And what about the Albanias in Macedonia?
Independent also?

He, let’s give the Kurds a real state then. And the Armenias in Turkey, the Catalans in Spain….

Good question (except on Italy I think their hesitant position is not difficult to explain).

The Trepca mine resources arent all that considerable by the way. The type of resrouces to be mined is second grade and much of the good stuff was blasted off in a foolhardy manner. I dont think (on a capitalist level) that it matters who controls Trepca as long as its run well.
That does bring up another issue though regarding Kosovo and Serbian investment - the Serbian mobile phone operator which was cut off by UNMIK. Apart from pandering to Kosovo Albanian populist sentiment I dont see the point.

Investment is investment and the local population has to understand (it is after all the type of values the West wants imposed upon all countries) that money and business doesnt have a colour.

You might want to use the country word Serbian rather than the ethnic group Serb by the way although domestic nationalists prefer to describe tribe (erhem, I mean ethnic group) rather than ‘citizen Serbian’.

As for the PR - watch CNN and tell me what you think of the latest Serbia advert. If you are only referring to politics then I dont think any amount of lobbying will change the minds of the US, France or Britian.

This is probably true – identity politics being what they are. The Kossovars have good reason to see themselves as an American protectorate, even though it’s the EU that picks up most of the bills. They don’t trust Europe, both because Europe was more reluctant to bomb Serbia than was the US, and for historical reasons going back to 1913.

What’s in it for the US and what’s in it for Europe? Spain is worried about the precedent for its own national unity, presumably, but one can’ help wondering what factors are behind the US, British, French, Italian and German positions. Any ideas anybody ?

Just a thought: The Trepca mineral resources are considerable, even though the mine is completely run-down. Partition might make it more difficult to get them running again – and that’s a pretty big contract to leave partly under Serb control.

BTW - Is there any nation in Europe worse at PR than the Serbs ?

This remark gets my back up. The Iraq invasion was putatively based on a violated UN resolution. The reason why the UN’s imprimateur was required for regime change was that the rationale for the invasion was a prior UN resolution that Iraq’s government was alleged to have broken. If it happens that EU functionaries really do have an irrational admiration for the UN, then please cite another example. In the case of the Iraq Invasion, EU objections to its illegality were entirely accurate and meritorious.

UN SCR 1441 was advanced by the Bush Administration as its justification for the invasion. Yet it was entirely clear that, while 1441 had been passed unanimously, none of the UNSC members besides the US and UK regarded the measure as having authorized war. Since these were the parties that voted on 1441 in the first place, it is absurd to pretend that 1441 authorized an invasion. Clearly, such an argument is sophism at best, and deadly silliness at worst.

I read today that Nicholas Burns said that something will be put on the table at the UN in February or March Doug. Dont know Burns has a pretty hard line in support of Kosovo independence - if he’s finally conceding pushing dates back then…

In such a case, counter-secession would have to be conducted by actors that support independence, such as the US and Britain. Would the US be willing to take such a step knowing that this would really antagonise Moscow? I don’t think so. Therefore, if a counter declaration of independence was made, I predict a stalemate. This would eventually evolve into an agreed double partition that everyone could live with.

In any case, the complacent view that seems to exist in the minds of many about the recent Russian statement is outstanding. As is the idea that EU member states can be ignored. In case it hadn’t been noticed, the idea of a common EU position on Kosovo seems to be slowly dissolving. Just this week, Italy and Greece have also indicated their concern about an imposed solution. The idea that US support is the only support that matters is sheer hubris. Kosovo is not in N. America. It is in Europe and its whole future is tied up with the EU. A fundamental division among EU members could be disastrous for the province. Spain, Italy and Greece (and soon Romania) may not seem important at first glance, but they nevertheless command an important say in EU decision making.

By the way, Mijawara, you never did give me a satisfactory answer as to why you believe the partition of Serbia along essentially ethnic lines is acceptable (remembering that Serbia remains a far more multiethnic state even without Kosovo than Kosovo will ever be) and yet the thought of the division of Kosovo seems to cause your head to implode!

Ahtisaari will have /something/ on the table by early February, and it will include de facto independence.

BTW, the whole recognition thing is a bit premature. Kosovo isn’t going to have full sovereignty for a while yet, and a UN seat is many years away under any scenario. Right now they’re looking at (1) the UN moving out, to be replaced by the EU; (2) everyone agreeing that there’s no constitutional connection to Serbia; (3) a foreign ministry, even if nobody calls it that; and (4) international approval of a self-defense force. All of this via a suitably weasel-worded UN resolution that will replace 1244. They will /not/ get independence, full sovereignty, ambassadors, or any of that good stuff.

The pinching point is “no constitutional connection to Serbia”. The Serbs will hate that a lot. Will the Russians veto? I have my doubts, especially if the resolution doesn’t include the “I-word”.

(Of course, if a state has no constitutional connection to any other state, and is largely self-governing, what then is it? Ahem. But Kosovo is strange and unique.)

Doug M.

Thanks for the link.

Jim, above, is also right to observe that in EU matters (and probably UN, too, though I am less well versed), fudge and delay are always good bets.

I’m interested in hearing from some of the pro-partition voices out there. In the likeliest scenario, where UNOSEK recommends conditional independence shepherded by the EU, counter-secession is one route for K-Serbs north of the Ibar might take. If a UNSC resolution permits states to recognize Kosovo’s independence, and KFOR is there under a UN mandate, how does KFOR respond to the unilateral secession of part of a state that most of its members will recognize?