, after Kosovo Case, are spitting on the ICJ. Georgia and Russia, despite opposing each other on numerous issues, are united in recognizing ICJ's error. As are most Eastern European countries.

Also, just a note: for the purposes of political geography, if you take all the members of the Council of Europe and add Belarus, you have what's politically considered Europe.

[Shofercia]

...- No Genocide was committed...

I stopped reading here.

My apologies for actually requiring someone to prove something they say, instead of simply taking their word for it. If you actually read what I wrote, and how I analogized it, you might have learned something, but against stupidity, nothing but laughter can triumph, and I didn't feel like cracking jokes about an issue, which some posters deeply care about. Here is the analogy again, about an event, that happened in 2008, where everyone yelled about Genocide, and it didn't happen. Context can be quite magical....

No Genocide was committed. You have to prove it, not say it. Both Russia and Georgia, as well the Western Media, the Republicans, and sources such as Amnesty, claimed thousands of civilian deaths in the Ossetian War. Total confirmed civilians deaths thus far? 69 for Georgia, 168 for South Ossetia, and two idiots who should not have been covering the war in the crossfire. "Hi, we are Russians, we are going to bomb here in 30 mins" "No you won't - I need to film!" Oh, the horror! And there are over a million on this bullshit being called genocide: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=ossetia+ ... 3f93f79a62
In reality, as documented by an actual journalist, Fajardo, neither genocide nor ethnic cleansing occurred, but the Georgians attempted ethnic cleansing in Operation Clear Field. That operation failed.

[Krsta]

So, FSSU, I am crazy, but I am a Serb, too and I would "give up" my sovereignty.

Ever heard about what happened in Suva Reka? In Podujevo?

Wait, Fatmir Sejdiu was never member of KLA.

Declarations of independence were always (except in the Montenegro case, for example) unilateral and one-sided, by nature. Nearly the whole Western civilization was formed by a document called "Declaration of independence", beginning from 4th of July, 1776 and ending with the 1990/91 split of USSR.

[Kalibarr]

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

[Shofercia]

So, FSSU, I am crazy, but I am a Serb, too and I would "give up" my sovereignty.

Ever heard about what happened in Suva Reka? In Podujevo?

Wait, Fatmir Sejdiu was never member of KLA.

Declarations of independence were always (except in the Montenegro case, for example) unilateral and one-sided, by nature. Nearly the whole Western civilization was formed by a document called "Declaration of independence", beginning from 4th of July, 1776 and ending with the 1990/91 split of USSR.

Umm, once again, Kosovo was covered by Resolution 1244. Security Council trumps unilateral declarations. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the Delta Force or SpetzNaz, they'll be quick to explain. Kosovo accepted Resolution 1244, and is thus bound by it. Resolution 1244 forbids unilateral actions. What is so complex about that?

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

In the Civil War, the South did not commit Genocide against the North at Andersonville, ok? You make it seem as if the meany Serbs were oppressing the poor, poor Albanians, who were just trying to live out their lives. That's not the case. Kosovo was a brutal civil war, between Albanians and Serbs. Most of those buried in the so called mass graves, are those who were allied with the KLA, or fought against the Serbs. They weren't civilians. Here's a Serb mass grave for ya: http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2005/May_15/1.html

Both sides were committing atrocities, so please stop trying to paint Albanians as poor, poor victims, alright? I'm not denying Srebrenica; I'm not denying those mass graves. Yet for the Albanian side, somehow, they deny it, and get away with denying it. Hashim Thaci is a fucking terrorist. And yet he's a prime minister of Kosovo. It appears the Serbs, for trying to be honest, got fucked over by the Albanian side and their supporters telling blatant lies. Not to mention that Albanians started the whole war, not Serbs.

So hey kids, want your own country, here's what you do:

1. Start an unsuccessful uprising.
2. Get crushed.
3. Change the people who terrorized, err valiantly fought from military to civilian clothes.
4. Claim genocide. Hope that US President is fucking an intern and needs a distraction.
5. Hail the people dropping bombs on innocent civilians, err great liberators for saving you.
6. Sign a resolution that says "no unilateral actions".
7. Spit on said resolution, and declare independence.
8. Call countries that point this out, big bad bullies! And bawww repeatedly about genocide!

I could also point out that the legal definition of genocide states that "an attempt must be made, with the intent to destroy an ethnicity, in whole or in part". Those who claim genocide, should be made aware that it requires an intent to destroy an ethnicity; not to ethnically cleanse an ethnicity from a certain place, as that is not called genocide, but rather called ethnic cleansing. However, the best argument here is for attempted ethnic cleansing, which also falls apart, because the KLA targeted moderate Albanians, proving it to be not entirely a racial war. Of course certain legal "experts" forget about the word intent and claim genocide.

I already presented over a million Google hits for "Genocide" in South Ossetia in 2008, which clearly did not take place. Hate to point it out to you, but politicians and media tend to lie. Remember WMDs in Iraq?

[Greater Americania]

The "International Court of Justice"'s opinion is irrelevant whereas such an illegitimate organization has no authority to declare that a sovereign state such as Serbia no longer has rightful control over it's own territory. I find it's opinions to be irrelevant and still regard Kosovo as rightfully the property of Serbia.

[Hornopolis]

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

No way, that is definitely not evidence.

[Shofercia]

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

No way, that is definitely not evidence.

No way, that's defintely not sarcasm completely ignoring the anology I made. Oh wait....

Since you ignored my other point, and opted for sarcasm, here it is again:

In the Civil War, the South did not commit Genocide against the North at Andersonville, ok? You make it seem as if the meany Serbs were oppressing the poor, poor Albanians, who were just trying to live out their lives. That's not the case. Kosovo was a brutal civil war, between Albanians and Serbs. Most of those buried in the so called mass graves, are those who were allied with the KLA, or fought against the Serbs. They weren't civilians. Here's a Serb mass grave for ya: http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2005/May_15/1.html

Both sides were committing atrocities, so please stop trying to paint Albanians as poor, poor victims, alright? I'm not denying Srebrenica; I'm not denying those mass graves. Yet for the Albanian side, somehow, they deny it, and get away with denying it. Hashim Thaci is a fucking terrorist. And yet he's a prime minister of Kosovo. It appears the Serbs, for trying to be honest, got fucked over by the Albanian side and their supporters telling blatant lies. Not to mention that Albanians started the whole war, not Serbs.

So hey kids, want your own country, here's what you do:

1. Start an unsuccessful uprising.
2. Get crushed.
3. Change the people who terrorized, err valiantly fought from military to civilian clothes.
4. Claim genocide. Hope that US President is fucking an intern and needs a distraction.
5. Hail the people dropping bombs on innocent civilians, err great liberators for saving you.
6. Sign a resolution that says "no unilateral actions".
7. Spit on said resolution, and declare independence.
8. Call countries that point this out, big bad bullies! And bawww repeatedly about genocide!

I could also point out that the legal definition of genocide states that "an attempt must be made, with the intent to destroy an ethnicity, in whole or in part". Those who claim genocide, should be made aware that it requires an intent to destroy an ethnicity; not to ethnically cleanse an ethnicity from a certain place, as that is not called genocide, but rather called ethnic cleansing. However, the best argument here is for attempted ethnic cleansing, which also falls apart, because the KLA targeted moderate Albanians, proving it to be not entirely a racial war. Of course certain legal "experts" forget about the word intent and claim genocide.

I already presented over a million Google hits for "Genocide" in South Ossetia in 2008, which clearly did not take place. Hate to point it out to you, but politicians and media tend to lie. Remember WMDs in Iraq?

[SERBIJANAC]

who cares, we will see what will happen in u.n. with new resolution but i expect nothing but worst from our puppet government, it seems the russians have taken the ball ,ambasador stating they will have to be greater serbs then our political muppets ,which i dont like at all but somthin^ ^s better then nothin^.... i bet our so called "serbian" president ( born in montenegro and lived in bosnia) is shittin^ his pants right now.

[Risottia]

Moreover, Resolution 1244 does nothing to declare Kosovo Serbian or anything like that. In fact, it leaves Kosovo's status to be determined.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Resolution_1244

Text of UN res.1244
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3b00f27216.html

Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) [on the deployment of international civil and security presences in Kosovo]
The Security Council,

Bearing in mind the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security,

Recalling its resolutions 1160 (1998) of 31 March 1998, 1199 (1998) of 23 September 1998, 1203 (1998) of 24 October 1998 and 1239 (1999) of 14 May 1999,
...
Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2,
...
10. Authorizes the Secretary-General, with the assistance of relevant international organizations, to establish an international civil presence in Kosovo in order to provide an interim administration for Kosovo under which the people of Kosovo can enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and which will provide transitional administration while establishing and overseeing the development of provisional democratic self-governing institutions to ensure conditions for a peaceful and normal life for all inhabitants of Kosovo;
...
(11.)
(e) Facilitating a political process designed to determine Kosovo's future status, taking into account the Rambouillet accords (S/1999/648);
(f) In a final stage, overseeing the transfer of authority from Kosovo's provisional institutions to institutions established under a political settlement;


Rambouillet agreement text
http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/ks ... _text.html
2. National communities and their members shall have additional rights specified in Chapter 1. Kosovo, Federal, and Republic authorities shall not interfere with the exercise of these additional rights. The national communities shall be legally equal as specified herein, and shall not use their additional rights to endanger the rights of other national communities or the rights of citizens, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, or the functioning of representative democratic government in Kosovo.

7. Federal organs shall not take any decisions that have a differential, disproportionate, injurious, or discriminatory effect on Kosovo. Such decisions, if any, shall be void with regard to Kosovo.
...
(Consitution)
Article I: Principles of Democratic Self-Government in Kosovo
...3. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has competence in Kosovo over the following areas, except as specified elsewhere in this Agreement: (a) territorial integrity, (b) maintaining a common market within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which power shall be exercised in a manner that does not discriminate against Kosovo, (c) monetary policy, (d) defense, (e) foreign policy, (f) customs services, (g) federal taxation, (h) federal elections, and (i) other areas specified in this Agreement.

4. The Republic of Serbia shall have competence in Kosovo as specified in this Agreement, including in relation to Republic elections.






Basically, the only legal way for Kosovo to become independent would be through a political settlement between Serbia (the successor of the FRY) and Kosovo, as both resolution 1244 and the Rambouilled agreement declare Kosovo to be part of Serbia and of FRY.

[Shofercia]

who cares, we will see what will happen in u.n. with new resolution but i expect nothing but worst from our puppet government, it seems the russians have taken the ball ,ambasador stating they will have to be greater serbs then our political muppets ,which i dont like at all but somthin^ ^s better then nothin^.... i bet our so called "serbian" president ( born in montenegro and lived in bosnia) is shittin^ his pants right now.

Seems your leader Tadic is as much of a puppet as Yushenko was. Why do you guys keep reelecting him? I mean he fucked up on the question, enourmously. Serbia shouldn't have asked "can Kosovo declare independence". That gave the ICJ way too much to talk about. Serbia should've just asked "Does the text of Resolution 1244 bar Kosovo from declaring independence?" Seems like Tadic is deliberately letting Kosovo secede. Don't worry though, Russia and China have Serbia's back, for reasons not entirely related to Serbia *cough* Taiwan *cough*.

Moreover, Resolution 1244 does nothing to declare Kosovo Serbian or anything like that. In fact, it leaves Kosovo's status to be determined.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Resolution_1244

Text of UN res.1244
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3b00f27216.html

Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) [on the deployment of international civil and security presences in Kosovo]
The Security Council,

Bearing in mind the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security,

Recalling its resolutions 1160 (1998) of 31 March 1998, 1199 (1998) of 23 September 1998, 1203 (1998) of 24 October 1998 and 1239 (1999) of 14 May 1999,
...
Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other States of the region, as set out in the Helsinki Final Act and annex 2,
...
10. Authorizes the Secretary-General, with the assistance of relevant international organizations, to establish an international civil presence in Kosovo in order to provide an interim administration for Kosovo under which the people of Kosovo can enjoy substantial autonomy within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and which will provide transitional administration while establishing and overseeing the development of provisional democratic self-governing institutions to ensure conditions for a peaceful and normal life for all inhabitants of Kosovo;
...
(11.)
(e) Facilitating a political process designed to determine Kosovo's future status, taking into account the Rambouillet accords (S/1999/648);
(f) In a final stage, overseeing the transfer of authority from Kosovo's provisional institutions to institutions established under a political settlement;


Rambouillet agreement text
http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/ks ... _text.html
2. National communities and their members shall have additional rights specified in Chapter 1. Kosovo, Federal, and Republic authorities shall not interfere with the exercise of these additional rights. The national communities shall be legally equal as specified herein, and shall not use their additional rights to endanger the rights of other national communities or the rights of citizens, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, or the functioning of representative democratic government in Kosovo.

7. Federal organs shall not take any decisions that have a differential, disproportionate, injurious, or discriminatory effect on Kosovo. Such decisions, if any, shall be void with regard to Kosovo.
...
(Consitution)
Article I: Principles of Democratic Self-Government in Kosovo
...3. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has competence in Kosovo over the following areas, except as specified elsewhere in this Agreement: (a) territorial integrity, (b) maintaining a common market within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which power shall be exercised in a manner that does not discriminate against Kosovo, (c) monetary policy, (d) defense, (e) foreign policy, (f) customs services, (g) federal taxation, (h) federal elections, and (i) other areas specified in this Agreement.

4. The Republic of Serbia shall have competence in Kosovo as specified in this Agreement, including in relation to Republic elections.


Basically, the only legal way for Kosovo to become independent would be through a political settlement between Serbia (the successor of the FRY) and Kosovo, as both resolution 1244 and the Rambouilled agreement declare Kosovo to be part of Serbia and of FRY.

How dare you point out facts?! You must be evil and oppressive for doing so! Do you want the Albanians in Kosovo to be genocided? Do you want the extinction of the non-existent Samovar, err Kosovar race? You come in here and point out facts, while some people were high on emotion, how dare you Risottia?! Actually requiring to adhere to that, which they signed?

[Kalibarr]

So, FSSU, I am crazy, but I am a Serb, too and I would "give up" my sovereignty.

Ever heard about what happened in Suva Reka? In Podujevo?

Wait, Fatmir Sejdiu was never member of KLA.

Declarations of independence were always (except in the Montenegro case, for example) unilateral and one-sided, by nature. Nearly the whole Western civilization was formed by a document called "Declaration of independence", beginning from 4th of July, 1776 and ending with the 1990/91 split of USSR.

Umm, once again, Kosovo was covered by Resolution 1244. Security Council trumps unilateral declarations. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the Delta Force or SpetzNaz, they'll be quick to explain. Kosovo accepted Resolution 1244, and is thus bound by it. Resolution 1244 forbids unilateral actions. What is so complex about that?

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

In the Civil War, the South did not commit Genocide against the North at Andersonville, ok? You make it seem as if the meany Serbs were oppressing the poor, poor Albanians, who were just trying to live out their lives. That's not the case. Kosovo was a brutal civil war, between Albanians and Serbs. Most of those buried in the so called mass graves, are those who were allied with the KLA, or fought against the Serbs. They weren't civilians. Here's a Serb mass grave for ya: http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2005/May_15/1.html

Both sides were committing atrocities, so please stop trying to paint Albanians as poor, poor victims, alright? I'm not denying Srebrenica; I'm not denying those mass graves. Yet for the Albanian side, somehow, they deny it, and get away with denying it. Hashim Thaci is a fucking terrorist. And yet he's a prime minister of Kosovo. It appears the Serbs, for trying to be honest, got fucked over by the Albanian side and their supporters telling blatant lies. Not to mention that Albanians started the whole war, not Serbs.

So hey kids, want your own country, here's what you do:

1. Start an unsuccessful uprising.
2. Get crushed.
3. Change the people who terrorized, err valiantly fought from military to civilian clothes.
4. Claim genocide. Hope that US President is fucking an intern and needs a distraction.
5. Hail the people dropping bombs on innocent civilians, err great liberators for saving you.
6. Sign a resolution that says "no unilateral actions".
7. Spit on said resolution, and declare independence.
8. Call countries that point this out, big bad bullies! And bawww repeatedly about genocide!

I could also point out that the legal definition of genocide states that "an attempt must be made, with the intent to destroy an ethnicity, in whole or in part". Those who claim genocide, should be made aware that it requires an intent to destroy an ethnicity; not to ethnically cleanse an ethnicity from a certain place, as that is not called genocide, but rather called ethnic cleansing. However, the best argument here is for attempted ethnic cleansing, which also falls apart, because the KLA targeted moderate Albanians, proving it to be not entirely a racial war. Of course certain legal "experts" forget about the word intent and claim genocide.

I already presented over a million Google hits for "Genocide" in South Ossetia in 2008, which clearly did not take place. Hate to point it out to you, but politicians and media tend to lie. Remember WMDs in Iraq?

I never said the KLA was any better that serbia, and just because the KLA did horrible things doesn't mean serbia didn't do horrible things too. Serbia wanted all the albanians gone, and thus it was intended.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Risottia, last I checked, Yugoslavia doesn't exist.

[Serbian_Soviet_Union]

Risottia, last I checked, Yugoslavia doesn't exist.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

[Tmutarakhan]

Risottia, last I checked, Yugoslavia doesn't exist.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

Does it actually say anything about "successor states"? If "Yugoslavia" could not hold itself together, even in the diminished territory it had left in 1999, what obligation is there to the pieces? How about annexing Kosovo to Montenegro, for example: wouldn't make that much sense, but claiming that Serbia has a continuing right to Kosovo doesn't sound all that compelling either.

[Shofercia]

So, FSSU, I am crazy, but I am a Serb, too and I would "give up" my sovereignty.

Ever heard about what happened in Suva Reka? In Podujevo?

Wait, Fatmir Sejdiu was never member of KLA.

Declarations of independence were always (except in the Montenegro case, for example) unilateral and one-sided, by nature. Nearly the whole Western civilization was formed by a document called "Declaration of independence", beginning from 4th of July, 1776 and ending with the 1990/91 split of USSR.

Umm, once again, Kosovo was covered by Resolution 1244. Security Council trumps unilateral declarations. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the Delta Force or SpetzNaz, they'll be quick to explain. Kosovo accepted Resolution 1244, and is thus bound by it. Resolution 1244 forbids unilateral actions. What is so complex about that?

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

In the Civil War, the South did not commit Genocide against the North at Andersonville, ok? You make it seem as if the meany Serbs were oppressing the poor, poor Albanians, who were just trying to live out their lives. That's not the case. Kosovo was a brutal civil war, between Albanians and Serbs. Most of those buried in the so called mass graves, are those who were allied with the KLA, or fought against the Serbs. They weren't civilians. Here's a Serb mass grave for ya: http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2005/May_15/1.html

Both sides were committing atrocities, so please stop trying to paint Albanians as poor, poor victims, alright? I'm not denying Srebrenica; I'm not denying those mass graves. Yet for the Albanian side, somehow, they deny it, and get away with denying it. Hashim Thaci is a fucking terrorist. And yet he's a prime minister of Kosovo. It appears the Serbs, for trying to be honest, got fucked over by the Albanian side and their supporters telling blatant lies. Not to mention that Albanians started the whole war, not Serbs.

So hey kids, want your own country, here's what you do:

1. Start an unsuccessful uprising.
2. Get crushed.
3. Change the people who terrorized, err valiantly fought from military to civilian clothes.
4. Claim genocide. Hope that US President is fucking an intern and needs a distraction.
5. Hail the people dropping bombs on innocent civilians, err great liberators for saving you.
6. Sign a resolution that says "no unilateral actions".
7. Spit on said resolution, and declare independence.
8. Call countries that point this out, big bad bullies! And bawww repeatedly about genocide!

I could also point out that the legal definition of genocide states that "an attempt must be made, with the intent to destroy an ethnicity, in whole or in part". Those who claim genocide, should be made aware that it requires an intent to destroy an ethnicity; not to ethnically cleanse an ethnicity from a certain place, as that is not called genocide, but rather called ethnic cleansing. However, the best argument here is for attempted ethnic cleansing, which also falls apart, because the KLA targeted moderate Albanians, proving it to be not entirely a racial war. Of course certain legal "experts" forget about the word intent and claim genocide.

I already presented over a million Google hits for "Genocide" in South Ossetia in 2008, which clearly did not take place. Hate to point it out to you, but politicians and media tend to lie. Remember WMDs in Iraq?

I never said the KLA was any better that serbia, and just because the KLA did horrible things doesn't mean serbia didn't do horrible things too. Serbia wanted all the albanians gone, and thus it was intended.

Again, in order to claim Genocide, you need to have an intent to destroy a race, not to want them all gone. That's called ethnic cleansing, which is not the same as Genocide. I am not denying that Serbia committed war crimes. But when two groups are going at it, and one group wins, it's not called Genocide. Neither the Red Army, nor the American, nor the English, nor the French, nor any other armies committed Genocide against the Wehrmacht. Yet when KLA mass graves are discovered, suddenly it's called Genocide. Discovering a KLA mass grave in 1945, and yes KLA's predecessor did fight with Hitler, it was ok, as armies kill each other, and bury each other in mass graves, on the battlefield. Modernly, there was this fucking stupidity to disguise the battlefield, and move mass graves elsewhere.

Additionally, the Serbs did not want all Albanians gone. If the Serbs hated the Albanians so much, they could've removed all Albanians from Kosovo with ease in 1944 or early 1945. They did not. Clearly there was some friendship between moderate Serbs and moderate Albanians. The Serbs wanted the revolting Albanians gone, and who wouldn't want rebels gone from their country? When the Boer rebelled against the British, the British couldn't beat the Boer army, so they took a coastal Boer city and started killing Boer civilians until the Boers surrendered. Likewise, Brits in NATO bombs Serbs into submission, by hitting civilian targets, until the Serbs signed a peace treaty - Resolution 1244. You have two sides brutally going at it. That's neither Genocide nor Ethnic Cleansing. War Crimes - absolutely, on both sides. But to depict one side, or the other as innocent, and the other as ebil oppressors of Genocide and/or Ethnic Cleansing is bullshit.

Risottia, last I checked, Yugoslavia doesn't exist.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

Does it actually say anything about "successor states"? If "Yugoslavia" could not hold itself together, even in the diminished territory it had left in 1999, what obligation is there to the pieces? How about annexing Kosovo to Montenegro, for example: wouldn't make that much sense, but claiming that Serbia has a continuing right to Kosovo doesn't sound all that compelling either.

Buffy is using the argument first presented by the ICJ, in the Yugoslavia v. Belgium case, where it was believed that Yugoslavia couldn't sue as it was a non existent country. However, the UN Security Council is as much a party to Resolution 1244, as Yugoslavia. Additionally, Resolution 1244 clearly stated that no unilateral actions were to be taken, and Kosovo's Declaration of Independence was a Unilateral Declaration of Independence.

Additionally there is the doctrine of successor states. It was established by the very fact that Russia inherited the USSR's seat on the UN Security Council, and inherited the USSR veto. Not a single new state has been given veto power. In order to gain veto power, Communist China had to be recognized as a successor state to Nationalist China. The doctrine of successor states is clearly established. Additionally, Resolution 1244 "Reaffirms the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Kosovo remains part of the FRY, to which Serbia is now the recognized successor state". The only way to change that, is a 5/5 UN Security Council Permanent member vote, that is upheld by at least 3/10 remaining UN Security Council members. Russia and China both clearly stated that any such attempts will be vetoed. In other words, Kosovo is Serbia.

Additionally, in the Yugoslavia v. Belgium case, the precedent was that the ICJ could not take the case. The ICJ did not hail NATO's actions in that case, but simply refused to hear the case. The ICJ can refuse to hear a case. However such a refusal cannot bind any case law by established cases, as one needs to take the case in order to establish case law.

As per Tmutarakhan's post, Serbia is the successor state to Yugoslavia, just as Russia is the successor state to the USSR. It would be silly to claim that Estonia is the successor state to the USSR. It is just as silly to claim that Montenegro is the successor state to Yugoslavia.

[Srboslavija]

Kosovo is Serbia, nuff' said.

[Risottia]

How dare you point out facts?! You must be evil and oppressive for doing so!

I'm a notoriously evil eurocommie for a reason, you know.

Do you want the Albanians in Kosovo to be genocided? Do you want the extinction of the non-existent Samovar, err Kosovar race?

Of course I want a genocide; where do I get the babies for my salami if not from the refugees?
And hands off the Samovar - I need my tea!

You come in here and point out facts, while some people were high on emotion, how dare you Risottia?!

We evil eurocommies are robots. Hence incapable of emotions. *beep*

[Risottia]

Risottia, last I checked, Yugoslavia doesn't exist.

It leaves Kosovo's status to be determined WITHIN the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (and hence its successor states).

Does it actually say anything about "successor states"? If "Yugoslavia" could not hold itself together, even in the diminished territory it had left in 1999, what obligation is there to the pieces?...

Additionally there is the doctrine of successor states. It was established by the very fact that Russia inherited the USSR's seat on the UN Security Council, and inherited the USSR veto.
...
As per Tmutarakhan's post, Serbia is the successor state to Yugoslavia, just as Russia is the successor state to the USSR. It would be silly to claim that Estonia is the successor state to the USSR. It is just as silly to claim that Montenegro is the successor state to Yugoslavia.

Actually, the "successor state" is a legal convention far older than the split-up of CCCP. And the "successor state", after a secession, is considered to be the non-seceding part of the former country .

The succession in Yugoslavia is:
Kingdom of Yugoslavia
Democratic Federal Yugoslavia=Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia=Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
Serbia and Montenegro
Serbia

Also, if you read the Rambouillet text, it's clear that Kosovo is not considered a federal state of Yugoslavia on par with the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro, because the agreement states that the Republic (of Serbia) would have the legal power (and the duty) to organize the elections for the Republic in the Kosovo territory, too. Hence, the Rambouillet text (upheld by UN SC res 1244) states implicitly that Kosovo is part of the Republic of Serbia (that is: status quo ante!) - although it is to be given autonomy.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Fuck your "facts."

[Shofercia]

Fuck your "facts."

I wouldn't mind fucking a couple of Serb Facts

[Krsta]

So, FSSU, I am crazy, but I am a Serb, too and I would "give up" my sovereignty.

Ever heard about what happened in Suva Reka? In Podujevo?

Wait, Fatmir Sejdiu was never member of KLA.

Declarations of independence were always (except in the Montenegro case, for example) unilateral and one-sided, by nature. Nearly the whole Western civilization was formed by a document called "Declaration of independence", beginning from 4th of July, 1776 and ending with the 1990/91 split of USSR.

Umm, once again, Kosovo was covered by Resolution 1244. Security Council trumps unilateral declarations. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the Delta Force or SpetzNaz, they'll be quick to explain. Kosovo accepted Resolution 1244, and is thus bound by it. Resolution 1244 forbids unilateral actions. What is so complex about that?

So the mass graves and countless eye witnesses are not evidence of the genocide against Kosovar albanians?

In the Civil War, the South did not commit Genocide against the North at Andersonville, ok? You make it seem as if the meany Serbs were oppressing the poor, poor Albanians, who were just trying to live out their lives. That's not the case. Kosovo was a brutal civil war, between Albanians and Serbs. Most of those buried in the so called mass graves, are those who were allied with the KLA, or fought against the Serbs. They weren't civilians. Here's a Serb mass grave for ya: http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2005/May_15/1.html

Both sides were committing atrocities, so please stop trying to paint Albanians as poor, poor victims, alright? I'm not denying Srebrenica; I'm not denying those mass graves. Yet for the Albanian side, somehow, they deny it, and get away with denying it. Hashim Thaci is a fucking terrorist. And yet he's a prime minister of Kosovo. It appears the Serbs, for trying to be honest, got fucked over by the Albanian side and their supporters telling blatant lies. Not to mention that Albanians started the whole war, not Serbs.

So hey kids, want your own country, here's what you do:

1. Start an unsuccessful uprising.
2. Get crushed.
3. Change the people who terrorized, err valiantly fought from military to civilian clothes.
4. Claim genocide. Hope that US President is fucking an intern and needs a distraction.
5. Hail the people dropping bombs on innocent civilians, err great liberators for saving you.
6. Sign a resolution that says "no unilateral actions".
7. Spit on said resolution, and declare independence.
8. Call countries that point this out, big bad bullies! And bawww repeatedly about genocide!

I could also point out that the legal definition of genocide states that "an attempt must be made, with the intent to destroy an ethnicity, in whole or in part". Those who claim genocide, should be made aware that it requires an intent to destroy an ethnicity; not to ethnically cleanse an ethnicity from a certain place, as that is not called genocide, but rather called ethnic cleansing. However, the best argument here is for attempted ethnic cleansing, which also falls apart, because the KLA targeted moderate Albanians, proving it to be not entirely a racial war. Of course certain legal "experts" forget about the word intent and claim genocide.

I already presented over a million Google hits for "Genocide" in South Ossetia in 2008, which clearly did not take place. Hate to point it out to you, but politicians and media tend to lie. Remember WMDs in Iraq?

Lulz what about killing 120 000 Albanian civilians in period November 1912-February 1913. That's 4 months, man! That is the first time something was characterized as a genocide, because Serbian socialist Dimitrije Tucović called it "the attempted premeditated murder of an entire nation." Then, we have Vasa Čubrilović promoting expulsion of Albanians from Kosovo in 1937. People who demonstrated in 1981 expressing their opinions were stayed in prison for more than 15 years, each.