Byzantine Blog

Short and Sweet

STRASBOURG, France, Jan. 24, 2007 — The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has accepted the request for deletion of paragraph 4 from the draft resolution, prepared by Russell Johnston, which assessed that “conditional independence” of Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province provides the best chance for peace and stability in the Balkans.

Ninety MPs voted for adoption of amendments deleting the unacceptable paragraph, as proposed by head of the Serbian delegation Milos Aligrudic and British MP David Wiltshire, while 64 of them voted against those amendments.

How a Certain Troll Keeps Failing

A careful observer of the numerous attempts at hijacking of Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province by various trolls figuring prominently at the top of what’s amicably referred to as the “international community” (in fact, a handful of bureaucrats from the richest Western countries forcing their will upon the rest of the world), might remember the early October session of Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Back than, thanks to the vigilance of the British conservative MP David Wilshire, report by the Troll Russell-Johnston proposing a form of independence for Serbian southern province was scrapped from PACE’s agenda until the Assembly’s January session.

The reason for the withdrawal of the Troll’s resolution at that point was the “utterly and completely undemocratic” way Albanian sock-puppet Russell-Johnston tried to push it in — through the back door, like a rotten egg no one was supposed to notice until it was too late.

Now, the same “resolution” by the same Troll was discussed at Assembly’s January 24, 2007 session, then voted on, then adopted, but with its key ingredient —“conditional independence” for the Serbian province—deleted, by the majority votes.

Trollympics

And here’s what Albanian lobbyist in the Europe’s Parliament, Russell-Johnston, was sweating over all along (apparently, for more than a decade now), only to see it shredded and thrown out with the rest of garbage:

[Paragraph 4 of the Draft Resolution] While respecting Serbia’s interest and right to preserve its territorial integrity, the Assembly believes that Kosovo’s independence — subject to certain conditions — is the solution which is liable to ensure the greatest chances of durable, long-term peace and stability for Kosovo and the entire region, in addition to being the one which corresponds to the will of the majority of Kosovars [meaning Albanian Muslims occupying Serbian province]. The Assembly therefore encourages Serbia to adopt a more flexible and pragmatic attitude during the status negotiations, as well as to reopen a discussion within Serbia’s main institutions to that effect.

Although another Major Troll, Martti Ahtisaari (a.k.a. Adolfsen) was also there to support his Troll Brother in the common quest, although some of the French, Swiss, Albanian and even an Albanian-Macedonian troll have also wholeheartedly backed the Alpha Troll Russell-Johnston (the Albanian from Macedonia successfully demonstrated the embarrassing level of ignorance regarding the elementary geopolitical facts of the region he inhabits, by referring to the northern Serbian region of Vojvodina as one of the former Yugoslav “republics” which became a “state” along with Croatia, Bosnia, etc.), although a number of speakers talked a lot while managing to say absolutely nothing, the reason prevailed and Europe’s Parliament scrapped the Troll’s independence proposal, voting for “a negotiated and mutually accepted solution to Kosovo’s status” instead.

Troll Defeaters

For the record, and just so the so-called “international community” won’t be able to claim tomorrow that they were not warned, here’s how the European Parliament members reacted to the Troll’s ideas of “peace, stability and security” the amputation of the Serbian province was supposed to bring. Also, these are the very arguments that have won the day and defeated Russell-Johnston’s reckless “proposal”:

Mr KYPRIANOU (Cyprus): Butchering a Country Not Conductive to Peace and Stability

“Kosovo can be characterized as an open wound that needs urgently to be healed if peace and stability are to prevail in the Balkans. If that is our aim, it would be a great paradox if we were seriously to consider or even discuss today the secession of Serbian Kosovo province and its recognition as an independent state.”

“The second matter is that the members of the Council of Europe have repeatedly declared our devotion to, and respect for, the UN charter and the basic principles of international law. In this respect, the possible recognition of Kosovo province as an independent state would constitute a severe violation of the UN charter and the basic principles of modern international law.”

“[...] What would have happened if the principle that ‘where there is a nation there should be a state’ was implemented in a world with 5,000 to 6,000 ethnicities but less than 200 states? Would it be a return to the middle ages?”

“[...] We strongly believe that condoning the idea of Serbian Kosovo province becoming an independent state would mean disrespect to the United Nations charter and to the basic principles of international law — particularly the principles of territorial integrity, sovereignty and non-intervention. Additionally, such a dangerous step would not solve the problem but worsen it, as it would reverse the geopolitical balance, political stability and economic growth of the western Balkans, for which we declared our strong support last month.”

Mr LONCLE (France): Sovereignty a Fundamental Right

Mr Loncle of France said that the Parliamentary Assembly stood for human rights, democracy, the rule of law and peace. Sovereignty could be considered a fundamental right and it is not for the Council of Europe to divide a state, or add one to the list held by the United Nations; the Council of Europe should neither draw new frontiers nor define new countries.

“The international community had expended too much effort in attempting to integrate minority groups, and in an area with fewer than 2 million inhabitants, it was wrong to focus on decentralization. This could risk the “Lebanisation” of Serbian province and sow the seeds of the break-up of the state.”

“Many views of the economic viability of an ‘independent Kosovo’ were too optimistic. The local market was not economically viable and the necessary networks for exporting to neighboring countries were non-existent.”

Mr GARDETTO (Monaco): Independence is Not the Only Solution

Mr Gardetto thanked Lord Russell-Johnston for his detailed report, which fulfilled a far from straightforward task. It was certain that instability in Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province posed a risk to the stability of the region as a whole. A negotiated solution between all parties was the most desirable outcome.

“Independence is not the only solution for Kosovo province. Institutions were needed to guarantee human rights, democracy and the involvement of all ethnic groups. Public services needed to be improved and a remedy found for crimes based on the victim’s ethnic group. The effective investigation and prosecution of crimes motivated by ethnicity would give the authorities credibility and secure the confidence of the population.”

Mr GEVEAUX (France): France Supports a Negotiated Solution

Different ethnic groups have to live together. It is necessary to find out what had happened to those who had disappeared, to ensure freedom of religion, and to preserve the remaining cultural heritage. It was also important to address the state of the economy. Unemployment was high and industry was still not back on its feet, while at the same time there was a flourishing black economy, including trafficking. France had participated in the Kosovo Stabilization Force, and now supported a negotiated solution where the rights of minorities were respected.

Mr KOSACHEV (Russian Federation): Proposing Independence for Serbian Province Absolutely Unacceptable

Mr Kosachev said that whenever Kosovo was discussed, three issues needed to be addressed: human rights, the status of the territory, and the impact of any solution on other areas within Europe and further afield. On human rights, everyone agreed that standards in the region should be the same as the rest of the world. At present, people were having to live in different areas according to their ethnic origin and feared moving outside their own communities. Such a situation was shameful in a modern Europe. The report had considered this issue and was to be commended, but paragraph 4 of the draft resolution went beyond the competence of the Council of Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly. The status of Kosovo was properly within the competence of the United Nations’ Security Council, and the Council of Europe should not try to affect the former’s decision.

“Russia’s view is that Serbia should be allowed to maintain its territorial integrity. [War criminal] Agim Ceku had said that the Albanian Muslim leadership in Serbian province was integral to finding a solution where human rights were respected. However, there was no reason to trust this comment without seeing evidence of improvements on the ground. Moving forward on Serbian province’s independence without addressing human rights first might lead to further conflicts. The Council of Europe should not depart from the basic principles of human rights and territorial integrity. Paragraph 4 is therefore totally unacceptable.”

Mr HUGON (France): No Solution Without Acceptance by the Both Sides

Mr Hugon said that Ahtisaari’s negotiations in recent months had led to failure. Serbs might be ‘a minority’ in Kosovo province today, but Serbs have thousand of years of history in Kosovo, which also has particular religious importance for them. [...] No solution was viable in the long term unless compromises were accepted by both sides.

“A further challenge faced in Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province was the state of the economy: there was high unemployment, it was one of the poorest in the Balkans, not self-sufficient in energy and its industry was in a poor condition. It should therefore be no surprise that organized crime had flourished. A number of political parties in Kosovo were actually in favor of corruption. There needed to be reform of the civil service and other public services. There were many other minorities in Kosovo, such as the Roma and Turks, who were frequently ignored. The return of refugees to the region is still only hypothetical.”

Mr DAČIĆ (Serbia): Old Agreement was Never Honored — Why Enter into the New One?

Ivica Dačić said that, in 1999, Ahtisaari was in Belgrade when the peace agreement, United Nations Resolution 1244, was signed and the war stopped. Mr Dačić asked Ahtisaari who was present why this resolution had not been honored: 300,000 Serbs had left Kosovo, over 150 churches and monasteries had been destroyed and Serbian property had been stolen. The Serbs in their province of Kosovo are now forced to live in the same deplorable conditions as the Jews under Hitler — they are living in ghettos, in fear for the lives of their children. The UN Resolution 1244, behind which Ahtisaari and the whole world stood, stated that solution for Kosovo was autonomy within Serbia. The old agreement has not been honored, so why was there any question of a new resolution?

“Today, Kosovo province is a part of a Serbia where drug, arms and human trafficking represent the entire “economy”, and where al Qaeda recruits mujahedeens for the next stages of jihad. This created problems for the whole of Europe, not just for Serbia. The issue was self-determination or the inviability of borders. Kosovo was not unique; if the solution was independence, then questions remained about the Serbs in Republika Srpska in Bosnia, the Albanians in Macedonia, Montenegro, or Greece. Lord Russell-Johnston had said ten years ago that he favored independence for Kosovo, so this report is nothing new.”

“Albanian Muslims in Serbian Kosovo province demanded independence before Slobodan Milošević came on the scene. Before 1999, Serbs had formed a majority in Kosovo, but as a consequence of ethnic cleansing they were now in a minority. The rapporteur was telling a state to accept a division of itself, but how would he have reacted if somebody had proposed independence for Northern Ireland, Catalonia, Chechnya, South Ossetia or Nagorno-Karabakh? If, in a hundred years’ time, Albanians were the majority in Strasbourg, should Strasbourg become an Albanian state?”

Mr ALIGRUDIĆ (Serbia): Will of Serbian People at Least as Important as the Will of Albanian Muslim Minority

Belgrade and Pristina agreed to have the issue of the future status of Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province solved via the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy as an intermediary in the negotiations, after which the Contact Group would offer its position on the matter. Finally the UN Security Council will voice its position.

“This is a sensitive question and one should have knowledge of the historical and political facts before one talks about it. That is not the case with the report and the rapporteur. It is true that 90% of the population in the southern Serbian province are Albanian Muslims but, since 1999, more than 250,000 Serbs and non-Albanians have been ethnically cleansed and are now internally displaced persons with no right to return to their homes and properties. Those who have not been forced out of the province live in fear for their lives.”

“For most of the period after the Second World War, Serbs formed almost 50% of the population of the Kosovo-Metohija province. Their number decreased significantly in the 1980s and tragically by the end of the 1990s. Given all that and the fact that the talks on Serbian province’s future status are not over, it is not appropriate to state, as the resolution suggests, that ‘independence would guarantee stability and peace’ in Serbia and the region.”

“There are three key arguments. First, if we accept this wording, it will encourage one party to the negotiations, the Albanian Muslims from Serbian province, not to negotiate. Why should they invest any effort in the process if they have been told by this esteemed body that they are right and the other side is wrong? They need only to sit and wait for the outcome. That would directly jeopardize the possibility of an agreed solution.”

“Secondly, the proposed text states that the independence of Kosovo should correspond to the ‘will of the majority of Kosovars’ — meaning the will of Albanian Muslims who are now, as the result of decades of ethnic cleansing, a ‘majority’ in this Serbian province. This is wrong. We should take into account the will of the people of Serbia, as well as the will of Serbs and other non-Albanians residing in Kosovo-Metohija province. Serbian Kosovo province is not a federal unit nor an independent state. It is part of Serbian state under the provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which has not been changed.”

Cartoon by Toso Borkovic