I wanted to write a post comparing Kosovo and South Ossetia but Dan Drezner has already written it. [...]…

The second is simple pragmatism. Looting and raping over the border is fine. Looting and raping in your own country, less so. And I wouldn’t say Montenegro is “welcoming” of non-Serb minorities, exactly. “Tolerant”, on a good day.

Doug M.

Also, in a previous post about Montenegro’s secession, one of you talked about how some Montenegrins eagerly participated in Serb atrocities in Bosnia even as Montenegro itself is welcoming of non-Serb minorities and sought separation from Serbia.

Doug M.

Stolen? You came from Russia (pretty late too) and claim it as your land!!! You got some nerve.

One cannot expect guerrilla fighters to go toe to toe against tanks. They had no choice but to disperse and use hit and run. I have to say that as NATO was bombing, tank warfare was being taught to the KLA, so things would have gotten heated. There is a video of a Serbian tank getting blown up in Presevo 2001 trouble.

Let’s face it: Serbia with a third world economy aand barely 7 million (very old) people, cannot keep 2 million people colonized. They still have not paid their regular soldiers (the paras got paid by looting and raping)

Will Kosovo unite with Albania in 20-30 or 50 years? Who knows. Montengro might join Serbia again too, and once the status is solved it’s up to the two countires. There is safety in numbers, 2-3 million vs. 7-8 million will make a huge difference in Serbia’s decision to attack or not to attack.

I really do not have any evidence about Kossovo uniting with Albania, one way or another. However, in negotiations there is a minimal and a maximum set of demands and if you cannot get the maximum, you get the most of what you can get. You do not have to go far in the Balkans. An example in the Balkans is the VMORO/VMRO/IMRO, a Bulgarian organization in the start of last century who in the words of their founders had the maximalist goal of grabbing Macedonia for Bulgaria and as a minimum goal getting an independent Macedonia which could unite with Bulgaria at a later stage. They did not openly say it would have to be cleansed of non-Bulgarians; they just practiced it(and failed, but this was another topic)

The point is that in international politics there is speakable and unspeakable. Kossovo uniting with Albania would be hard for the West to swallow;
Maybe it is not in the mind of Kossovo Albanians; but if it is, do you really expect them to say it openly?
If I were a Kossovo Albanian and I did favor reunion, I’d say take the safe road, wait 50 years, make sure things subside and then claim right of self-determination and so on. I’m not saying this is what Kossovo Albanians want. I just don’t read minds, only actions. Wim’s concerns are quite justified.

Finally about the undecided countries:
Law is what the weak needs against the strong.
So many of the weaker countries are understandably reluctant to recognize Kossovo: if they side with breaking the law, how will they invoke the law if they are the victims?
The counterargument is that Kossovo is a unique case:
no one else in the planet has suffered that much. One can argue that S.Ossetians being bombed and killed was all they needed, but maybe I’ll skip this discussion and suggest another topic: There are basically two different concepts of law: The french concept is a detailed list of what you may not do(such as “you may not use swearwords a,b,c on this blog”-I know it is not that detailed, but it helps for contrast). The anglo-saxon concept is essentially “You must not do anything bad”.
This has the advantage of flexibility, as new forms of “bad” behavior arise, but it gives enormous power to the judge or jury to define what bad is. The relevance here is that the reasons given for Kossovo’s independence are
based on the anglo-saxon model, without even a valid jury(meaning UN-approved) I doubt any country would agree to subject itself to such an interpretation of international law.