Comments on: Recognising Kosovo is a bad idea http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/ The Education of an Opinionated Mind Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:01:47 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: The Acorn » Russia vs Georgia, outside the Olympics http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-121287 The Acorn » Russia vs Georgia, outside the Olympics Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:40:18 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-121287 [...] of annexing it entirely. Prime Minister Putin has only to cite the recent example of the US and EU position on Kosovo. For surely, if the Kosovars had a case to break away from Serbia, South Ossetians should hardly be [...] [...] of annexing it entirely. Prime Minister Putin has only to cite the recent example of the US and EU position on Kosovo. For surely, if the Kosovars had a case to break away from Serbia, South Ossetians should hardly be [...]

]]> By: bluerose799 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115974 bluerose799 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:31:49 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115974 More than four IIIyrian Entities compose Albania. LABEATS, TAULANTS, ALBANS, ENKELEIS, DARASETS and KAONS. All of them speaks Illyrian language but with different dialects. Three first has a very distinct Illyrian dialect named GEGE and the rest has another Illyrian dialect named TOSKE. On 1912 they united in one single state and agreed to be named Eagle’s Land. SHQIPERIA. The foreign “SKOLARS” named Albania based on the name of only one of the Entities. This was not only Ignorance but also a big mistake of these “very educated Scholars“. The situation then was so critical for SHQIPETARET, so they accepted any injustice and compromise. This was the big price they pay to gain the independence. Of course many other Illyrian entities was ignored. This has been done in purpose to use Illyrian territories as a trade merchandise to please slavics, which in return were used in two wars. The Slavics paid their price. They lost 56 million people 1908 – 1946. Illyrian paid bigger price. They were spread over 5 different states. It's about time to recognize the historical right of Kosova (Dardania) to have its destiny fulfilled-That is full independence. Kosova never was a Serbian province. It was there, since the times of birth of European civilization, a very distinct Dardanian/llyrian identity. Always populated by Dardanias who, although under constant pressure of forcefully migration by Serbian shovinism, Tito's Yugoslavia & Milloshevic's Serbia, still make up 92% of the population. They speak ilirian language with the dialect GEGE. Serbs always have been a minority there. We know that Serbs appeared in Balkans (then llyria) only by the 6th Century AD, and they speak a language more similar to Ukrainian then Russian. They have always been a minority and 'the story' of Kosova being the Heartland of Serbia is just a pure Serbian nationalist fantasy. Facts Speak Louder Than Words and Serbian’s Lies Will Collapse by Themselves. Serbs always have been considered as oppressors there, not just by Albanian majority, but also by other ethnic groups too. Serbs just occupied Kosova during the rise of the Serbian nationalism early 20th century from Ottomans, who by then were loosing the Balkans after 500 years of occupation. The borders of Kosova are well established and recognized. Now Kosova should be Free! To find the answer for the question “do you think Kosovo’s independence will strengthen separatist movements elsewhere”, please refer to: http://www.acesofww2.com/germany/aces/Hartmann.htm Erich Hartman – top ace of all the time. German Luftwaffe Bf 109 Pilot. Near the end of WWII, in early May 1945, Hartmann, then Gruppenkommandeur of famous Jagdgeschwader 52, and his Commodore, Hermann Graf, ground crew, family members, and other civilians, who had joined the squadron, seeking protection approaching Russian army, moved west in direction of territory already occupied by US troops. On May 8th, 1945, the soldiers and civilians surrendered to US troops in the region between Bavaria (German province) and Czech border. But on May 17th, the US Army delivered all of these German troops and civilians to the Red Army. How did the Russian troops treat the civilians? They tortured, raped German woman, children at least 12 years old. Some woman were shot after the rapes. Others were not so lucky. A twelve year old girl whose mother had been raped and shoot being raped by several solders. She died from these acts soon afterward. Then more Russian came, and it began all over again. During the night, entire German families committed suicide with men killing their wives and daughters, then themselves. This is the way the slavics treat the human been, the innocent civilians. This is the way the Serbs treated innocent Croatian, Bosnian and Dardanian civilians. If any entity of human been will be treated like that, then they are in title to ask and gain the independence. More than four IIIyrian Entities compose Albania.
LABEATS, TAULANTS, ALBANS, ENKELEIS, DARASETS and KAONS.
All of them speaks Illyrian language but with different dialects. Three first has a very distinct Illyrian dialect named GEGE and the rest has another Illyrian dialect named TOSKE.
On 1912 they united in one single state and agreed to be named Eagle’s Land. SHQIPERIA.
The foreign “SKOLARS” named Albania based on the name of only one of the Entities.
This was not only Ignorance but also a big mistake of these “very educated Scholars“.
The situation then was so critical for SHQIPETARET, so they accepted any injustice and compromise. This was the big price they pay to gain the independence. Of course many other Illyrian entities was ignored. This has been done in purpose to use Illyrian territories as a trade merchandise to please slavics, which in return were used in two wars. The Slavics paid their price. They lost 56 million people 1908 – 1946. Illyrian paid bigger price. They were spread over 5 different states.
It’s about time to recognize the historical right of Kosova (Dardania) to have its destiny fulfilled-That is full independence. Kosova never was a Serbian province. It was there, since the times of birth of European civilization, a very distinct Dardanian/llyrian identity. Always populated by Dardanias who, although under constant pressure of forcefully migration by Serbian shovinism, Tito’s Yugoslavia & Milloshevic’s Serbia, still make up 92% of the population. They speak ilirian language with the dialect GEGE. Serbs always have been a minority there. We know that Serbs appeared in Balkans (then llyria) only by the 6th Century AD, and they speak a language more similar to Ukrainian then Russian. They have always been a minority and ‘the story’ of Kosova being the Heartland of Serbia is just a pure Serbian nationalist fantasy. Facts Speak Louder Than Words and Serbian’s Lies Will Collapse by Themselves. Serbs always have been considered as oppressors there, not just by Albanian majority, but also by other ethnic groups too. Serbs just occupied Kosova during the rise of the Serbian nationalism early 20th century from Ottomans, who by then were loosing the Balkans after 500 years of occupation. The borders of Kosova are well established and recognized. Now Kosova should be Free!
To find the answer for the question “do you think Kosovo’s independence will strengthen separatist movements elsewhere”, please refer to:
http://www.acesofww2.com/germany/aces/Hartmann.htm
Erich Hartman – top ace of all the time. German Luftwaffe Bf 109 Pilot.
Near the end of WWII, in early May 1945, Hartmann, then Gruppenkommandeur of famous Jagdgeschwader 52, and his Commodore, Hermann Graf, ground crew, family members, and other civilians, who had joined the squadron, seeking protection approaching Russian army, moved west in direction of territory already occupied by US troops. On May 8th, 1945, the soldiers and civilians surrendered to US troops in the region between Bavaria (German province) and Czech border. But on May 17th, the US Army delivered all of these German troops and civilians to the Red Army. How did the Russian troops treat the civilians? They tortured, raped German woman, children at least 12 years old. Some woman were shot after the rapes. Others were not so lucky. A twelve year old girl whose mother had been raped and shoot being raped by several solders. She died from these acts soon afterward. Then more Russian came, and it began all over again. During the night, entire German families committed suicide with men killing their wives and daughters, then themselves. This is the way the slavics treat the human been, the innocent civilians. This is the way the Serbs treated innocent Croatian, Bosnian and Dardanian civilians. If any entity of human been will be treated like that, then they are in title to ask and gain the independence.

]]> By: The Acorn » Europe’s failure with multi-ethnicity http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115457 The Acorn » Europe’s failure with multi-ethnicity Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:57:46 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115457 [...] op-ed in the Indian Express is brilliant. (Not only because it echoes most of the points made on this blog. Well, that too!) As Michael Mann, in an important article on the “Dark Side of Democracy” had [...] [...] op-ed in the Indian Express is brilliant. (Not only because it echoes most of the points made on this blog. Well, that too!) As Michael Mann, in an important article on the “Dark Side of Democracy” had [...]

]]> By: Nitin http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115280 Nitin Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:38:14 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115280 Here's <a href="http://securitydilemmas.blogspot.com/2008/02/legal-status-of-kosovos-independence.html" rel="nofollow">something</a> to illuminate the Kosovo question in international law. According to Anthony Arend, a Georgetown University professor: <em> III Conclusions 1. In the absence of UN authority in Kosovo, a strong case for secession could be made. If the UN had not become engaged in the Kosovo conflict, it would seem to me that a strong argument could be made that the people of Kosovo were being denied their right of internal self-determination and thus would have the right to secession. But note: even here the law is unclear as to whether a people in "category three" would ever have a right of secession. 2. Because the UN Security Council has been seized of the matter, a strong case against secession can be made. Given that the UN Security Council has affirmed the territorial integrity of Serbia and continued to work for an autonomous, but not independent, Kosovo, a very strong argument can be made that in the absence of any further Security Council action, Kosovo secession would be illegal. Why? First, the Security Council has the authority to issue binding resolutions in this area. And even though Resolution 1244 does not explicitly prohibit secession or prohibit states from recognizing secession (like Security Council Resolutions 216 and 217 in the case of Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence in 1965), it nonetheless seems to set forth the framework for self-determination that does not include independence. Second, it seems that all the parties in the case were attempting to create an autonomous arrangement-- not complete integration in to the Serbian political structure-- so the logic of the Quebec case's understanding of internal self-determination would not quite seem on point. In the Kosovo case, internal self-determination would be achieved through autonomy within Serbia, not full participation in the overall political, economic, and cultural life of the Serbian state, as was the case of Quebec.</em> Here’s something to illuminate the Kosovo question in international law. According to Anthony Arend, a Georgetown University professor:


III Conclusions

1. In the absence of UN authority in Kosovo, a strong case for secession could be made.

If the UN had not become engaged in the Kosovo conflict, it would seem to me that a strong argument could be made that the people of Kosovo were being denied their right of internal self-determination and thus would have the right to secession. But note: even here the law is unclear as to whether a people in “category three” would ever have a right of secession.

2. Because the UN Security Council has been seized of the matter, a strong case against secession can be made.

Given that the UN Security Council has affirmed the territorial integrity of Serbia and continued to work for an autonomous, but not independent, Kosovo, a very strong argument can be made that in the absence of any further Security Council action, Kosovo secession would be illegal. Why? First, the Security Council has the authority to issue binding resolutions in this area. And even though Resolution 1244 does not explicitly prohibit secession or prohibit states from recognizing secession (like Security Council Resolutions 216 and 217 in the case of Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence in 1965), it nonetheless seems to set forth the framework for self-determination that does not include independence. Second, it seems that all the parties in the case were attempting to create an autonomous arrangement– not complete integration in to the Serbian political structure– so the logic of the Quebec case’s understanding of internal self-determination would not quite seem on point. In the Kosovo case, internal self-determination would be achieved through autonomy within Serbia, not full participation in the overall political, economic, and cultural life of the Serbian state, as was the case of Quebec.

]]> By: Nitin http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115265 Nitin Sun, 24 Feb 2008 02:51:56 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115265 Salil, Regarding the recognition of the republics that emerged from the former Yugoslavia, the case of Kosovo is very different. First, NATO's bombing of Serbia was illegal under international law, as it was done without UNSC authorisation. Thereupon, Kosovo was administered by the UN, before declaring itself independent. Let's set aside Indian realism for a minute: what does this mean as a precedent? (a) that NATO forces can attack anyone, let the UN do what it likes and (b) letting UN administer troubled spots is dangerous because it won't be responsible to the current government. So why would any state agree to allow UN to administer a troubled place, even for humanitarian reasons? Position in international law of the whole affair is deeply suspect. No takers for "this won't be a precedent" logic. As for India recognising some secessions: The test should be whether recognition serves the larger Indian interests. We don't recognise Eelam do we? I'd argue that Bharat Karnad's argument is spurious for the opposite reasons. Kashmir has nothing to do with it. Realists will argue that international law and precedent is selectively applied if power and interests allow/require it. You can squeeze Serbia, but you can't squeeze India. Rather, India's decision must be motivated by the need not to needless antagonise (for the sake of a high-sounding principle) Russia and perhaps even Israel. And of course, against emergence of more single-ethnic-national states. I'm yet to hear from anyone what tangible advantages there might be for India by recognising Kosovo. All I hear is that we should do it out of principle. Salil,

Regarding the recognition of the republics that emerged from the former Yugoslavia, the case of Kosovo is very different. First, NATO’s bombing of Serbia was illegal under international law, as it was done without UNSC authorisation. Thereupon, Kosovo was administered by the UN, before declaring itself independent. Let’s set aside Indian realism for a minute: what does this mean as a precedent? (a) that NATO forces can attack anyone, let the UN do what it likes and (b) letting UN administer troubled spots is dangerous because it won’t be responsible to the current government. So why would any state agree to allow UN to administer a troubled place, even for humanitarian reasons? Position in international law of the whole affair is deeply suspect. No takers for “this won’t be a precedent” logic.

As for India recognising some secessions: The test should be whether recognition serves the larger Indian interests. We don’t recognise Eelam do we?

I’d argue that Bharat Karnad’s argument is spurious for the opposite reasons. Kashmir has nothing to do with it. Realists will argue that international law and precedent is selectively applied if power and interests allow/require it. You can squeeze Serbia, but you can’t squeeze India. Rather, India’s decision must be motivated by the need not to needless antagonise (for the sake of a high-sounding principle) Russia and perhaps even Israel. And of course, against emergence of more single-ethnic-national states.

I’m yet to hear from anyone what tangible advantages there might be for India by recognising Kosovo. All I hear is that we should do it out of principle.

]]> By: shared an item on Google Reader | Chakresh Mishra http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115255 shared an item on Google Reader | Chakresh Mishra Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:43:38 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115255 [...] an item on Google Reader Acorn: Recognising Kosovo is a bad idea February 18 at 1:12 pm - Comment No Comments, Comment or [...] [...] an item on Google Reader Acorn: Recognising Kosovo is a bad idea February 18 at 1:12 pm – Comment No Comments, Comment or [...]

]]> By: Salil http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115246 Salil Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:21:28 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115246 Nitin, I was traveling, hence late coming into this. Four points: Kosovo independence completes the unfinished business of disentangling Yugoslavia. When Slovenia became independent and the West defended it, when Croatia was supported by Germans, leading to the fragmentation, the world agreed. The world rightly supported Bosnia-Herzegovina, too. Dismantling the last remnants of an artificially put together country, backed only because Tito could hold it together, is natural justice. India has in the past supported many separatists: Mugabe's Zanu and Nkomo's Zapu fighting Rhodesia, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic separating from Morocco, Namibia's own independence struggle. India even sent troops to help East Pakistan become Bangladesh, and for many years supported the Heng Samrin regime in Cambodia which replaced Pol Pot's regime. While not "independence" as such, it was intervention. India does not want to back Kosovo's freedom, probably, because it does not want a Kashmir precedent. Fair point. But that's a different reason than not-antagonizing the KGB. Bharat Karnad's argument, therefore, that India should run a campaign AGAINST Kosovo's independence, is not only spurious, but against Indian interests. Many regard Kosovo's leaders, at least some, to be inspired by Gandhian concepts of reconciliation. Yes, there are lunatics who shoot first and ask questions later, but they're everywhere. And Karnad is also wrong, because being on the right side of the Kosovo debate is a good thing: why would India NOT want to support a moderate, west-leaning, democratic Muslim country? We've been in the Soviet bear hug for too long. Salil Karnad's argument is spurious. Nitin,

I was traveling, hence late coming into this. Four points:

Kosovo independence completes the unfinished business of disentangling Yugoslavia. When Slovenia became independent and the West defended it, when Croatia was supported by Germans, leading to the fragmentation, the world agreed. The world rightly supported Bosnia-Herzegovina, too. Dismantling the last remnants of an artificially put together country, backed only because Tito could hold it together, is natural justice.

India has in the past supported many separatists: Mugabe’s Zanu and Nkomo’s Zapu fighting Rhodesia, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic separating from Morocco, Namibia’s own independence struggle. India even sent troops to help East Pakistan become Bangladesh, and for many years supported the Heng Samrin regime in Cambodia which replaced Pol Pot’s regime. While not “independence” as such, it was intervention.

India does not want to back Kosovo’s freedom, probably, because it does not want a Kashmir precedent. Fair point. But that’s a different reason than not-antagonizing the KGB.

Bharat Karnad’s argument, therefore, that India should run a campaign AGAINST Kosovo’s independence, is not only spurious, but against Indian interests. Many regard Kosovo’s leaders, at least some, to be inspired by Gandhian concepts of reconciliation. Yes, there are lunatics who shoot first and ask questions later, but they’re everywhere. And Karnad is also wrong, because being on the right side of the Kosovo debate is a good thing: why would India NOT want to support a moderate, west-leaning, democratic Muslim country? We’ve been in the Soviet bear hug for too long.

Salil

Karnad’s argument is spurious.

]]> By: Rohit http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115213 Rohit Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:15:01 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115213 Nitin, My apologies. Nitin,

My apologies.

]]> By: Nitin http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115205 Nitin Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:34:18 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115205 Gentlemen, Discussion of the US presidential campaign is off topic on this post. There's reams of it everywhere. Spare this blogger and his readers. Gentlemen,

Discussion of the US presidential campaign is off topic on this post. There’s reams of it everywhere. Spare this blogger and his readers.

]]> By: Rohit http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115200 Rohit Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:25:30 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115200 Umesh, Perhaps, for the writer of this blog and may others here, progressivism means advancing the Indian Interest at ANY cost. Why should we be constrained to accept your definition? And as far as Obama is concerned, I am seriously glad that Americans are still gullible enough to believe in election slogans. I am not being sarcastic here;such belief--however misplaced--is essential for well being of the political system. But why should India's foreign policy be guided by this agenda of hope, when it has not even won the Democratic primary, let alone the Presidential elections is not exactly clear. The real test of this agenda of hope would be after President Obama assumes office. Till then, its just words--empty ones at that. Umesh,

Perhaps, for the writer of this blog and may others here, progressivism means advancing the Indian Interest at ANY cost. Why should we be constrained to accept your definition?

And as far as Obama is concerned, I am seriously glad that Americans are still gullible enough to believe in election slogans. I am not being sarcastic here;such belief–however misplaced–is essential for well being of the political system. But why should India’s foreign policy be guided by this agenda of hope, when it has not even won the Democratic primary, let alone the Presidential elections is not exactly clear. The real test of this agenda of hope would be after President Obama assumes office. Till then, its just words–empty ones at that.

]]> By: Jai_Choorakkot http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115195 Jai_Choorakkot Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:59:08 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115195 On Kosovo's independence, I agree with scritic that we should be in a wait-and watch mode. The MEA statement appears to do so with a nuanced disapproval- "studying the evolving situation". Looks like a serious discussion on Obama & Kosovo in the comment thread. Some thoughts: I guess the worst case scenario is that a President Obama punishes us for working against Kosovar independence (if we do), probably by blocking the nuclear deal.... and we are left only with Russia which may not give us an eqvt deal, or not be able to give us an eqvt deal, or has its own steep price set on an eqvt deal. I guess a realistic analysis should take this into account. How likely is this? Arent these separate issues. Wouldnt Obama be against this deal anyway, regardless of Kosovo. What are our other options? Reference points on these issues, 1. from IndianExpress.com: Dont wait for Obama "... As Barack Obama surges ahead in the race for the Democratic nomination, India can hardly forget his killer amendment to the Hyde Act on restricting future nuclear fuel supplies to India..." 2. Obama is actually a lot more nuanced than Hillary on Kosovo, IMO: 2008central.net/2008/02/17/obama-and-clinton-statements-on-kosovo-independence/ Hillary: I welcome this historic declaration... historic step.... I regret it has taken us this long to reach this historic juncture... Obama: ...a unique situation resulting from the irreparable rupture Slobodan Milosevic’s actions caused; it is in no way a precedent for anyone else... Hillary refers to Serbs in Kosovo and her reference to Serbia is only to worry abt its democratic future while Obama explicitly states that Serbia and its people also suffered terribly. Elsewhere in their statements, they are mostly parallel. regards, Jai On Kosovo’s independence, I agree with scritic that we should be in a wait-and watch mode. The MEA statement appears to do so with a nuanced disapproval- “studying the evolving situation”.

Looks like a serious discussion on Obama & Kosovo in the comment thread. Some thoughts:

I guess the worst case scenario is that a President Obama punishes us for working against Kosovar independence (if we do), probably by blocking the nuclear deal…. and we are left only with Russia which may not give us an eqvt deal, or not be able to give us an eqvt deal, or has its own steep price set on an eqvt deal.

I guess a realistic analysis should take this into account. How likely is this? Arent these separate issues. Wouldnt Obama be against this deal anyway, regardless of Kosovo. What are our other options?

Reference points on these issues,

1. from IndianExpress.com: Dont wait for Obama

“… As Barack Obama surges ahead in the race for the Democratic nomination, India can hardly forget his killer amendment to the Hyde Act on restricting future nuclear fuel supplies to India…”

2. Obama is actually a lot more nuanced than Hillary on Kosovo, IMO:

2008central.net/2008/02/17/obama-and-clinton-statements-on-kosovo-independence/

Hillary: I welcome this historic declaration… historic step…. I regret it has taken us this long to reach this historic juncture…

Obama: …a unique situation resulting from the irreparable rupture Slobodan Milosevic’s actions caused; it is in no way a precedent for anyone else…

Hillary refers to Serbs in Kosovo and her reference to Serbia is only to worry abt its democratic future while Obama explicitly states that Serbia and its people also suffered terribly.

Elsewhere in their statements, they are mostly parallel.

regards,
Jai

]]> By: B.O.K. http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115192 B.O.K. Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:00:58 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115192 Obamesh Patil, I can't believe *you* are the one looking down on rhetoric! Do you *really* not see that you are the only person on this thread who has been going on and on with irrelevant rhetorical tangents? <blockquote>The question is ‘recognition of Kosovo’ can be done on such world view or not.</blockquote> No, the question is whether recognizing Kosovo is a good idea for India. That's all. All, The MEA's response is <a href="http://mea.gov.in/pressbriefing/2008/02/18pb01.htm" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Quoting it in full: <blockquote>"India has a long standing and consistent policy on the issue of recognition. Recognition is normally accorded on the basis of a country having a defined territory, a duly constituted Government in charge which is accepted by the people and which has effective control over an area of governance. It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties. We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation".</blockquote> Obamesh Patil,

I can’t believe *you* are the one looking down on rhetoric! Do you *really* not see that you are the only person on this thread who has been going on and on with irrelevant rhetorical tangents?

The question is ‘recognition of Kosovo’ can be done on such world view or not.

No, the question is whether recognizing Kosovo is a good idea for India. That’s all.

All,

The MEA’s response is here. Quoting it in full:

“India has a long standing and consistent policy on the issue of recognition. Recognition is normally accorded on the basis of a country having a defined territory, a duly constituted Government in charge which is accepted by the people and which has effective control over an area of governance.

It has been India’s consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties.

We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation”.

]]> By: Nitin http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115189 Nitin Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:46:54 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115189 Dear Umesh, Ha ha ha! *ROTFL* Dear Umesh,

Ha ha ha! *ROTFL*

]]> By: Umesh Patil http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115152 Umesh Patil Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:01:28 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115152 It is clear that folks would rather have a rhetorical shot than see the real point. Obama is great or not is not the point. He and many others from time to time have attempted to throw the burdens of History exhorting people to undertake actions with unity which are in longer term interests and are egalitarian in essence. India herself has a long history of such leaders. The question is 'recognition of Kosovo' can be done on such world view or not. The original post hardly moved away from perpetuation of burdens of History. Why do we want to think only in terms of 'instigation to our separatist movement' or 'deference to Russia's geo-political power'? When Punjab separatist movement was quelled eventually, was it because India was guarded all along in foreign policy? Or something else helped to root out Khalistanis? My real beef is with such standard foreign policy prescriptions where at times there seems to be some kind of intellectual laziness. Why in the world 'because USA does’ should pass? Neither failures of USA need to be excuses for other countries in not undertaking enlightened policies; nor should what USA does set the bar. Point is just like any other democratic country, USA also constantly debates about what foreign policy it pursues. Reference to Obama and Liberals is to denote political forces within American polity which are trying to influence outcome towards the 'progressive policy'. The question is where do we see that movement in India? I am not saying it is absent. But I am trying to understand to what an extent this blog and the particular blog post enables such progressive discourse within India. My reading of the blog post as well as subsequent comments tell me that, unfortunately at least for this blog post that opportunity is missed. It is clear that folks would rather have a rhetorical shot than see the real point. Obama is great or not is not the point. He and many others from time to time have attempted to throw the burdens of History exhorting people to undertake actions with unity which are in longer term interests and are egalitarian in essence. India herself has a long history of such leaders.

The question is ‘recognition of Kosovo’ can be done on such world view or not. The original post hardly moved away from perpetuation of burdens of History. Why do we want to think only in terms of ‘instigation to our separatist movement’ or ‘deference to Russia’s geo-political power’? When Punjab separatist movement was quelled eventually, was it because India was guarded all along in foreign policy? Or something else helped to root out Khalistanis?

My real beef is with such standard foreign policy prescriptions where at times there seems to be some kind of intellectual laziness. Why in the world ‘because USA does’ should pass? Neither failures of USA need to be excuses for other countries in not undertaking enlightened policies; nor should what USA does set the bar. Point is just like any other democratic country, USA also constantly debates about what foreign policy it pursues. Reference to Obama and Liberals is to denote political forces within American polity which are trying to influence outcome towards the ‘progressive policy’. The question is where do we see that movement in India? I am not saying it is absent. But I am trying to understand to what an extent this blog and the particular blog post enables such progressive discourse within India. My reading of the blog post as well as subsequent comments tell me that, unfortunately at least for this blog post that opportunity is missed.

]]> By: B.O.K. http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-115137 B.O.K. Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:59:53 +0000 http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2008/02/18/recognising-kosovo-is-a-bad-idea/#comment-115137 Umesh Patil, Ok, Obama is great. Now, what about Kosovo? Why should India recognize it? Umesh Patil,

Ok, Obama is great.

Now, what about Kosovo? Why should India recognize it?

]]>