I found the Malcolm article on the differences between South Ossetia and Kosovo pretty strong. Especially interesting were the legal arguments why Kosovo had the same legal right to being a country as Croatia, Slovenia etc. Maybe you can discuss such arguments in your next Kosovo post , for in this discussion it passed unnoticed (well, the cham thing, my fault I know ).

Thanks for clearing up Noel’s remark on pms and judges; we are talking about becoming citizens first, then pms and judges.
I am not sure Greece’s or Italy’s naturalization or citizenship procedures are any hasher than any other country, for example the US. Some of the questions applicants are asked there may seem downright degrading, but at the same time every country
has a right to choose who to accept as a citizen. In Switzerland for example, the choice is up to the local community; if they like you, they may grant you citizenship very soon. If not, never. And there are no quotas either: You do not HAVE to give citizenship to such and such a number of applicants or such a percent.
In the case of Greece or Italy I assume that especially since the EU takes no responsibility for security issues, one cannot seriously question the national procedures. After all, the example of a multiethnic state like Yugoslavia is still fresh. My point is that every country has its own procedures regarding immigration and they should be completely respected. And yes, such a path will probably be slow and tortuous. Why, for instance, may the average citizen ask, should one give citizenship to fanatical islamic immigrants(I do not mean Albanians, who are pretty secular, but immigration procedures probably cannot openly discriminate between Albanians, Chinese or Afhgans)? So that Rome or Athens can have a share of the bombings of Madrid, Paris or London?

You said that “Greece and Italy never had any sizable Albanian citizen community”. I said that was wrong; Italy had the Arberesh, while Greece had the Arvanites. Then you said, well, do they consider themselves Albanians today? Which is moving the goal posts, but okay — the Arberesh certainly do, the Arvanites don’t. The Arvanites were Albanians-in-Greece back in the 19th century, but by WWII most of them considered themselves Greeks who happen to have Albanian ancestry. A few still speak Albanian at home, but it’s more of a curiosity than an ethnic identity — sort of like those Americans who like to say they’re one-sixteenth Cherokee.

But the point is, yes, both Italy and Greece had historical Albanian minorities. Greece very gradually assimilated the Arvanites, while the Arberesh remain distinct, but that’s neither here nor there.

Albanian-Greek ministers and such: actually, one interesting aspect of Greece’s immigration system is that they’re resistant to granting Greek citizenship to non-ethnic Greeks — and they’re /very/ resistant to granting it to “undesirable” nationalities such as Albanians. In fact, it’s almost impossible for an Albanian to get permanent residence in Greece. The system is designed to keep legal immigrants on an endless treadmill of applying to renew their status. So, although there are tens of thousands of Albanians who have been in Greece since the early 1990s, and tens of thousands more who were born and grew up there, speak perfect Greek, and consider Athens (or wherever) to be their home — none of these people can become Greek citizens, never mind ministers or judges.

(This is in contrast to Italy. Italy does allow a path to naturalization, though it’s slow and tortuous; some thousands of Albanians from Albania have taken Italian citizenship since 2001.)

“I have not seen any evidence for this” — I said, and I quote, “google Arbereshe and Arvanites”. I’m sorry, is googling too hard? This internet stuff is very complicated sometimes, I know. Here’s a Pro-tip — type /inside/ the little window.

I have a one-year-old here at home, Liam. She gets all my spoon-feeding: there isn’t any left over.

Doug M.

Cubans and Puerto Ricans…. Yes, we are talking about citizens. Anyone else is in too sensitive a situation to even think about complaining. What I wrote is just the general sentiment towards these groups. I could add “Arabs” after 9/11. Anyway, once you are a citizen in any western country, the US, Italy, Greece, you are eligible for anything and nobody looks at ethnic background. So of course nobody can object to a judge Sotomayor. But at the same time one cannot be too happy about the Puertorican gangs.

Which brings us to the second, and most important point: According to Doug,
“The Arberesh most definitely consider themselves Albanian, albeit of a special and distinct kind”. I have not seen any evidence for this and Doug does not provide any, but let’s take his word. I take this to mean that the Arvanites do NOT. Hence, unless you believe you have been self-appointed as their representative and really know best what they are, they may not be considered as an Albanian minority. Because they do not want to.
So the question:
“Any potential Albanian-Greek prime ministerial candidates? Albanian-surnamed generals and high court judges?”
makes no sense, since Arvanites do not consider themselves Albanian-Greek. Plus, fyi, “Arvanitis” in Greece appears to be a common name and not excluded in anyway from any public office, as in any western country. But these people do not consider themselves Albanian, according to Doug, so what is your point? Unless you mean whether non-citizen immigrants are eligible to be PMs, supreme judges or army generals. I assume the answer would be no in any country

But, yeah, Cuban-Americans are wealthy, on average. And very successful politically.

Liam, your post is more than a little weird. You’re arguing that countries limit immigration from “problem” groups and treat them badly, and the U.S. treatment of Spanish Caribbean immigrants is an example of that.

But consider. Britain unceremoniously tossed out the Caribbean and imposed restrictions on the ability of Britain citizens to migrate to Britain. Congress could have tossed Puerto Rico out but it did not. So your example kinda proves the opposite of what you think it does.

(FYI, the U.S. did in fact toss the Philippines out of the union to limit immigration, yet Filipinos are very successful in the U.S. and viewed as such.)

Your Cuban example, same problem. Cubans had /no/ migration limits imposed on them from independence in 1902 until 1994. (In point of fact, there were no restrictions before then either. That’s why Martí could live in the States and publish in a New York magazine called “Revista Ilustrada.”)

After August 19, 1994, Cubans received a quota of 27,845 emigrants per year … but any Cuban who managed to make it to American soil still received the automatic right of abode. A weird system, but not what you’d expect from a country that viewed Cuban immigrants as a problem.

So your statement about how Americans impose immigration limits on them problematic Caribbean-type Spanish-speakers just doesn’t make any sense, even on its own terms.

Plus, as Doug points out, this is a country with senators named Salazar, generals named Sanchez, and supreme court justices named Sotomayor. It probably won’t be very long before there is a Latino president; the mayors of Los Angeles and San Antonio are plausible future candidates, as is the current interior secretary. And as we saw in 2008, it’s quite possible that few today have heard of the person who will elected President of the United States in 2016 or 2020.

Any potential Albanian-Greek prime ministerial candidates? Albanian-surnamed generals and high court judges?

What was your point again? Since your analogy didn’t make sense, the argument disappeared.

Puerto Ricans… umm, dude. Puerto Ricans are US citizens. There are half a dozen of them in Congress, tens of thousands in the US military, and one’s about to be seated on the Supreme court.

Cuban-Americans are one of the most prosperous immigrant groups; US born CAs have a higher average income than native Americans. They tend to be socially conservative and not a particular crime risk. In South Florida a CA is more likely to be a cop than a criminal.

No offense, but your image of US immigration seems to be drawn from bad movies and Grand Theft Auto.

Doug M.

I’m also not sure what you mean by “general attitude”. I assume any country has the right to control its borders and to select which people to let it. The groups targeted are the groups perceived to create problems, for instance Puerto Ricans or Cubans rather than Chinese immigrants in the US. Same idea for Italy or perhaps Greece.
I can recall my own experiences in France where even EU citizens with a contract for working there and who are entitled to work, need a Carte de Sejour(work permit), which although the State cannot deny, one first needs to get health insurance. And to get health insurance, you need, you guessed it, a work permit…
But the bottom line is that especially for non-EU citizens, if things are so bad, why don’t you go somewhere else? As for Greece, my understanding is that the state does not treat its own citizens any better(other than EU requirements), so I am not sure there is a basis for complaining there either.

In Italy, large numbers of Albanians have obtained legal residence since 1991, and thousands have taken Italian citizenship. I’m going to oversimplify a complex situation and say that in Italy, there are spasms of aggression and hostility against illegal immigrants, but the general background is of tolerance and relative welcome for Albanians. (Note that when Italian politicians talk about illegals, they’re generally talking about black Africans, north Africans, and — bizarrely enough — Roma.) Keep in mind that Albania was a former Italian client state and later colony. The relationship goes back for generations; the history is complex but not always adversarial. Much of Albania’s first generation of intellectual and political leaders were schooled by Italians.

Greek officialdom: umm. Spend half an hour at a border checkpoint between Albania or Macedonia and Greece, and you’ll have plenty of opportunity to see how Greek officials treat Albanians. Or spend half an hour at a cafe in Tirana talking to Albanians who’ve worked in Greece. The general attitude is that Albanians are a necessary evil, to be hassled and occasionally squeezed for bribes but not actively persecuted.

Doug M.

As for the rest of Charly’s comment, by the argument that a 10 fold increase in 60 years
is believable, why has not the population of the entire country risen by that amount and only a small segment had such an explosive growth. Also, it is hard to claim you know what was in the mind of a partisan military commander when he attacks a legitimate military target. And as for some being innocent, the most modern example in the region is Yugoslavia. How many people lost their lives and home through no fault of their own?

Greece vs. Serbia: that’s not a good comparison at all. One, there’s already a huge Albanian community in Greece, hundreds of thousands of immgrants both legal and illegal. The Albanian community in Serbia, outside the Presevo Valley, is tiny. Two, anti-Albanian feeling runs much deeper and stronger in Serbia than in Greece. Greeks are often biased against Albanians and Greek officialdom tends to treat them badly. But there is a general acceptance that Albanians are needed, if only to do the dirty jobs that Greeks don’t want, and that they are in some sense part of society. This is nothing like the situation in Serbia, where hating Albanians has become part of Serb nationalism. Very few Serbs under thirty have ever met an actual Albanian, and most have only vague and ridiculous notions of what Albanians are like.

I note in passing that there are small Albanian communities in Slovenia and Croatia — partly from Yugoslav times, partly more recent immigrants, legal and otherwise. That’s because anti-Albanian prejudice in those countries, while a real problem, is very mild compared to Serbia.

Finally, note that it’s impossible for Kosovar Albanians to emigrate to Serbia legally, since Serbia doesn’t recognize Kosovar passports.

Doug M.