Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Western myth of a Serbian Kosova
Bosnian Institute ^ | 29 November, 2005 | Branka Maga

Posted on 12/02/2005 10:15:22 PM PST by Hunden

[This] article written for the [Bosnian Institute] website argues that Western politicians have been mistaken in accepting the notion that Kosova is 'an integral part of Serbia', so that Belgrade must necessarily be involved in discussions about Kosova's status

As negotiations between Serbia and Kosova about the latter’s status are about to begin under UN auspices, one is prompted to pose the obvious question: ‘Why is Serbia involved at all?’ Or, to put it in another way:

‘Why do Western governments assume that the wishes of Kosova’s inhabitants are insufficient grounds for recognising its independence, and that such a step requires also Belgrade’s acquiescence?’

Answers to such questions refer as a rule to Kosova being an integral part of Serbia: recognising Kosova means changing Serbian borders. The international community, the argument continues, has thus far respected the borders of the former Yugoslav republics: Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina have all been recognised within their existing borders. Recognising Kosova as an independent state without Serbia’s agreement would be a departure from past practice. Some even suggest it would violate international law. The otherwise respectable International Herald Tribune even recently published a letter from Raju G.C. Thomas in Belgrade (27 October 2005) that moved on from arguing that Kosova’s independence would violate ‘international law’ regarding ‘the territorial integrity and sovereignty of existing states’ to advocate in effect genocide against the recalcitrant Albanians.

The Western assumption that Serbia enjoys sovereign rights over Kosova, however, is as fictitious as the Serbian myth that Kosova was the cradle of the medieval Serbian state [which was actually in Rascia, now called the Sandjak although Serb nationalists are now trying to give it back its former Slavic name of Raska]. On the contrary, Kosova’s inherent sovereignty and separate existence from Serbia is a well-established legal and historical fact. By accepting Serbia as a relevant partner in negotiations over Kosova’s future, the United States and the European Union have vested it with an authority that it never enjoyed in the former Yugoslavia.

To begin with, the former Yugoslav Republic of Serbia was not of the same character as the other former Yugoslav Republics. Unlike Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia and Montenegro, all of which were constituted on a unitary model, the Serbian Republic was from its inception composed of three distinct politico-territorial entities: Serbia, Kosova and Voivodina. These entities were constituted separately and independently from each other in the last stages of World War II (1944-5), as part of a process leading to creation of a Yugoslav federation on the ruins of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. The process began with the formation of a number of distinct politico-territorial entities in areas liberated from Italian Fascist and German Nazi armies of occupation: once established, these entities served as basic building blocks for the new Yugoslav federated state. Some of them were constituted as Republics, others as Autonomous regions (later provinces). Each and every one of them, however, was established formally as an emanation of the proclaimed will of their (usually ethnically mixed) inhabitants.

Kosova and Voivodina were actually established before Serbia: Kosova in January 1944, Voivodina in March 1944, Serbia only in November 1944. Serbia at the latter juncture did not include either Voivodina or Kosova. It was only in July 1945 that Kosova and Voivodina voted - autonomously and separately from one another and from Serbia - to join Serbia. Their adhesion to Serbia was sanctioned by the Yugoslav AVNOJ government in August 1945 [AVNOJ stands for "Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Yugoslavia"], when they were also given separate (from Serbia) [and direct] representation within Yugoslavia’s Federal bodies. Kosova and Voivodina, in other words, were from the start constituent elements of the Yugoslav federation, just as the Republics were. This was fully recognised by the last Yugoslav Constitution [of February 21, 1974], by virtue of which Voivodina and Kosova were in all practical respects equal to the Republics [and which explicitely recognized them "equal rights"]. Despite their formal union with Serbia, they were by the nature of their Constitutions and legal status Provinces of Yugoslavia, not of Serbia. Their union with Serbia was legally valid only during Yugoslavia’s existence, or as long as their populations did not decide otherwise. For just as Kosova had voluntarily joined the union with Serbia, so too it retained the right to leave it by its own will.

Four of the six former Yugoslav Republics (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia) are today internationally recognised states. Their recognition took place on the basis of two criteria: their separate status within the former Yugoslavia, and the will of their populations. Although Kosova satisfies both criteria [as it voted for independence in September 1991], its international recognition has been delayed for reasons of Western Realpolitik - resting on the (clearly mistaken) premise that peace in the region can be achieved only by conciliating Serbia.

What is most extraordinary in this whole story is that while the international community treats Serbia as a state whose alleged borders should be respected, it simultaneously pretends that Kosova was not a self-governing territory within Yugoslavia and within Serbia, hence that its status remains to be determined. The fact is that neither Serbia nor Kosova are internationally recognised states, though each has its own democratically elected government. Whether Serbia and Kosova win international recognition depends - and should depend - solely upon the freely expressed will of their respective populations.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: antichristian; appeasement; balkans; bravosierra; clintonistas; clintonlegacy; clintonsquarmire; communistkillers; democracy; ethniccleansing; europeansurrender; frankwingnut; frenchdipstick; frogidiot; independence; international; islamiccrusade; islamofascists; islamopropaganda; jihad; jihadistscum; kosovo; landgrab; landtheft; lies; loser; lyingscum; massmurderers; mendacity; orientalliars; promuhammedan; rewritingofhistory; russia; selfdetermination; serbia; serbofascists; serbolsheviks; sorosfluffer; sovereignty; srpskimajmuni; surrendermonkey; truth; unwittingturks; usefulidiot; voivodina; warcrimedenial; westerntraitor; wrongplace; wrongtime; wrongwar; yugoslavia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last
This article, like others by the author on the same subject, rests on the official legal reasoning of the former Communist Yugoslavia and its polite fiction that its constituent federated entities had joined it of their own will.

Yet, in the absence of any other possible legal reasoning, the "international community" did rely on the existing Yugoslav Constitution (which described them as "independent and sovereign states") to recognize the independence of the former Yugoslav Republics — with the exception of Serbia and Montenegro, which "agreed" to form a Federation. This article is a useful reminder of the reasons why Kosovo, as an "Autonomous province", enjoyed the same rights as said Republics, and is now independent according to that Constitution.

This post was prompted by the discovery here of a couple of propagandists who are trying to abuse the crucial fight against Islamofascism to push a foreign agenda of anti-Muslim Fascism in the Balkans, as a reminder of the fact that public debates need not ignore the basic facts of the issues, especially as they relate to the principles of democracy and the rule of law.

1 posted on 12/02/2005 10:15:22 PM PST by Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hunden

Some Russian Rodine speech people have also been involved. Beyond fascism and religious identity in common, what's their interest in radical Serb efforts?


2 posted on 12/03/2005 12:28:18 AM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

The search for scapegoats or hatred of others a substitute for self-esteem?


3 posted on 12/03/2005 1:07:25 AM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

"Kosova" is a corruption. The correct spelling is "Kosovo"


4 posted on 12/03/2005 1:11:01 AM PST by eclectic (Liberalism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Civilizational solidarity, per Samuel Huntington.


5 posted on 12/03/2005 1:30:23 AM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
Recognising Kosova as an independent state without Serbia’s agreement would be a departure from past practice…. Kosova and Voivodina were actually established before Serbia: Kosova in January 1944, Voivodina in March 1944, Serbia only in November 1944.

The article only starts from 1944, as if the creation of these countries started from then only. It conveniently omits the fact that even Yugoslavia (means Southern Slav) was a continuation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, which was established after WWI. Kosovo (and part of Macedonia) was part of the new country. Since the new country is a merge of three kingdoms (Serb, Croatia, and Slovenia), we can tell that Kosovo was considered part of the Serbian Kingdom (as Croatia and Slovenia, being both Catholics, never lay claim on it).

The Western assumption that Serbia enjoys sovereign rights over Kosova, however, is as fictitious as the Serbian myth that Kosova was the cradle of the medieval Serbian state...

Historically, since during the Crusades, Kosovo has been part of Serbian Kingdom for long time.

Culturally, Raska, or Kosovo, region was the place where King Stefan Nemanja (1167-96) reigned. He was the first to proclaim Serbian independence from the Kingdom of Bulgaria, a strong country in the region at the time, and also include Zeta, the other (and older) Serbian-ruled area. Stefan later went to Greece, entering Hilandar Monastery on Mt. Athos. Also important to remember that Stefan's son, prince Rastko Nemanjic, who in young age already decided to become a priest, later became the first Serbian Archbishop, which practically establishing an independent Serbian Orthodox Church. He later became St. Sava, whom until today is considered the Patron of Serbians. The biggest church in Belgrade, St. Sava, is after his name. For this reason, Serbians consider Kosovo the cradle of their civilization.

When the Ottoman invaded the whole region, Serbian fought hard and the biggest battle of all was in fact, in Kosovo, where they lost their prince, Lazar. One by one, the Christian areas in Balkan (at first mostly Orthodox areas) fell to Islamic Ottoman, and by the 16th century, in included Catholic areas of Croatia, Slovenia and Hungary. During this period, migration of the Muslim Albanian to Kosovo, together with conversion of some local Serbs, changed the demographic-religious structure of the region.

By 18th century, the Ottoman started to lose some areas in the region to Hapsburg Empire, including Croatia and Slovenia. In early 19th century, some Serbian rebellions led the Ottoman to grant them an autonomy status, while other parts, such as Bosnia and Kosovo, were still under Ottoman.

After the Second Balkan War, 1913, however, Serbian acquired the Kosovo area, and when the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was established in 1918, Kosovo was included. The new Kingdom gained international recognition under the Versailles Treaty (1919).

This new kingdom, however, was always troubled by internal conflicts, many times because leaders from non-Serbs parts were dissatisfied with Serb-dominated government. Before and during WWII, the conflicts were stronger as the leaders accusing each other of collaborating with the German. Tito brought them together and established communist federation, Yugoslavia, with Vojvodina and Kosovo as autonomous provinces. This part is being used by the article’s author to claim that Serbs doesn’t have any claim whatsoever of Kosovo.

So, I see this article as a piece to confuse readers with claim as if Serbs’ claim over Kosovo is totally unfounded. It's true that the issue is not easy to resolve now, as majority of Kosovo's population today are (Albanian) Muslims. But, to say Serbs’ view of Kosovo as their cradle of civilization is a myth, I think, is a myth.

6 posted on 12/03/2005 1:44:38 AM PST by paudio (Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

l8r


7 posted on 12/03/2005 5:09:54 AM PST by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden; mark502inf; heybeavis; Hoplite; GSlob; ninenot; sittnick; steve50; Hegemony Cricket; ...

KosovA?

What KosovA means in Albanian? Or most of other names in Kosovo?

8 posted on 12/03/2005 5:17:02 AM PST by A. Pole (Saint Augustine: "The truth speaks from the bottom of his heart without the noise of words")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

So what's your agenda? You really think Europe needs another Muslim nation? Meanwhile the Muslims wrecked Lebanon which was a semi Christian nation in the middle East. And they hanker to destroy Israel because these idiots cannot tolerate non Muslim nations in the Middle East

But Muslim stooges in the West act as midwives and promoters for more Muslim nations on European turf. Boggles the mind. Are the Bosnians also getting their own little Muslim nation. Isn't Albania a Muslim nation in Europe? The mind boggles.


9 posted on 12/03/2005 5:21:21 AM PST by dennisw (You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you - Bob Dylan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden; zagor-te-nej; Lion in Winter; Honorary Serb; jb6; Incorrigible; DTA; ma bell; joan; ...

Bid a hearty welcome to our latest Soros fluffer as he spreads Islamofascist propaganda on FR.


10 posted on 12/03/2005 6:56:07 AM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; Hunden

Say hello to the Jihad's useful idiot
______

Lenin came up with the term "Useful Idiot." "Useful idiots" were those gullible, well-intentioned people in Western democracies who became apologists for the, shall we say, excesses of the new Soviet regime

- from the internet


11 posted on 12/03/2005 7:01:47 AM PST by dennisw (You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you - Bob Dylan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: paudio
This article is just proof that Mr. Soros will spend a lot more money to secure his stolen gains in Kosovo. As a result, he has to insure that the rightful owners don't take possession of the land.

And we know all about Mr. Soros' dabbling in US politics. He's just been more successful sticking it to the Serbs than he has sticking it to us...for now, anyway.

It's a fluff piece in more ways than one.
12 posted on 12/03/2005 7:02:38 AM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: eclectic
Albright called it kosova. That's what all anti Serb factions call it. It is, of course, Kosovo.
13 posted on 12/03/2005 9:03:21 AM PST by isrul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
Kosovo is originally a Slavic (Serbian) word (Kosovo Polje = Field of Blackbirds, from kos = blackbird). That the Albanian form of the name is a little different seems to have no significance, any more than "Roma" being called "Rome" by English speakers.

The author of this piece is a Croatian woman. The Bosnian Institute acknowledges financial help from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation. If there is any connection to Soros, it isn't mentioned on their website.

14 posted on 12/03/2005 9:48:23 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
When different communities do not want to live together, separation is the only civilized way to handle the situation - be it Greece/Turkey in 1922-23, or Cyprus, or West Bank/Gaza or anywhere else, like Kosovo. The boundaries, if need be, could be adjusted accordingly, so as to disrupt the smallest number of lives. Comparing Vaclav Havel ["velvet divorce" = civilized solution] with Milosevic tells one everything one would ever need to know.
15 posted on 12/03/2005 1:27:23 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
That the Albanian form of the name is a little different seems to have no significance, any more than "Roma" being called "Rome" by English speakers.

Maybe Albanian Muslims changed the last letter to "a" to make it more Albanian? Or maybe it is to honor Ali the nephew of Muhammad? How will they change names like Pristina, Mitrovica, Prizren, Gracanica, etc?

16 posted on 12/03/2005 2:25:08 PM PST by A. Pole (Saint Augustine: "The truth speaks from the bottom of his heart without the noise of words")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

Give my regards to George!


17 posted on 12/03/2005 2:48:59 PM PST by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

Magas is a Croatian journalist. In other wors, another Croat continuing the genocide of the Serbian people.


18 posted on 12/03/2005 3:00:07 PM PST by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
About 30% of Albanians are Christian, and many of the Muslim Albanians are probably Muslim in name only after decades of atheistic indoctrination (under the Hoxha and Tito regimes). Mother Teresa was an ethnic Albanian born in Macedonia. Some Albanians fled to Italy at the time of the Turkish conquest, and their descendants still speak Albanian...I don't think any of them are Muslims.

Modern Albanian is usually thought to be descended from the language of the ancient Illyrians in the same region...I doubt that the fact that many Albanians adopted Islam under Turkish rule affected the endings of names.

There are already Albanian versions of the names in Kosovo...Prishtina for Pristina, etc.

19 posted on 12/03/2005 3:11:29 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
There are already Albanian versions of the names in Kosovo...Prishtina for Pristina, etc.

It is like saying that Waszyngton is a Polish name for Washington. Prishtina/Pristina/Prysztina is a Serbian word.

About 30% of Albanians are Christian

Few in Kosovo and I seriously doubt that Albanian Christains would be destroying monasteries and ancient churches.

20 posted on 12/03/2005 3:52:46 PM PST by A. Pole (Saint Augustine: "The truth speaks from the bottom of his heart without the noise of words")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
It turns out that surrender is in Hunden's blood!


21 posted on 12/03/2005 4:07:32 PM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
"The search for scapegoats or hatred of others a substitute for self-esteem?"

I've often wondered if a kind of mandatory, full time pride (would could lend more to that kind of nationalism) in that region might have something to do with what we perceive from our US eyes and ears.

In other words, many people in some cultures have very obvious pride in language, customs, sports teams, race/ethnic and/or national identity. ...seems to be a requirement for 24/7 pride based on whatever in some places. In other cultures, displays of pride are more limited to and reserved for accomplishments of deeds or goals.

I don't know much but speak from military experiences, related studies, acquaintances and work with people from other countries.
22 posted on 12/03/2005 6:09:25 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
"Civilizational solidarity, per Samuel Huntington."

Thanks for the reference. I will read.
23 posted on 12/03/2005 6:10:57 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: familyop
In other words, many people in some cultures have very obvious pride in language, customs, sports teams, race/ethnic and/or national identity. ...seems to be a requirement for 24/7 pride based on whatever in some places. In other cultures, displays of pride are more limited to and reserved for accomplishments of deeds or goals.

How in your opinion Americans would react if they were in such situation like Serbs are: if they were attacked, part of their core historical territory (like East Coast) was occupied by foreign powers, if they were being expelled by hostile ethnic group while the monuments of the past were being erased.

What is your experience telling you. Do you think that they would "limit displays of pride to and reserve for accomplishments of deeds or goals".

24 posted on 12/03/2005 6:49:30 PM PST by A. Pole (Saint Augustine: "The truth speaks from the bottom of his heart without the noise of words")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole
"What is your experience telling you. Do you think that they would 'limit displays of pride to and reserve for accomplishments of deeds or goals'."

On "displays of pride," I was referring to the behaviors of individuals. In Denver, Colorado, USA, for example, many of the Russian ethnic people are moving into a Mexican culture neighborhood, where they say that they are more culturally comfortable. I'm not complaining about it but am interested. Most (not all) walk very stoicly and speak very loudly with much emphasis of accent in language. They are also very easily offended and perceive even American soldiers to be weak and effeminate by what we in the USA call gentlemanly behavior (remotely similar to old Chinese religious standard of personal humility for warriors).

But in reply to the rest of what you wrote, we in the USA would probably do what most others in the world are doing in that kind of situation. If we did not assimilate a high influx of a culture that is very different from ours, we would eventually partition the area of other culture from our own. Genocide is not an option for us, considering our moral values, and partitioning is a much more humane (although very difficult) way of "ethnic cleansing."

But then so far, we in the USA have assimilated other cultures that are very different from our own. It will be interesting to see what we do with our recent and current higher flow of immigrants. If they change our culture much, we deserve it for having embraced feminism (divorce, cohabitation,...) and for having abandoned older family values, IMO.
25 posted on 12/03/2005 7:43:18 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Genocide is not an option for us, considering our moral values, and partitioning is a much more humane (although very difficult) way of "ethnic cleansing."

There was no genocide and ethnic cleansing was done and is still being done against the Serbs.

26 posted on 12/03/2005 7:51:37 PM PST by A. Pole (Saint Augustine: "The truth speaks from the bottom of his heart without the noise of words")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hunden; jb6; FormerLib
This article is posted in the wrong discussion group.

Should be posted here instead.

Debunking all distorted facts, semitruths, malignant omissions and deliberate falsifications would take three times more space than the original article.

This article is total Bravo Sierra.

27 posted on 12/03/2005 8:11:18 PM PST by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A. Pole

I probably wasn't clear enough in speech on that, as it was not an accusation. When two sides in one country are willing to fight as long as it takes for one side to prevail, genocide may be the result. Not many civil wars are as restricted to only men fighting, as happened in the USA. And civil wars involving much about religion/ethnicity are often worse.

Partitioning is one attempt to separate two ethnic sides in such conflicts. India and Pakistan are one example. Arrangements like that don't stop the violence completely, but there is hope for eventual peace and less chance of one culture completely extinguishing the other.


28 posted on 12/03/2005 8:12:07 PM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: F-117A
>>>>>>Magas is a Croatian journalist. In other wors, another Croat continuing the genocide of the Serbian people.<<<<<

When one reads Croatian papers he or she can learn amazing things: That famous Italians, such as Marco Polo were in fact Croatians, that Croatians are in fact Iranians, that medeval Ragusa (Dubrovnik) and her brilliant culture are in fact Croatian although Ragusa became part of Croatia for the first time in 1939, that Croatians discovered America before Columbus and many other amazing things, more fit fit for supermarket tabloids then respoectable newspapers.

The sad truth is that all this garbage is written by people who call themselves journalists and are card carrying members of the media.

This gem by Branka Magas fits the mould perfectly. When personal dishonesty meets disregard for journalist ethic, the result is an article like this.

29 posted on 12/03/2005 8:31:25 PM PST by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Kosova and Voivodina were actually established before Serbia: Kosova in January 1944, Voivodina in March 1944, Serbia only in November 1944.

What a load of crap. Serbia was established in 1878 at the 'Congress of Berlin'.

30 posted on 12/04/2005 5:29:28 AM PST by Grizzly Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DTA

the idea that Marco Polo was Croatian is based on a misunderstanding that arose in Korcula (he was captured in the battle that took place near Korcula between Venice and Genoa)...it is played up by the local tourism industry but seems like harmless nonsense. There are some scholars who think that the Croatian name may be originally Iranian (there was an ancient Iranian tribe with a similar name)--possibly an Iranian elite conquered a group of Slavs and left them their name, the way that the Bulgars did to a different group of Slavs (the original Bulgars were not Slavic, but not Iranian either).

The people of medieval Ragusa were Catholics and spoke Croatian or a local Romance language which later died out (known as Dalmatian). A lot of people in the Balkans didn't have a firm ethnic identity until the 19th or 20th century--would have spoken a particular language and had a particular religion, but if illiterate peasants may not have affiliated themselves with one of the modern names.


31 posted on 12/04/2005 5:36:08 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

For just as Kosova had voluntarily joined the union with Serbia, so too it retained the right to leave it by its own will.

Again, some incredible BS. The AVNOJ is clear on that, the constituent nations had the right to leave and join the federation, as Yugoslavia was a federation of it's peoples. The Albanians were not constituent, nor a slavic nation and they did not had the right to self-determination according to the constitution. http://www.arhiv.sv.gov.yu/a100008g.htm

32 posted on 12/04/2005 5:40:40 AM PST by Grizzly Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: eclectic
"Kosova" is how 93 percent of its inhabitants call "Kosovo" — or, rather, "the Kosovo", since it is the definite form of the word. Many Balkan experts also use it throughout the world to signal their knowledge of the subject, which has led them to support independence.

When Persia decided to call iself "Iran" or Ceylon "Sri Lanka", everyone followed suit. It didn't work with Finland (—"Suomi") or Georgia (— "Sakartvelo"), but a change of name may take place when the independence of Kosovo is recognized at long last.

Yet the word is of Slavic origin. Although the Serbs only started invading Kosovo at the end of the 12th century, Slavic invaders had become a majority there by the turn of the 10th — it was part of the Bulgarian kingdom of Macedonia. Yet it did have an Albanian, or proto-Albanian name in ancient times: "Dardania" — from a word which gave the Albanian "dardha", "the pear" or "the pear-tree".

33 posted on 12/04/2005 10:03:32 AM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

I was wondering.....none too bright either, it seems. Or have they finally destroyed all of the churches there?


34 posted on 12/04/2005 10:05:43 AM PST by MarMema (http://www.curenikolette.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GSlob; dennisw
When different communities do not want to live together, separation is the only civilized way to handle the situation

So I guess you will suggest Michigan for the muslims who don't want to be part of our society? Or which state do you think we should let them have?

35 posted on 12/04/2005 10:14:07 AM PST by MarMema (http://www.curenikolette.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hunden; MarMema

Spare us the bullshit. Fact is you want another Muslim nation in Europe. You are useful idiot for the Jihad


36 posted on 12/04/2005 11:20:58 AM PST by dennisw (You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you - Bob Dylan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
This post was prompted by the discovery here of a couple of propagandists who are trying to abuse the crucial fight against Islamofascism to push a foreign agenda of anti-Muslim Fascism in the Balkans, as a reminder of the fact that public debates need not ignore the basic facts of the issues, especially as they relate to the principles of democracy and the rule of law.

LOL! If you want to discover another poster with an agenda, look in the mirror!

37 posted on 12/04/2005 11:27:37 AM PST by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paudio; familyop; GSlob
It should have been clear enough that the purpose of this article is, no more and no less, to describe the current legal status of Kosovo, which is seldom mentioned in the debates about independence though the Yugoslav Constitution of 1974 on which it rests was the basis for international recognition of the former federated Republics.

If it had chosen to go further, it could also have explained why Kosovo was never legally part of contemporary Serbia until 1945: the treaties of London (1913) and Istanbul (1914), by which the Ottoman empire ceded it to the Kingdom of Serbia, were never ratified.

The legal status of Kosovo in the Kingdom of the Serbs, the Croats and Slovenes (SHS), called "Yugoslavia" after 1929, is even also in question. The Treaty of Sèvres, signed by the SHS Kingdom with Turkey in 1920, became null and void, and the Treaty of Ankara of 1925, which involved the mutual recognition of the states, made no specific mention of the territories taken from the one the other in 1912-13. You can only say that the recognition of such annexations took place, and only implicitely, when Ankara opened a consulate in Skopje.

Also, the second Yugoslavia was expressedly built on a rejection of the institutional principles of the first, which had failed because it was a centralized state according to the Serbian political tradition. However credible under Communist rule, the Yugoslav idea was conceived of in Croatia in the 19th century as a voluntary union of equal partners, not as an empire where some conquered peoples were subject to recurring policies of extermination.

You wrote: for this reason, Serbians consider Kosovo the cradle of their civilization. But you gave no reason at all, and there is none: Raska, as I have said, was what is now known as the Sandjak, not Kosovo; the claim by some Serbs that their medieval state was born in Kosovo is nothing but a lie. The Serbs started invading Kosovo, at the expense of the Byzantine empire, after the Nemanjid state had become independent, and the conquest actually took place in the13th century. Is the above slogan supposed to mean that, by their own admission, they had no civilization before?

And then, in 1459, every Serbian state disappeared into the Ottoman empire. The Serbs may be the only nation in the world who have managed to convince otherwise sensible people that a 250-year possession by successive medieval states half a millenium and half a century ago is a valid basis for a contemporary territorial claim.

The truth of the matter is that the Serbian state invaded Kosovo in 1912 — and massacred 20,000 of its Albanian natives — after it had liberated itself from the Ottomans, because it wanted an access to the sea through the Drin valley (also, because it would help them hold Macedonia). All the Serbian myths now peddled about Kosovo were then fairly recent, as they are re-writings of history from the 19th century, including the claim that the first Battle of Kosovo was of decisive strategic importance.

Among these, the claim that Albanians "immigrated" into Kosovo is a formal absurdity. Since the Albanians are the descendants of the Illyrians, the first known inhabitants of the former Yugoslavia (except Slovenia), the Kosovar Albanians could not, logically, "immigrate" into Kosovo, all the less so when the whole region was part of a single state. They became an absolute majority again in their own country in the mid-19th century, when enough Serbs had left for New Serbia, the principality in the north which offered better prospects as it was de facto independent from the Ottoman empire.

The only instance of a massive influx of Albanians into Kosovo which actually took place is the one the Serbs won't tell you about: when 100,000 Albanians who lived in the region of Nis, Pirot, Leskovac and Vranje were ethnically cleansed by the Serbs in the winter of 1878. All the other stories about Albanians "immigrating" into Kosovo are Serb fabrications.

38 posted on 12/04/2005 12:34:30 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
If it had chosen to go further, it could also have explained why Kosovo was never legally part of contemporary Serbia until 1945: the treaties of London (1913) and Istanbul (1914), by which the Ottoman empire ceded it to the Kingdom of Serbia, were never ratified.

And when and by whom was the occupation of Serbia and Kosovo&Metohija ratified? See, no one ratified the illegal occupation of Serbia, including Kosovo&Metohija in the first place, so why should anyone need anybody ratifing something when Serbia including Kosovo&Metohija was liberated. Serbs liberated themselves and got rid of those who occupied them for centuries. And you think they should have asked the Ottomans for permission and needed some sort of ratification for doing so.

39 posted on 12/04/2005 1:13:44 PM PST by Grizzly Adams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
The Bosnians are only getting their own Muslim nation in the lies of Serb propaganda. And Kosovo would now be part of Albania if Serbian and Montenegrin imperialists had not annexed half the territories where the Albanians were a compact majority in 1913.

Peace will only come to the region when the territorial claims of Serbia on foreign lands are at long last rejected. Only then will Serbia become a democracy, and address the real problems of the Serbs.

40 posted on 12/04/2005 1:25:14 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DTA
The Inhabitants of Dubrovnik have regarded themselves as Croats since the 19th century. Before 1808, Dubrovnik was an independent republic which sometimes paid a tribute to Venice or the Ottomans.

And of course, to say that Dubrovnik was originally "Serb" on account of the fact that it was founded on a territory invaded by the Serbs in the 7th century is only slightly less true than to say that the Ustashe were Serbs. For almost all of the Ustashe were Herzegovinian Croats and as such, the descendants of Serbs converted to Catholicism by the Franciscans in the early 15th century.

41 posted on 12/04/2005 1:48:43 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Grizzly Adams

Branka Magas bases her reasoning on the 1974 Constitution, which recognized the "equal rights" of the Constituent peoples" and "nationalities".


42 posted on 12/04/2005 1:53:10 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Hunden; dennisw

No, you're thinking of the nation of cowards that is France where peace will only come when the territorial claims of the descendents of the Franks, meaning the cheese-eating surrender monkeys, are at long last rejected by their new Muhammedan occupants.

Peace in Kosovo, on the other hand, will only come alongside the Serb army, who will also restore justice.


43 posted on 12/04/2005 1:53:53 PM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; mark502inf; heybeavis; Hoplite; GSlob; ninenot; sittnick; steve50; Hegemony Cricket; ...
So you are only here to peddle the following:

— The Muslims in the former Yugoslavia are invaders, not native people whose ancestors converted to a mild form of islam.

— None of them is anything but an Islamo-fascist so that every violence meted out to them is legitimate self-defence

— Those who defend their rights as innocent human beings are therefore accomplices of Islamo-fascism or in the pay of liberal do-gooders.

— There is no objective truth: every statement by the member of a tribe is due to the fact that he or she is a member of that tribe. What my tribe says is true because it is my tribe, and therefore…

— Every territorial claims by the Serbs is legitimate, including countries which were never part of a Serbian state or where the Serbs are only a tiny minority.

Beyond those statements, every one of which is the opposite of the truth, you have nothing to say.

Why repeat yourself?

The political principle at the root of Western, and particularly American, civilization is that every human being naturally has rights to the extent that he does not violate the rights of others.

You are not part of that civilization: the principle which drives you here, that you may say anything you wish and do everything you want to others if you claim to have the right religion, that is if you belong to the right tribe, is the Oriental principle at the core of Islamo-fascistm.

That is why you cannot be an ally, but are actually a hindrance in the struggle against it, and your claim to defend "Christianity" is an embarrassment to all real Christians

44 posted on 12/04/2005 2:01:43 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
Beyond those statements, every one of which is the opposite of the truth, you have nothing to say.

Considering that you made each one of them up, monkey-boy, what makes you think you can make me claim any of them since they are not what I said?

Shouldn't you be surrendering to someone by now?

45 posted on 12/04/2005 2:10:54 PM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

Comment #46 Removed by Moderator

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: FormerLib

If you didn't agree with some those statements, all you had to to is indicate which ones.


48 posted on 12/04/2005 5:16:55 PM PST by Hunden (Email)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Hunden

Actually, I didn't have to do anything of the sort. Like seeing dog crap in the road, there's just no reason to get involved with it.

All of the statements were nonsense and the suggestion that any of our anti-Islamofascist posters said anything of the sort is pure dog crap.

Surrender now, monkey, and fulfill your destiny!


49 posted on 12/04/2005 5:48:55 PM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Hunden
— The Muslims in the former Yugoslavia are invaders, not native people whose ancestors converted to a mild form of islam.

Actually, their ancestors were native people that converted to a very brutal form of Islam! Unless, of course, you consider having your children ripped from you and sent to Turkey as "mild"!

You really should educate yourself about the brutality of Islam in the Balkans.

50 posted on 12/04/2005 7:05:21 PM PST by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-85 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson