So, what do you think? Did Serbia ask the wrong question? And, if so, did it do so deliberately? Thanks for watching. If you found this video useful, please do consider giving it a 'Like' and sharing it with others who might be interested. And do all consider subscribing. It helps the channel to grow! Much appreciated!
Serbia tried to show themselves as the right guy in front of the other UN member states but for them international law was not a thing when they massacred people in Kosovo & Bosnia. I always said it if there was no Serbia in the Balkans the region would be peaceful.
Your informative insights are fascinating; while this comment is simplistic; on one hand the USA was quick to recognize the sovereignty of Kosovo (an erstwhile province of Serbia) yet the USA and "the West" completely avoided any support for Catalonia (an erstwhile province of Spain) or Scotland
Well by making Kosovo a part of Serbia again terrifies me a Kosovar because it makes me think how the military of Serbia tried to kill my family in 1998 and how they will not hesitate to do so to take the land which my Grandfather bought 50 years ago because they're excuse ,firstly serbs thought kosovars shouldnt have had the right to by land since they considered us slaves,so the land we live today has been obtained "ilegaly" so the have the right to take it by force if they have to.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it! So glad you like the channel. Do let me know if there are any topics that you would like to see me cover. I am always keen to hear ideas.
I really like how there were given objective facts in this video so that the viewer can decide and think for themselves about this topic. And I agree with other comments, this is a very underrated channel. Thank you.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I do believe it is important to try to present the facts clearly and let people decide. But I will often hint at where I might stand on things. :-)
The problem with "anyone who wants independence can get it" as an international legal norm is that it's just a liberal-sounding way of enforcing the principle of "might makes right." When Albanians wanted independence from Serbia, they had NATO on their side, so they got it (de facto). When Albanians also wanted independence from (Northern) Macedonia and in the Preševo Valley east of Kosovo, NATO didn't intervene in their favor - well, they sort of did in Macedonia - so they didn't get it. When Serbs in northern Kosovo wanted to remain in Serbia, nobody but Serbia recognized their right to do it. When Serbs wanted independence from Bosnia, NATO intervened... to prevent them from getting it. When Serbs wanted independence from Croatia, the Croatian state fought, and eventually won, a war to prevent them from getting it (complete with a 2-year long UN administration in northeastern Croatia after the war). When Croats wanted independence from Bosnia, the United States helped broker an agreement between them and the government to keep the non-Serb part of Bosnia from breaking up. So what happens when the countries that recognized Kosovo aren't there to keep all the other borders in the former Yugoslavia in place? Lest you think I'm picking on the West: Russia believes in self-determination for Crimea, but not for Chechnya. India believes in self-determination for Bangladesh, but not for Kashmir. Pakistan believes in self-determination for Kashmir (as long as independence is not an option and it has to choose between India and Pakistan), but not for Balochistan. Israel believes in self-determination for the Jews in the former Mandatory Palestine, but not for the Arabs. Iran believes in self-determination for those Arabs, but not for the ones in Khuzestan. Turkey believes in self-determination for Northern Cyprus, but not for southeastern Anatolia. Catalan independence supporters believe in self-determination for Catalonia, but not for those parts of Catalonia that want to remain Spanish. There, I think I've pissed off enough people.
bruh in macedonia nato supported macedonia and albania still won it was settled another way albanian civillians gained rights + albania is the second language of north macedonia so who is winner think it again about kosovo yeah i am not gonna talk about that everything is clear albania won the war it was albanian land before serbia only can take kosovo by corruption (1943) and civil war (1300) Now they cry cuz they lost it by war
Crimea and Chechnya are two very different issues. Crimea was part of the USR (Ukranian Soviet Republic) after Hruzchev gifted it in 1954. Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics, they became independent states after 1991, Ukraine was one of them. Chechen republic was always part of the Russian lands, during the Soviet Union, Chechnya was part of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic.
@@vitalygolubchik1535 That's a distinction without a difference. Either Chechens and Crimean Russians both have this supposed right to self-determination, or neither do. Trying to restrict it based on an irelevant piece of administrative trivia is a perfect example of the hypocrisy I'm talking about.
@@Stamboul You got no idea what you are talking about.The right for self-determination can only be exercised through a public vote by the people living on a territory in question. People in Crimea , not the parliament, voted to join Russia. When did the Russian government blocked a referendum (public vote) for independence of Chechnya? I would like to know
International law is so arbitrary it is hard to take it seriously at all. Basically facts on the ground are what matter. Edit: making legal decisions based on political opinions also makes the court look weak and compromises it’s integrity.
Exactly. The justices would have understood the bond they were in: produce an opinion that would have negated the reality in the ground and led to major tensions or create a precedent for unilateral secession. Going for a ruling that says anyone can say a territory is independent, but it is up to states to recognise it, was a fancy but if footwork. Unsatisfying in many ways, but it gave both sides what they needed, even if they didn’t get what they wanted.
I remember the news in Serbia at the time. The question that was formulated was about whether the "recognition" was legal, not if "the declaration" was legal. However our then prime minister had urgent consultations with Germany, France, and the UK which helped them formulate a "better" wording of the question. At the time Serbia was applying for EU accession and the media implied that had we not changed our question to the court we would be left behind Croatia at the periphery of the EU. Serbian politicians sold us out in this regard. Choosing EU membership and hoping to reverse recognition via foreign policy campaigns. We lost our only opportunity to voice our legitimate complaint about this situation.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. It is an incredibly difficult case, for all sorts of reasons. And thanks for the subscription. Do let me know if there are other topics you’d be interested in seeing. I do make a note of all suggestions and try to follow up on them. In the meantime, I hope all is well over there. Best regards from London!
To be fair, it felt the pressure from both sides. And international law is a slightly different beast to domestic law. There were a lot of very serious weaknesses to the decision, especially the third part. But on the main point it struck a delicate balance.
Today Putin met Guterres and used this ICJ ruling to bring some validity to the self-declared independence of the 2 Donbas regions. Thanks for your clear explanation, as it helps understand the geopolitical tensions of 2022.
It seems that due to this precedent, Putin's reasoning is correct. However, the fact that the separatist movements in the Donbas were funded and organised by the Russian government, I don't think that this is a valid claim. While NATO supported Kosovo, it did such after Kosovo had made its intention to leave Serbia clear. It is still a problematic issue though, and I am not sure how I feel about it.
@@GreggOld You really think the KLA wasn't funded and trained by outside forces. Knowing what we know now about the CIA and their meddling. Camp Bondsteel was planned years, maybe decades in advance.
ICY skipped to answer the question by saying that declaration of independence did not violate the international law since it actually has nothing to do with it, it was almost saying its just a paper. Btw, really good analysis by Mr. James, one of the best I ve heard on this issue 👍🏻
Thank you very much indeed! Yes, people don't often realise what the ICJ did and didn't say. I encounter this a lot. Essentially, it said that it could declare independence but that it is then up to states to decide whether that really made it a state.
As someone from Serbia, this is very frustrating to me. The negotiations in 2007 were pretty much a fait accompli by most of the Western countries, presented as two sides with diametrically different stances, so they decided to support one of the two, with the Ahtisaari's plan of supervised independence that didn't satisfy anyone and only had served as a temporary remedy to ease Serbia's pain. Serbia had had ideas of a two-systems-one-state, a plan implemented by China and Hong Kong, but the Western powers hasten the whole thing. I personally support Kosovo's independence, but this decision by the court only puts us further into the limbo in which we are stuck. After the recognition of Kosovo by most of the Western countries, we can't go back, but we can't go forward either because many other countries don't recognize Kosovo. We are both stuck, and this will probably be the case in decades to come. I would like it if the court decision gave us a direction in which we could find any political frame in which Serbia and Kosovo could have functional relations, instead of being stuck for decades. We see the practical implications of this in relations between Serbia and Russia, in which Serbia is in no position to implement sanctions on Russia, a country whose support is crucial to Serbia in the UN Security Council.
Thank you so much. I completely agree. In fact, I fully understand your position. I actually wrote about the status negotiations and was extremely critical about the way they were handled. Ahtisaari behaved atrociously. (I actually interviewed him twice about the talks.) And I was very critical about the implications of the outcome on wider international relations. If you are interested, the book has been published in Serbia www.biblio.com/book/kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na/d/489156706 That said, I also agree that the best outcome would be independence - albeit after proper talks to decide the final terms of the split. (Including autonomy for the religious sites and the Serbian community.) The current situation is not good for anyone - except for Moscow, which has done a very good job of exploiting its veto in the Security Council to ensure that Serbia remains a compliant regional actor.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you, I will look at it. I think the overwhelming sentiment in both societies is in favor of solving practical and cultural issues. The main problem in both countries is that there are strong elements who think they have the upper hand. In Serbia, most people think that Serbia has the upper hand on the legal ground, while in Kosovo many think they have the upper hand on the international stage, and, after the ruling, on the legal ground as well. In my opinion, the ruling itself only makes things worse, because both sides can take what they like from the ruling. On the other hand, I understand that this was too much to ask from a court. In the end, the solution needs to be political. When we finally decide is Kosovo a country or not, all the rest will be just details really.
It is actually not so complicated. Kingdom of Serbia, with which Republic of Serbia can establish some loose legal continuity, got in Kosovo in 1912. There is no valid legal record of Serbia occupying todays Kosovo territory before. Just some Serbian state-Propaganda about the continuity with some mythical Medieval state which is not factual and draws no legal consequence to what happens today. So having in mind the circumstances and the war crimes Kingdom off Serbia committed in 1912. which are well documented in Carnegie Reports, Serbia should have never been in Kosovo at the first place. Admit your crimes, get some closure and move on. Kosovo will never again be Serbian and it should has never been.
13:53 to 14:10 Why it is not possible to apply this to the Crimean situation? If I understood it correctly, at the end of the day the fact that matters is how the international community welcomes you as a State. Someone will say no, someone will say yes. And more: is it illegal to recognize Crimea, or Kosovo as independent States? Crimea, if I remember well, declared independence and then held a referendum to join the Russian Federation as a federated republic. Sorry for all of those questions but I found them very tricky and interesting.
There is not really a paralel between Kosovo and Crimea. 👉While Kosovo is mainly ethnic albanian, Albania never played a role in kosovo war (kosovars fought with no arms or finnances support from albania, all self-relied - until NATO of course) unlike crimea that was actually annexed by Russia. 👉Kosovo was a constitutional unit in Yugoslavia and had the right to vote for any desicion in the federal government of the time, just like Serbia, montenegro, croatia, bosnia, slovenia and macedonia. Indeed the recognition and acception from international community plays a really central role in a new nation's statehood but the very existence of Kosovo inside yugoslavia as a constituional federal unit helped on recognition and acceptance of Kosovo.
James, the content you produce is absolutely incredible. I've taken a real interest in geo-politics in the past year and having watched hundreds of different RUclipsrs- many of which are good, but you are on another level. Totally objective and you make potentially complicated matters easy to understand. Keep it up :)
Thank you so much. It’s incredibly kind of you. I am so glad you like the videos. I love making them. It’s actually a wonderful learning process for me as well. And all worthwhile to get such nice comments. I really appreciate it! :-)
@@JamesKerLindsay Hi James. It just came to me that I never asked what I wanted to a few weeks ago. What would the implications have been if Serbia had asked the court whether or not States who recognised Kosovo had in fact undermined the territorial integrity of Serbia? It's obvious why they didn't but still an interesting 'what if'!
The two of these criterias are fulfilled as far I know:It was colonized in early 6 century when slavic HORDES moved in to the region (by plundering the indigenious Albanian pupullace) ,It was indipendent (co-ruled with otomans) during otoman period,then OCUPIED after wwI and wwII when the tide worked in serbian favor.
Thank you for your great video!! Apart from the legality of the secession, I think it is possible to say that Serbia asked the question for their interest correctly. For example, Vuk Jelemic was clearly saying that the ICJ did not answer the question of the legality of the secession, meaning that it is a Serbian victory. As many scholars say, Serbian decision makers tried to get legitimacy by referring to the advisory opinion rhetorically (quite post-modern way).
Thanks so much. This is a very interesting point. There is certainly an argument to be made that Serbia gained a victory by even managing to get the case before the Court. Also, the fact that the Court didn't pronounce on Kosovo's statehood did leave the door open for Serbia to continue its campaign to prevent the recognition of Kosovo. It really was a very interesting case in so many ways, wasn't it!?
James Ker-Lindsay Thank you for your reply. Yes, I agree that this is very interesting and I hope everyone who writes papers on this issue will watch your videos. I think Kosovo AO is too important not only for international law scholars but also for international relations scholars. As this AO increased the number of recognitions in short run for some reason + opened up the dialogues between Serbia and Kosovo, the influence of Kosovo AO was narrated as a positive one by some people. But as you say, if we focus on how ICJ did not answer a question related to remedial secessions and how Serbian decision-makers behaved later, I think this AO rather influenced the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo negatively. As the number of recognition of Kosovo doesn’t increase any more + counter-secession occurs and the US became a mediator for the dialogues, influence of Kosovo AO cannot be just positive.
Thanks. Again, some great points. It is interesting to see how often the reference to the AO is made I. Official documents, but few people seem to know exactly what this means in real terms. As I said, many believe the ICJ said Kosovo is a state. It didn’t. It steered well clear of this. But it did say that the declaration or independence was not contrary to international law and so if countries want to recognise Kosovo, there is no reason for them not to do so on this basis. (Although they may not want to recognise it for other reasons.) All in all, it was very carefully worded.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you for your great comments . I read a book written by Juan Francisco ESCUDERO ESPINOSA many times and it took time for me to understand the logic of Kosovo case. Yes, I agree that it is difficult to say Kosovo AO is a reason not to recognize Kosovo. At the same time, I think it made some people think that different interpretations of the legality of remedial secession are possible. As far as I read in Japanese (I am from Japan), Japanese international lawyers correctly understood that the ICJ didn't answer that point. I don't know how academic discourses influenced decision-making in Japan, but Japanese officials see Kosovo as a pre-mature one and abstained from voting of Unesco and Interpool. According to Japanese source, Japan decided to so as the officials expected that something like the case that the US cut finance for Unesco because of the Palestinian entry would happen. Again I don't know how Kosovo AO influenced the decision, but I think Japan would not have abstained if Kosovo AO clearly stated that Kosovo is a state.
From legal perspective you are both correct, the ICJ did not answer the question clearly but I think that the reality in the ground is different. Kosovo now has all institutions built, they have Passports, President, PM, Parament, Courts, Military, they have a lot of embassies around the globe, so even some countries will not recognize Kosovo this will not remove the fact that now Kosovo is a country in the heart of Europe. I am Albanian and I for sure am in favor of Kosovo recognition but as you know Balkans love football, Kosovo now is also in FIFA and UEFA :) Peace and love from a biased listener
I found your review to be very clear and precise and the ruling profound, clearing up some of my confusion over the legality of Putin's 'military operation' and annexation of parts of Ukraine. Understandably Putin is obsessed with Kosovo and resents the US having greater powers of persuasion via trade and sanctions when it comes to socially constructing its version of what a nation looks like.
Kosovo represent a precedent.The crimeans voted first time in 31st January 1991 to split from Ukraine.They even declared their independence in 1992.In 2014 voted to split from Ukraine and to become part of Russia because most of them identify themselves as being russians,and Hrushchev never asked them if they want to be part of Ukraine or not.
@@allianceofunitedcommunitie5541 Possibly as a bargaining chip down the road. Offer to recognize Kosovo in exchange for recognition of their control of Crimea. Also, a more simple explanation is they're friends with Serbia and recognizing Kosovo would sour that friendship.
A much more important question is why it is still the poorest part of Europe and after 22 years as they say they got rid of Serbia and Milosevic they cannot progress, the standard of living is convincingly the lowest in Europe, unemployment is the highest also, organized crime and corruption is in all institutions , human and minority rights are at the level of an African country, no one wants to live in such a country, everyone runs away, both Albanians and Serbs ...
In order to address this issue, first, let's answer your question. Was Kosovo occupied? The answer is YES. It was always part of Albania under the Turkish empire until the First World War. The creation of Yugoslavia was fake and a historical mistake. Once Yugoslavia disintegrated, Kosovo had all the rights like Slovenia and Croatia to not only be an independent state but to be part of Albania again as it had historically been. The genocide toward Kosovars is long before this century. The roots are in expulsion of Albanians in 1877-1878. The Kingdom of Serbia and Greece occupied most of the present-day Albania. According to Dimitrije Tucovic, Serbia doubled its territory. I could go on with the genocide of Albanians from both Serbia and Greece. However, this is not the place. It is high time for an honest apology to Albanians from both Greece and Serbia for the genocides they have continuously undertaken toward Albanians.
"the creation of Yugoslavia was fake and a historical mistake" -- that's clearly just conjecture. All states are "artificial" creations based on historical, political, and social factors. Yugoslavia is no exception. Meanwhile, the autonomous region of Kosovo pretty clearly did not meet the definition of occupation under established international law, so your point is moot. Using the precedent you argue for, Russia is entitled to its claims upon Ukraine, Greece is entitled to occupy and annex Istanbul, Mexico would be entitled to invade and occupy the American west, and many other examples. Regardless of whether or not you think it was fair, international law was established with post-WWII borders and trying to undo historical wrongs as it relates to borders only opens up Pandora's Box for countless nations to make claims to historical territories. The borders might not be ideal or even just, but that's the way they were determined to be, and international recognition of separatist territories that don't fall under the technical definitions of "occupation" or "colonization" is not considered legal under international law. While I wholeheartedly agree that it is high time for nations to apologize for the genocides they committed against the Albanians, none of what you claimed in any way justifies the secession of Kosovo. Ultimately, the ruling simply argued that "might makes right," the exact opposite of what the UN is supposed to exist for. Kosovo got lucky that its supporters happened to be the Western hegemonic powers, but other nations like Ukraine, Cyprus, Georgia, Moldova, etc. haven't been so lucky.
I wonder why Serbia did not instead take the US and other Western countries to the ICJ over their recognition of Kosovo, which most consider having broken the UN Security Councill Resolution 1244. It seems it would be a much more sensible move. Even now I don't understand what stops Serbia from doing that.
Thanks Mark. Great question! I actually investigated this very issue and wrote a chapter in an excellent volume on the ICJ case edited by two international lawyers very close to the proceedings from the different sides. global.oup.com/academic/product/the-law-and-politics-of-the-kosovo-advisory-opinion-9780198717515?cc=us&lang=en& Many also wondered why Serbia didn't go after the US and EU states. It would have been a far stronger case. However, it was apparently warned not to do it. (and it couldn't go after smaller countries as that would have looked like bullying.) It opted to go for a less confrontational approach that would not have alienated it from the EU, but left the door open for a less clear outcome.
@@JamesKerLindsay " it was apparently warned not to do it" but by whom and how? I imagine if the US and the EU were to threaten Serbia with economic sanctions for taking them to the ICJ it would just have made them look bad and weaken their position over Kosovo. I imagine that a lot took place behind closed doors but I cannot find an explanation for Serbia to act the way it did. I assume they were able to hire some very good legal advisers, they should have been able to predict what the ICJ ruling was going to be.
@@markdowding5737 USA and EU countries are much stronger and have unbelievable leverage over politicians in Serbia. Basically they pay Serbian politicians to act a certain way (carrot) or threaten them to close the doors on them in EU integrations (stick). Ever since the collapse of Yugoslavia, it has lost its sovereignity
I am grateful and appreciate this video, since I believe (mis)interpretation of ICJ advisory opinion is one of the most confusing argument regarding Kosovo issue. Regarding the question from your first comment, my answer is; Serbia did ask wrong question but did it deliberately. If the main reason of Serbia's request to ICJ is to prevent recognition of Kosovo's statehood by UN member states, I think Serbia should have asked legality of the act of those member states, rather than that of Kosovo authority. Then why did Serbia ask such wrong question? my guessing is that was the only way to proceed to ICJ process, considering the political atmosphere at the time when UNGA adopted the resolution requesting ICJ opinion. As you mentioned in this video, this resolution (63/3) was adopted by 77 in favor, 6 against, 74 abstention. Looking at the name of the countries abstained from voting, we will find most of the countries which had been recognizing the Kosovo independence(“Recognizer”) until that time. But what if the question posed to ICJ has been the one such as "Is the recognition of Kosovo's statehood in accordance with Int'l law? Would those abstaining states have voted in the same way? I do not think so. I think the request to ICJ itself was uncomfortable one for those "Recognizer". On the other hand, since most of "Recognizer" are from the West, it was difficult for them to oppose the use of ICJ as a tool of peaceful resolution of conflict. So, abstention was a kind of result from this “conflict of interest”. And I think those recognizers would be against the resolution in case their action(recognition), rather than declaration of independence by Kosovo authority, was the subject of consideration, and the request to ICJ itself would be fail. Under such situation, there was no other way for Serbia but compromising the text of question and prioritizing the adoption of the resolution.
Not necessary. because when Serbia lost war 1999, Serbia already lost saying. Just like Serbia won Kosovo when Ottoman collapsed, nobody cared what Ottoman and Kosovo (Albanians) say. If you can't gain something in battlefield, you can never gain it in political talk.
Dear James, amazing and insightful video. Since you asked our opinions, here are my thoughts. Hasn't the ICJ acted in rather pilatesque way on the matter, ie. avoiding on purpose to act as a proper judge on the matter by not issuing a clear and comprehensive statement? I mean, it just stated the obvious, geopolitically speaking: the act of unilaterally declaring indipendence (or claiming powern on a certain territory) is in itself neither legal nor illegal. What matters is the recognition other states or powers provide. But this has been the case since the dawn of civilization: from the Ionian revolt to the Greek war of independence and after. Many present day balkans states - notably Serbia - are born out of a successful revolt against a legitimate and recognized power. As you pointed out, it's not that they had much of a choice: the ICJ and UN clearly lack the power to enforce anything on anyone. They couldn't really rule without considering the balance of powers and the possible reaction to their verdict. But if the matter is like this, can we really talk in terms law? How can there be the rule international law if the institution which should rule on these matter isn't free to rule without being influenced by the de facto balance of powers (as you say: any clear ruling would have set a precedent) and also lacks the power to enforce its verdicts if the parts decide not to respect it? I personally find that this ruling is an implicit admission that international law isn't a binding force. Thank you for your time if you find some to answer this comment. Keep up with the good work! Awesome channel!
Serbia is not the only country that does not recognise the independence of Kosovo.. There are 100 others as well and 5 EU members. If so many countries don't it is pointless to expect from Serbia to recognase. The dialog is also pointless because each side wants the oposite solution and there is nothing in betweeen that can please both. After all, Cyprus was never expected to have a dialog with Turkish Republic of North Cyprus etc etc. If Kosovo beleives its fully independent, they don't need Serbian recognition
Great video, you may not understand this as a Brit, but the ICJ decision is what we Americans would call a “punt”. To be fair, they don’t want to mess up anything else in the Balkans. Not that it really would have changed the situation a ton, as their influence on events is minimal, but they just really didn’t want to touch the live wire
Thanks. Yes. I think you are absolutely right. I think this was exactly what the Court decided to do. Interestingly, I didn’t actually go into detail on the dissenting opinions. They were quite strong in their views and made some really important points. They are really worth a read.
I don't understand how the law does not bring the perspective of the War. If a war happens between two peoples groups inside a nation that results in division of power (since Serbia retreated it forces from Kosovo), then why should it be illegal to recognise a state that since then governs its own? By the way, that was a very good video.
Thanks so much! I think the point I always try to get across is that states HATE secession. They have created as many obstacles as possible for territories that want to break away. And they are really worried about anything that can set a precedent. This explains why they generally won’t recognise territories that have broken away without the permission of what we call the ‘parent state’. In fact, there was a time that if a territory did manage to break away and prove its as a state it would be recognised as such. This was the prevailing norm in the nineteenth century and interestingly explained how many SE European states came into existence. But this is not the model any more. This is why we now have de facto states. Countries that effectively exist as states but won’t be recognised as such by the wider international community. I hope this helps clarify things.
Of course. Winners write rules. Serbia won Ottoman, Greece won Ottoman, they become independent; 13 colonies won British Empire, USA is independent; Algeria won France, Vietnam won France, they become independent; Bangladesh won Pakistan, South Sudan won Sudan, they become independent. Since NATO won Serbia, Kosovo is independent; since Russia won Ukraine, Crimea is part of Russia. Very easy to understand. Very logical. Very making sense. And of course very jungle rules.
@@JamesKerLindsay but British Empire didn't want to give up 13 colonies, but native Americans never wanted loss land to European colonizers? did their fate and position have ever been cared? NO. because they lost war.
Do you think Kosovo's secession should have been recognized? I mean, why serbian populated area of the Croatia back then couldn't break away from Croatia, and why Serb populated part of Bosnia can't? I mean.. Let's be real, America, UK, Germany etc. are being too hypocritical.
Thanks Nemanja. It is an incredibly complex situation. There are various aspects that need to be separated from one another. First, there’s the question of Croatia’s secession. Under the 1974 Constitution the nations had a right of secession. But what this meant was disputed. Serbia argued it applied to the nations as peoples. Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia saw it belonging to the republics as the territorial embodiment of the nations. This was considered by the Badinter Commission, which argued the right was with the republics - a not unrealistic view given the principle of international law on the sanctity if substate boundaries in cases of independence. In this sense, while Croatia’s secession was perhaps regrettable - and I fully believe Germany acted hastily - it was not the same as the RSK’s secession, which clearly went against international principles. The same applies to RS. But, equally, Kosovo was considered to not have the right of secession. In this sense it’s recognition is a contravention of international law. That said, I do believe that many Serbs have never really considered the wider circumstances of the situation. Kosovo existed pretty much as a republic, and has a population that is overwhelmingly opposed to staying under Serbian rule. I understand why a Serbia is unhappy at the way it has been treated over Kosovo. No other state has been stripped of its territory in this way. But I’m not sure what people who want to keep hold of Kosovo expect would happen if it did stay in Serbia. The cost and difficulties of trying to control the territory would be massive. That’s why I have always believed a negotiated secession - perhaps with territorial changes - would make the most sense. But in this context, my bigger question is why was it OK for Croatia to use force to put down a secession, but it wasn’t for Serbia? This is certainly not to say that I advocate using force in either situation! This just is meant to highlight that the international community may frown on armed force to put down secession, but it often tacitly accepts it. But in the case of Kosovo it didn’t. I suspect that it really came down to the fact that many countries were by that point exasperated with Milošević. He used up a lot of political capital in Bosnia and Croatia and so when Kosovo happened there was little patience for his actions. In another situation can there may have been more pressure for a peace agreement based on extensive autonomy, but no one trusted him by that point. That’s why I firmly believe that Milošević lost Kosovo for Serbia. I hope that provides an answer. As I said, it is rather complex.
because winners write rules. Why USA UK France support Austria-Hungary Empire and Ottoman Empire self-determine but they don't self-determine? Why USA support de-colonization but refuse native American Self-determine? Because Austria-Hungary and Ottoman defeated in war; and the colonizers (British French) get defeated in war. Because Serbia get defeated in war.
@@allianceofunitedcommunitie5541 “Because winners write rules” I agree. I really love UK, France... but I feel big disappointment when it comes to political attitudes of those countries towards Kosovo issue. After our long friendship (alliance in WW1 and WW2) with them, I would never expect their support for Kosovo’s independence. I feel even more disappointed when I think about facts that some Slavic countries like Poland and Czechia also recognized Kosovo’s independence.. On the other hand, Republika Srpska(Serbian populated area of Bosnia) doesn’t have support from UK, France, USA, Poland, Czechia etc. to declare independence. That makes no sense, because there is no logical reason for Kosovo Albanians to have right of independence declaration, and Serbs outside of Serbia not to have that right. That’s not fair.
@@nemanjajovanovic2957 First, the winners rule is the world dirty rules; I never say it is fair nor good nor justice! but it is what it is! Second, the only reason why countries do anything is pure on interest rather than ideology. example: British French fight for centuries, when Germany becomes strong, they are good friends! Iraq dictator, but Saudi Arabia is ok. British French side with ottoman against Russia empire in crimea war (1850s) Thirdly, I understand your disappointed, but what about native Americans disappointed? and maybe 1912 kosovo Albanians disappointed even during Ottoman time Balkans disappointed? Finally, I never write these rules! I only point out the dirty politics even though it cound be offensive.
@@JamesKerLindsay Ok, maybe they didn’t trust him at that point because of 90s wars, but it is still not ok to give some territory right of secession, and not to give that possibility to someone else. I think that politicians should not make decisions in rage and to make some kind of revenge. And besides, in 2008 when Declaration of Independence took place, Milosevic’s ruling days were over long time ago. Then why? Republika Srpska is also a serbian entity, majorly populated by ethnic Serbs and they probably also want independence from Bosnia and Hercegovina, that’s why the war broke out in 90s. Why can Bosnia countrol Serbian entity which also functions pretty much as a Republic, but Kosovo got support to unilaterally declare independence from Serbia? And Republika Srpska also has population that is overwhelmingly opposed to staying under rule of Bosnia and Hercegovina, and still nobody supports them in getting independence. I mean, that really makes no sense. And yeah, how was it okay for Croatia to put down a secession using force, but that was not okay in case of Serbia? You get me James? I just don’t get how neither Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia succeeded in getting independence, but Albanians in Kosovo did in 2008.
First let me start with an compliment on the detailed analysis (both in nuances and complexity) before I offer my opinion. As in many other multilevel issues the micro in the macro and vice versa is crucial. Did Serbia ask the wrong question? Yes it did. Why? You hinted one reason and I agree with not having any definite facts on it but knowing since the fall of Milosevic regime all following serbian legislations were under tremendous pressure by western political influences often ignoring or not verifying essential serbian interest and placing only geopolitical thus global power player interests first. So the type of question asked by Vuk Jeremic could offer an "not losing face" option to all sides envolved. The ICY did also nothing groundbreaking new by pointing out that it is not what or who announces declerations of independence but who does recognise that declaration is ALL that matters for the political reality. In 2008 following Athisaris recommendation the Albanians unilaterly declared indedepence and over 80 states (such as USA, France, UK, Germany and others) immediately recognized this (self)recommended declaration. Broken and troubled with over a decade of civil war, sanctions, ugly propaganda, bombings and agression Serbia was not able to represent and state their own interest such as protecting it´s sovereignty. Today in 2020 it is somewhat different though. 1.) Serbia has grown and recovered economically and therefore established it´s position as an important regional country for trade, infrastructure etc. On the field of diplomacy it has been also successfully engaging in representing the countries best interest based on mutual coperations with others. 2.) Also the geopolitical scene today is a different one than in 2008. Much of the neoliberal NATO type of unilateralism is not applicable anymore. With Brexit, China, Russia, EU openly parting on foreign policies with the USA etc. the world has become a different place. These two factors are going to have major influences on any future Kosovo solutions.
Thank you very much. I’m really glad you found it interesting. I agree that the wider context has indeed changed enormously. Did you see my video on Kosovo recognitions? This rather makes the point that Serbia has been rather successful in its counter-recognition campaign. This has inevitably changed the context of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. However, I’m rather less certain about the wider geopolitical context. Russia is a useful ally, but it is not Serbia’s future. It’s level of support in real terms is minimal and it offers no future for Serbia’s economic or political growth. (In a region heading towards NATO and EU, Serbia will never be a Balkan leader as a Russian ally.) Ultimately, I firmly believe that Serbia’s future lies in the EU. It will need to reach a final settlement with Kosovo to achieve this. And I believe such a deal is genuinely in the interests of all sides. The key question is whether and how Belgrade can leverage the situation to do the best deal possible. It is in a stronger position than it has been since 2008 (or even 1999), but I am not sure that it will last indefinitely.
@@JamesKerLindsay I do share your point that the future of Serbia and actually all former Yougoslavian states lies in the EU. Ironically they will all be together in a federal type of confederation that they had in the first place, but...that´s another story. Mainstream politics in the Ex-YU was always a walking the line game between the west and east with Tito as a master player in that context. Looking at todays situation I think it is safe to say that global powers do not really make "allies" but rather temporary associations along the way if it serves their agenda. Therefore the traditional affiliation with Russia for example is more an emotional one that is relevant as a countermeasure on all the pressure from the west than a economic/political one. Also the reality de facto is that all former YU states, including Serbia, have to play the neoliberal game and accept the EU standards and regulations even though only Slovenija and Croatia are current members who get to benefit from membership. The hypocrisy of the EU is blatantly obvious since they advocate and strive for unity and "western values" within but change, improvise and double standard rules in the western Balkan. Here the rules change every 20-50 km based on the politics on the ground and resemble more a neo colonial format disrespecting their very own member duties and privileges that they claim are universal in the EU. So the majority in Serbia is not keen anymore on joining under such conditions and has it´s neighboring Croatia, Romania or Bulgaria as examples what to expect and actually get if you become a EU member. Frankly the situation is pretty much the same (good and bad) in the entire region maybe with Bosnia and Kosovo being the worst economically. One possible solution could be the forming of common economic confederations such as the "Mini Schengen" project to join and share forces, markets to improve and grow simular to the way how the EU has started originally as a economic project after WWII. If the "Balkan for the Balkans" would be accepted by Russia, EU and USA is unfortunately to be debated.
Thanks. It is clear that support for the EU has dropped. And I can see why. Everyone looks at it and wonders whether it is still the exclusive club it used to be. Also, there is a sense that it doesn’t uphold its promises anyway. Nevertheless, I do think it remains the main fake in town. The idea of localised cooperation is certainly interesting, and I have long argued that regional cooperation should be pursued regardless of EU integration, but EU integration still remains the main impetus for reform and cooperation. But I see why people are so disillusioned with it all.
@@JamesKerLindsay Unfortunately the EU has lost their integrity by demonstrating on numerous occassions that they do not honour their word. This way they lost any kind of real leverage or negotation offerings. Further you have to take in account that everyone knows that let´s say France and Germany after WWII just needed 5 Yrs to start serious future peaceful projects for the benefit of both peoples where as here the so called international community seems to be more interested to keep the entire region on "red alert" status in the last 20+ yrs. In the best case this demonstrates sheer incapability and in the worst divide et impera.
Wow ok, now this was a brilliant video, i have to admit, i did not expect this. Well done, 9/10, fair and balanced. What to say on the subject of the video? Its difficult. My first immediate thought is that this ruling switched the international framework from one that was static (and at that time) mostly understood to be in favor of sovereignty and territorial integrity (where UN members were expected to support and favor the integrity and sovereignty of fellow UN members, before that of any rising unilateral claimants) to one where both sovereignty and territorial integrity are not automatically guaranteed as recognized UN borders, but as broad arbitrary interpretation of third parties (neighbors, regional or super powers), who can then trade and peddle these interpretations as they please, and even outright follow opposing principles from case to case. To put this into practical terms, in the case of Kosovo, US chose to violate both sovereignty and territorial integrity of the parent country, but then in a very similar case of Crimea (or even Caucasian break away republics which are admittedly a slightly different example) 2 decades later, it reverted, and supported the parent country. Then-president Obama even went as far as to mention Kosovo's independence referendum as a standard for referendums when referring to the one held in Crimea (which US dont recognize, naturally). One problem being: Kosovo, of course, never had a independence referendum. I personally see three things worth mentioning here: 1.) As you said yourself, i dont doubt that this ruling was made with Western interests in mind, and the geo-political consequences a different ruling could have. So in a way what happened here, in my humble opinion, is that the West (namely US and UK as the main event drivers in case of Kosovo) has achieved a post-factum political vindication of its intervention and state building in Kosovo. But. While this was a undisputed win at the time, i also think this really turned around and bit them in the proverbial behind, starting with Russia-Georgia war of 08' and certainly and fairly self evidently in the case of Crimean reunification. Both US and UK have attempted - and promptly failed - to gather not only the traditional "international community" (a horrible phrase that really just means US + allies + US dependencies), but in this case properly, the real international community - meaning the rest of the world. Countries such as India, China, Brazil and so on, who then promptly looked back at US and UK and went like "you w0t m8 lol no". And specifically because of this ruling. If you remember the Balkan affairs of that time, it was also when US diplomats started aggressively referring to Kosovo as "unique case", in an attempt to persuade people that what happened there does not apply elsewhere and that we are back to sovereignty & territorial integrity. Naturally nobody bought that nonsense, just as nobody buys it when they use it in case of Bosnia. 2.) The person who was managing/handling this whole affair from Serbian side was one Vuk Jeremic - who later went on to become president of the UN general assembly. A feat that would be EXTREMELY difficult to achieve had he managed to previously piss off (or even annoy) Americans / the West in any way shape of form. And something that i personally choose to believe was more of a reward of what had previously been a mutually beneficial partnership. Perhaps. I do agree that the question was asked in a criminally bad way though. Maybe i shouldnt attribute to malice that what can adequately be described by incompetence. Maybe. But im not a professor nor an analyst, so i can be petty. 3.) If you are a small country and you have hope that the post World War 2 UN framework exists to protect you against abuse of major powers, boy are you living in a world of fantasies. And while you may say "gee Joe, did you just figure this out?", i would like to point out this: if this is our new normal - that US (or anyone else) can simply choose overnight to set up a new country on your territory - what argument can those of us who are against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, provide back? How can i blame Iran or North Korea for wanting to have nuclear bombs, if we live in the world where the measure of your sovereignty and territorial integrity is not based on international laws and UN documents, but is directly proportional to your ability to lob a thermonuclear bomb to Washington/Moscow/Beijing/any future would be power?
Thanks. Elements of the Opinion were in fact incredibly weak. The third part on the provisional institutions made little sense. But, as I noted, the question asked was deliberately designed to be more ambiguous than many realise. It gave the judges a way out that they might not have had if the question had focused on the obligation of member states to respect I’ve another’s territorial integrity. I’d also say that I am a little more positive about international law favouring small states. But , I agree, trying to enforce rulings is next to impossible. Aside from Russia’s bad behaviour in Crimea, you might also want to take a look at my video on the Chagos Islands. This has not been Britain’s finest hour! ruclips.net/video/3mK6XJOqe9E/видео.html (I also keep meaning to do a video on the US and Hawaii. Now there’s an interesting story!)
And than you wander why the Muslims ☪️ hate america talk about double standards,the countrys that don't recognise Kosovo spain russia china etc you can figure out why
@James Ker-Lindsay Well, I don't think it is the matter how, what or which question Serbia would ask. Because of the very delicated political situation and the political implications the court would try in any circumstance to avoid an answer where you get a clear statement. However let us take a look in France: the Basque country, the Bretagne, Corsica, in Turkey: Kurdistan; in Spain: Catalonia, Galicia in GB: Scottland, Northern Ireland just to mention a few (but there are more). Let them give independence and then this hypocritical countries could also ask the court about legality of declaration of independence. They could then ask the " *RIGHT* " questions and let us see what this international "court of justice" will answer. This is obviously more a circus for certain purposes then a real objective court - imho. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Sagledajte i podjelite naš kanal: ruclips.net/channel/UCWCFuNrKMDF2K7KBqRB20kA Bezplatna online-knjiga za sve!: drive.google.com/file/d/1ar5jIzoEeS9w7Ikej8pf_WMMsvX5PFny/view
No worry. When Kurdish freedom fighters win Turkey, when Catalonia freedom fighters, and Scottish Freedom fighters win UK; they will be independent. (Texas vs. White: There is no right to secede, except Revolution or consent of states.)
This is an incredible analysis, I will buy your book! May I ask what is your opinion on the reasons behind the US and NATO's pro-Kosovo stance and the intervention, considering both the US and NATO strongly pushed for Kosovo's independence and intervened through Operation Allied Force? I wrote multiple essays during my studies about Operation Allied Force-how it was described as a humanitarian intervention while actually being a way for the US especially with NATO to obtain certain power in the Balkan region through the newly independent Kosovo. The reasoning I have is that while the operation was described as humanitarian, it was not only done without the UN Security Council's approval, but also large amounts of depleted uranium were used, eventually spreading to parts of Kosovo as well, where Albanians reside (so the humanitarian aspect then is not the true intention, if the oppressed population is affected by the operation). Maybe I'm wrong, what are your thoughts?
Thanks so much. Ultimately, I think the problem was Milošević. It’s very hard for people in Serbia, especially the young, to realise how much damage he did to Serbia in the 1990s. I know many people like to think that the West hated Yugoslavia and wanted to destroy it. That simply wasn’t the case. Germany certainly made a stupid decision to push for the recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, but there wasn’t a conspiracy against Serbia. The problem is that Milošević, instead of letting the republics go and pushing for strong Serb minority rights, supported efforts to keep all Serbs in one country. But even this wasn’t the real issue. It was the way that he lied, cheated and deceived negotiators throughout ten wars. All this meant that by the time Kosovo erupted there just wasn’t any trust left. Many saw this as Milošević stirring things up again. Taken with ten view after Srebrenica and Rwanda that the international community couldn’t stand aside in the face of human rights abuses, there were calls to act when the situation in Kosovo deteriorated. I have written that I don’t think the West set out to create an independent Kosovo. Instead, once they had intervened, they were forced to accept it. It soon became clear that any attempt to return Kosovo to Serb rule would lead to an Albanian uprising. It was a case of seemingly good intentions gone wrong. I fully understand why many Serbs feel angry about what happened. But it is also depressing how few will now try to understand the context of the time and accept that Kosovo is the price Serbia pays for Milošević.
@@JamesKerLindsay I agree with what you've said and unfortunately people don't understand that the situation would've perhaps turned out differently if Milosevic didn't do what he did. I do believe though that the reason why Serbs think the West is to be blamed too, is because of other situations in the world where the West has acted/is acting differently, therefore making the Serbs wonder if the point of interventions is justice or it is about other motives (e.g. the US support of Israel right now, etc, appears hypocritical). Thank you for your insight!! Always good to see/hear different perspectives and opinions
Man speaks well but one thing here west make rules,beak them, rewrite etc...That is power.Everyone knows how unilateral declaration of independence in any case is wrong and again they all acting like it's fine.And deliberately reject to answer the real question...As Serb its sad to me to see west always against Serbia and taking side on muslim separatists creating narco,mafia one clear islamic state in europe controlled by USA...
Stop spreading false information and anti-muslim propaganda. The west stopped WW1 and WW2. They make better decisions and understand politics better than you do. No wonder every ex-yugoslavia state hates Serbia. Criminal people living there who still haven't seen justice.
Yes. And also affiliated to the University of Belgrade and whose work criticising the path to Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence has been translated into Serbian. www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354 And while I am not a lawyer, I do hold a PhD in International relations and am the author of the leading text on how states prevent secession published by Oxford University Press global.oup.com/academic/product/the-foreign-policy-of-counter-secession-9780199698394?cc=ro&lang=en& Anyway, nice try. 👏👏👏🙂
The history of Kosovo is very complicated due to the numerous occupations, so they manipulated the history of the Albanians at a time when the Albanian people were fighting for their existence. But after many wars, sufferings and pains, today we have come to a time when the voice of the Albanian people has begun to be heard, and this hinders our former occupiers! European historians know that we are the oldest people in the Balkans and perhaps the continent, but the past centuries have often ignored the injustices done to the Albanian people because of the interests and powers of the time such as Russia! But with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the unification of Germany, something positive began for the Albanians as well! Kosovo is a state with the desire of more than 95% of the population living in it!
Also, if the US and European powers weren't set on Kosovo becoming independent, do you think the court would have found arguments to rule the declaration was illegal? On the same note, aren't the countries that recognize Kosovo independence being hypocritical by not recognizing Catalonia's independence?
Kosovo is a Serbian land. Albanians moved to Kosovo during the Ottoman occupation. The Ottoman census of 1455 shows that 99% of Kosovo's population at that time was Serb. Albanians begin immigrating to Kosovo after the Great Migration of Serbs in 1690. When Serbs were forced to leave Kosovo massively under Turkish persecution ... However, Serbs made up the majority of the population in Kosovo until 1878 and the persecution committed by Albanians and Turks during the Serbian War of Independence 1876 - 1878. But Kosovo is a Serbian land and an example of population replacement, which also awaiting Europe ... Likewise, Europe's native Christian population will gradually be replaced by Muslim Immigrants... Serbia made the great mistake of not expelling all Albanians in the time of Kosovo's liberation from the Turks in 1912. In the time of Yugoslavia, Albanians in Kosovo had an autonomy that no minority nation in the world had, they even had a university in Albanian language. Albanians used their autonomous government power to continue harassing and persecuting the remaining Serbs from Kosovo, until Serbia intervened in 1990. Albanians have no right to live in Kosovo, and especially have no right to proclaim their "state" in the Serbian Holy Land, because Kosovo for Serbs is the same as Jerusalem for Jews. As from 0% of Kosovo's population, Albanians came to 90%. It will also return to 0% again. There is no measure that can describe the degree of hatred of Serbs towards Albanians. Albanians simply have no future in Kosovo, the Serbs will arm themselves, create a strong and modernly equipped army. And when the time comes, we will expel Albanian invaders from Serbian Kosovo. If anything, we would rather burn Kosovo with Nuclear Weapons than leave Kosovo to Albanians. It is best for all Albanians to move out. Germany, USA, Canada, Australia have a great need for immigrants. Albanians would also be better off there than in Kosovo.
Serbians agreed to the dayton agreement, where a bosnian federation would include reoublika srpska. Bosnian Serbs have equal rights in the federation and wish to remain part of bosnia
Great video! I have a question. Does this opinion from ICJ indirectly could mean, that right of the people to self-determination is more primary than inviolability of borders? I mean some could easily interpret this case as a precedent. Some even trying to right now
Thanks. Great question. The ruling was really an attempt by the Court to steer a middle ground. It knew saying the declaration was illegal would just mean that many countries , in particular the US, would ignore it. This would weaken the ICJ’s standing. But saying it was legal would open up all sorts of problems. It therefore adopted a very narrow reading of the question. It avoided the question of whether Kosovo is an independent state. It essentially said that any territory could declare independence (except if there was a formal international prohibition on this, such as a UN resolution), but that didn’t make it a state. What matters is recognition. Do other countries accept it as independent? In essence the Court made it a free speech issue!
@@JamesKerLindsay Yeah, i get that from video. It's just frustrates me in seeking for some stable ground on this matter. I mean countries could have their own interest on un/recognising someone. And how to know who is in the right here? Every time I hear about Crimea incident it comes with "international law" in one sentence, but then i remember this case of Kosovo and its becoming more complicated. Anyway, thanks for the video and an answer
Lately, Kosovo Government has wanted to take a genocide case against Serbia to an international court. How will this effect on the region, do you have any opinion?
Thanks. This has actually been talked about for years. To be honest, I’m not sure what Pristina would hope to achieve by it at this stage. It will just further ramp up tensions and make finding a settlement more difficult. Frankly, at this stage, I’d like to see more effort from all sides to find a workable final deal.
Thanks. I’m sure you understand that I can’t possibly hope to go into every detail. A guerrilla campaign rather presupposes attacks against police and army units. As fit the assertion that the EU and US supplied the KLA with arms directly, I have seen no evidence to support this. In fact, in 1998, the year before, the US still viewed it as a terrorist movement. Ultimately, it was Milošević’s atrocious actions (not just in Kosovo, but also earlier in Bosnia) that led NATO to step in. I am extremely critical of the way the status process was handled. But equally people in Serbia need to understand how Kosovo was really lost!
@Ledi Shabani You forget that Kosovo&Metohija is Serbian province and that "Kosovar" as an identity is made up term. Also you forget that US got on the KLA's side just so they can later construct camp Bondsteel when "Kosovo" declare independence. Also you forget that KLA("Kosovars") was listed as an terrorist organization and that there is a certain "yellow house" in Albania. With all that said your comment seems uneducated.
Hello James. Thank you so much for creating such informative content these last few months. I would love to hear more about post-independence agriculture policy and trade in Kosovo circa 2008-2009. Thank you again for sharing this wealth of information with us. Love the channel!
Hi Dylan, thanks so much for the comment. I am so glad you like the channel. Regarding the question about agriculture, let me have a think about some people who might be able to help and then get back to you. I got the email.
Interesting how you sir take last 20 or so years as the reason of the conflict regarding Kosovo. One question for you, how did Albanians get to be in the territory of Serbia in the 1st place? Now that is the history and explains everything as well as the final result that we know and have today. Thank you.
I’ve done previous videos on Kosovo. And I certainly know the background history to the issue. I was actually critical of the independence process and gave written extensively on it www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354 But I have no time for the arguments from either side about an exclusive historical right to land. Arguments about who was there first are just silly and irrelevant. After hundreds of years, it really doesn’t matter.
Hello sir, how far back you want to go? Quote from Wikipedia: "Slavic migrations to the Balkans took place between the 6th to 7th centuries." So, please tell me when Slavs arrived in the Balkans were there no Albanians at all at that time? Or were Slavs invading, enslaving and assimilating the autochthonous population of the Balkans? They managed to come as far as Durres (North Albania - Adriatic Coast) raiding and settling in the Balkans. Or, maybe you'll say that Proto-Albanians didn't exist and put something like we come from Turkey/Otoman Empire even that our language and archeological facts tell the opposite. Please, double check your facts. Even tho, I agree with what @James Ker-Lindsay said, that it doesn't really matter after all those years I felt like responding to you. I don't mean to offend you at all and I would be happy to reply to any argument or question you might have. Have a nice day from Kosova.
How did Serbs or Slavs then and Serbs now occupied Albanian and Dardanian territory ? They Claim that they fight the battle of Kosova, of which they never won in first place , and secondly you can have a fight in foreign Land , it doesn't necessarily make it yours. Albanian fought and win many battles in 1444 against Ottomans in few places around our neighbours, like North Macedonia , Monte Negro or Perhaps Serbia (Not Dardania included), But we are not creating mythology over it .
Yes 👍👍 Kosova is independent, Sanxhak is Albanian, Hungary is Ukraine, Slovakia and Czech is Germany, Poland is Germany, Slovenia is Croatia, Romania is Albanian! Long live Albania
Немања 03 Thanks. Very good question. It is very difficult to say if it will happen. I could certainly see circumstances where it does. If full recognition and UN membership seems impossible, then voices for unification - albeit as a very decentralised federation or confederation - may grow. As for Serbia’s reaction, obviously there would be official government outrage. However, I suspect that it might not be viewed as a disaster by any means. It is actually far easier to Belgrade to accept this than to have to recognise an independent Republic of Kosovo. In fact, politically it solves a lot of problems for Serbia. Serbia recognises Albania. That could continue. Belgrade could say that it doesn’t recognise the ‘annexation’ of Kosovo, but otherwise maintains very good relations with Tirana ‘despite their dispute over Kosovo’. The situation would be even easier if the north of Kosovo remains under Serb rule in such a scenario. Albania claims all of Kosovo, but only controls the area under the Ibar. Serbia claims all of Kosovo, but only controls the area north of the Ibar. They bury claim all of Kosovo, but in the meantime they just get on with things. In many ways, this situation would sort of parallel Northern Ireland. So, could I see it happening? Yes. How would Serbia react? Publicly outraged, but secretly probably rather OK with the situation. What do you think?
@@JamesKerLindsay interesting. Also, this might sound random, how would the west react if China invaded Taiwan considering a war with China would be catastrophic because it would destroy the global economy and kill thousands, if not millions of people.
@@eaglesland8093 i think that serbia cant really start a war again Because Of ne the US President which i think would directly attack serbia but i think this can even start ww3 .
3 года назад
@@JamesKerLindsay I can just say this, very soon faster than any of nato and usa can imagine. Just look Serbian history and how long we will wait to get back Kosovo, Do you thinkiNg what are you saying PEACE AFTER ALL? Can you explain what did it USA AND EU to Serbia and why? Dont be idiot . This is just question of time , and Serbia has all the time of the world to bring back Kosovo . Just wait and be pation
Great video as always. One thing that I'm wondering about is to which extent (if at all) does the fact that UN1244 mention the "sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other countries of the region" explicitly, play a role in the decision of ICJ? The problem with that wording is that Serbia and Montenegro (and later Serbia) were subsequently denied their request to be seen as the legal successor of the FRY. Is the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia also implied by the statement, or are we speaking of some premeditated legal sleight of hand (to an even larger extent than we normally are)? At any rate, to me, the whole ICJ opinion business smells of a cop-out based on technicalities, coupled with hypocritical avoidance of establishing a precedent. These double standards (everyone can secede from Yugoslavia and Serbia, but Serbs cannot secede from anywhere) are probably the biggest problem the Serbs have with the international community and institutions. Edit: Oh my, we seem to have started an even worse dumpster fire with this one 🙂
@@perpaimbe8849 I have no idea what is valid there, honestly I don't want to know, but last time I checked it was the only UN document talking about the status of the disputed territory.
Technically, it is actually still valid. It may not be effectively *enforced* any longer, but it still remains *in force*. Resolution 1244 was a very strange resolution. Indeed, I think it is unique. Most UN resolutions putting in place a UN mission have to be renewed on a regular basis. For example, the UN renews the peacekeeping force in Cyprus every six months. However, Resolution 1244 is in force until the Security Council says that it isn’t. So, while it doesn’t operate as it was envisaged in 1999, it does actually remain valid, even if only in a theoretical sense.
Thanks so much. This is such an interesting point. It is something that I have often thought about (and rather hoped no one would raise! 🤫😀). There is a really interesting discussion to be had here on the legal complexity thrown up by the ambiguous status of Yugoslavia and Serbia at the time of the resolution and what subsequent changes meant for Serbia’s claim to Kosovo. In truth, though, I think that it was takes as given that the context of the debate was Kosovo’s relationship to Serbia, not least of all due to its historical place as a man autonomy’s province of Serbia and that its status as a part of Serbia - rather than as an effective republic of Yugoslavia - has been essentially accepted by the Badinter Commission that had been asked by the EU to look into all these issues at the start of the wars. I don’t touch on it, but I very briefly allude to it in the video when I say that Kosovo’s calls for independence we’re rejected by Serbia and the international community. So, for all these reasons, I think we can regard the terms of 1244 as applying to Serbia, even though as you absolutely currently point out, there were very real questions about the exact legal situation. It really is a fascinating subject, isn’t it! And thanks for bringing it up, even though I rather hoped no one would. 😂
@@JamesKerLindsay It can be "valid" but in Kosoovo territory valide as suprime legal act is the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, we will soon kick out UNMIK out of Kosovo as relict of history ...
I’m not a legal analyst, but in the beginning you stated that independence is claimed and given to invaded countries. Serbia invaded Kosovo in 1912. The same year Albania declared independence from Turkey . In an other video you did cover how most of Albanian ethnic lands were left out or allowed to be occupied by the neighboring countries ( Montenegro, Greece , Macedonia and Serbia ) at the same period of time. Prior All these lands including Albania were under Turkish empire since the occupation 500 years ago. The neighboring countries had already declared independence from Turkey 70-80 years prior and claimed their natural lands. One of the issues that Serbia had was is the question , if Kosovo or Kosova as it was called prior to the Serb invasion , is Serbian land. That may have created a bigger issue beside the political one that you so elaborately explained and open the Pandora’s box for Serbia and the other neighboring countries , were large ethnic Albanians live that Serbia most likely wants to avoid. Today I see a lot of their so called historians trying hard to make the claim that they were there before Albanias and that not only Albanians but even them the Serbs ( that are actually slavs and started to move to the Balkan region In the 4th century AD ) are connected to the Illyrians or their descendants. So the question is Kosovo an invaded country, may have not been to their interest.
I think the important thing to realise is that international law changed dramatically after 1945. New principles emerged. Moreover, the borders established in Europe, and in the Balkans, following Ottoman rule were confirmed by treaties. So, while many might claim certain territories were occupied, or even that they could be considered colonies, in a strictly legal sense they weren’t.
Albanian history is still part of debate, it is not facts. As records of your people are not found till the 11 st. And with Dna halpogrups testing it's becoming prevalent that Dinaric people are mostly ingenious to Balkan.
@@rakun-raccoon1907 If you want to make a claim then you have to tell the whole story. It looks that we were there before you. Sorry! Below is word for word from Wikipedia: The origin of the Albanians has long been a matter of debate within scholarship. The Albanians first appear in the historical record in Byzantine sources of the 11th century. At this point, they were already fully Christianized. The Albanian language forms a separate branch of Indo-European, first attested in the 15th century, and is considered to have evolved from one of the Paleo-Balkan languages of antiquity.[1] The surviving pre-Christian Albanian culture shows that Albanian mythology and folklore are of Paleo-Balkanic origin and that almost all of their elements are pagan.[2] The main theories on Albanian origins all suppose a Paleo-Balkanic main origin, but they vary between attributing this origin to Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, or another Paleo-Balkan people whose language was unattested; among those who support an Illyrian origin, there is a distinction between the theory of continuity from Illyrian times, and those proposing an in-migration of a different Illyrian population. These propositions are however not mutually exclusive. The Albanians are also one of Europe's populations with the highest number of common ancestors within their own ethnic group even though they share ancestors with other ethnic groups.[3] Debate Edit Those who argue in favour of an Illyrian origin maintain that the indigenous Illyrian tribes dwelling in South Illyria went up into the mountains when Slavs occupied the lowlands,[4][5] while another version of this hypothesis states that the Albanians are the descendants of Illyrian tribes located between Dalmatia and the Danube who spilled south.[6] Scholars who support a Dacian origin maintain on their side that Albanians moved southwards between the 3rd and 6th centuries AD from the Moesian area, in present-day Romania.[7] Others argue instead for a Thracian origin and maintain that the proto-Albanians are to be located in the area between Niš, Skopje, Sofia and Albania[8] or between the Rhodope and Balkan Mountains, from which they moved to present-day Albania before the arrival of the Slavs.[9] The general consensus is that Albanians, ethnically and linguistically, originate from one or possibly a mixture of Paleo-Balkan peoples but which specific peoples is a matter of continuing debate.[10][11][12][13][14]
Great! Thanks so much. :-) I am really pleased you like the channel. Do let me know if there are any topics you would like to see me cover. I’m always keen to hear ideas.
Since you put the Kosovo as a separate country on Europe map then for you it is. But for us living in country where Kosovo is the part of Serbia then the answer is no.
You are right indeed. This question wasnt asked because serbian government was back than, very deep influensed by US secret service. You could cover the recent questions that Serbia is asking in dialogue with Kosovo, they do really look like the right ones. Thank you for this article
Thanks a lot. It is interesting to consider whether the current government in Serbia would have taken a different approach. There was a lot of pressure brought to beat on Belgrade over the issue. On the current talks, I’m not sure anyone has any idea where they are going now. The EU seemed more interested in making sure that the US doesn’t run things than on really considering what it wants to achieve in the dialogue. Personally, I favour a final comprehensive agreement. In my experience, pursuing little agreements here and there is really a waste of time. Far better for Serbia and Kosovo to draw a line under the issue. The question is what will the cost have to be to reach an agreement?
No, it wasn’t. Colonisation for the purposes of self-determination refers to the overseas colonisation of European powers. Many in Kosovo may regard it as colonisation but it doesn’t fit the standard accepted definition of the term.
The ICJ opinion has been manipulated by the politicians on both sides to fit the preferred narrative. The ICJ was asked an irrelevant pro forma question, and its ruling has been formulated in a way that neither confirms nor denies Kosovo's statehood. It did not bind either side to anything which disputes your argument entirely.
@@ukilectric The court knew what they were asking (Is Kosovo able to unilaterally declare itself independent = Is it independent), but chose to parse the language to give a meaningless answer so as not to upset the US.
Serbs often point out how all this is not fair, many actually believe that everyone hates Serbs because they are so much better than everyone else, but this is another story. It is probably not fair, but still it did not happen all at once as there is a clear path that lead to everything described here. Long story short, Serbian leadership during the nineties never played a proper game so after so many fails it is too late to call things unfair. I remember a show from the eighties very popular in Yugoslavia: "You Asked For It - Watch It!"
I would like to get your opinion Canary Islands and Politicals situation Marroco-Spain at the some time CEuta-Melilla. I positive know maybe you can't put your finger on it as of yet.But you did catch up with the Catalonia problem. Because there is an eerie silence about it, even more the Spanish parliment gave a negative answer to accept all inmigrants can be share among the spanish communities. Almiral Nelson went off with the tail into the legs. But I am confident that in an hipotetic case, UK, Sweden , Norway , Germany will be the firsts in backing up this resolution.
I like your way of thinking and your strife to be completely objective. In that sence, i would urge you to reconsider and look into your statement at 3:11 as i think that "guerrilla campaign" is a VAST understatement concidering their actions before, during and after the Kosovo war . I think that "terrorist campaign" would be a more suitable term as the KLA was concidered by the US to be a terrorist organization up until shortly before the war.
😂😂😂KLA was terrorist based instead Milosevic Serbian troops were the good guys doing some routine ethnic cleaning in the balkans with bosnians and albanians
Nice video as always. Is it forseeable that there would be an exchange of lands between Serbia and Kosovo to finally finish this dispute? Which places should be on it? Could it lead to Kosovo integrating in Albania?
Hello there, I'm from Kosovo. This idea is very opposed in Kosovo and integration(if by integration you mean unification) with Albania is something only a small percentage of people really want.
@@Omni-mal A number of reasons: 1. Because there is a strong Kosovan identity growing, 2. I believe that unification with Albania would be very costly, 3. Kosovans fought for the freedom and statehood of Kosovo and don't want to throw that away by becoming another province, even if it is in Albania
You just have a new sub. Just for the fact you know the matter. Without being subjective... Do you honestly think the Albanians deserved their independence and did history treated them well? What’s your view on the the Albanian division. Thank you and keep up the good work.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. Great question. My answer isn’t particularly straightforward unfortunately. But it does have a logic. I was actually very critical of the declaration of independence in 2008, not because I had any hostility towards Kosovo, but because I was worried that it would be used by others, such as Russia and China, for their own ends. That said, there was always an argument for giving Kosovo a chance to decide on its future. It was essentially equivalent to a republic. But to be honest, I think Ahtisaari made a complete mess of things. I interviewed him for a book I wrote on the status process and it was clear his approach was all wrong. This has cost both Serbia and Kosovo dearly (when a good mediator could have found a way to manage it so they could both accept the outcome). But he didn’t bother. As a result Pristina are locked in a stalemate that neither can lose, but neither can win. Frankly, I just want to see them have a normal relationship. I know Serbia well and have very close ties to the country. But, equally, I have a real affection for Kosovo and was a visiting scholar at the University of Pristina. I want to see them both do well. And unlike many others who work on the Balkans, I don’t think it should be about being pro-Serb or pro-Albanian. It is about supporting their European integration and cooperation - or not. I hope that makes some sense.
@@JamesKerLindsay By russia or china do you mean like the situation in crimea and wouldnt that be very hippocritical for them to not recognize kosovo by doing that
@@soul8938 Crimea was always Russian. It was given to Ukraine in 1954 and that was fine while Soviet Union was whole. But after Ukraine claimed independence, it should have been given back to Russia, whose it always was. Hrushchov didn't know what was coming, otherwise i doubt he would give it away. After all, it's not his private property to do with it as he pleases. Russia had every right to take it back, just as Serbia will take Kosovo back.
It is not the Balkans. It's former Yugoslavia the West destroyed and occupied. Warsauw pact fell, NATO took over the countries west of the Ukraine. Yugoslavia had to be destroyed so NATO could secure that part of Europe for it self too. The largest NATO base is in southern Serbian province of Kosowo and Metohiya. Large NATO bases are in Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Poland. NATO troops in the Baltic states. This is not about international law, international law was burried by the West. This is about encircling Russia and preparing for the invasion of Russia.
My request honestly is that you do a video on the looming New Caledonia referendum next month And also about the separatist fighters in Mali who want to create a country called Azawad and why they want to do it
Thanks a lot, Omar. Always grateful! I certainly plan to cover Chuuk. As ever, I want to try to say something ‘bigger’ about independence and secession. What interesting light does it cast on the subject. I’m therefore considering the angle to take. And thanks for the Mali suggestion. I will look into it.
In my city called FERIZAJ in kosova / DARDANIA, it was occupied in 1913. My grandfather's words. He was born in 1903. He saw it with his own eyes. Further north west started in 1800s. Nish 1895. Russian occupied. BELIGRADE was occupied in 1840s.
Mr. Ker-Lindsay. Your videos are very interesting and your opinion is very much objective. I'd like to add some extra information on the political events that occurred in Kosova during the 90s. After the autonomy was abolished by the Serbian government, members of the Kosovar parliament declared Kosova as a republic within the Yugoslav federation on the 2nd of July 1990. Then, on the 7th of September 1990, those members approved the Constitution of the Republic in the town Kaçanik. Afterwards, on the 26th of September 1991 was held a referendum for independence which was recognized by the Republic of Albania only. Also, in 1992 were held first democratic presidential and parliamentary elections. After a peaceful political process led by the Kosovar president, Ibrahim Rugova, the life conditions in the terrain became exceptional. Kosova wasn't included in the Dayton and the hopes for a peaceful solution died away. In 1997, Kosovar students organized a massive demonstration on the 1st of October which protest was stopped by force by the Serbian police. The other part of history is said in the video.
Thanks. Point well taken and thank you for the further details. Unfortunately, there is only so much history I can cover in a 10-15 minute video. I tend to focus solely on the things that people who don’t know the situation well need in order to make sense of the main point I’m making.
Ovdje je situacija jasna Albanci su vođeni snagom zapada očekivali da dobiju državu na srpskoj teritoriji Srbija samo treba da proglasi okupaciju svog teritorija od strane NATO pakta i da tuži sve članice koje su učestvovale u bombardovanju osiromašenim uranijumom da plate odštetu.
How you define colonisation and foreign occupation? Is Kosovo a colony of Serbs? Yes, Kosovo was the land of Romanians and Metohija of Albanians when the Serbs arrived. Was Kosovo occupied by Serbia? Yes, after the fall of the Ottomans, Kosovo was "liberated" by force without Kosovars having a say. In the view of the international junta, their rules apply only for the future and all the empires or colonial provinces and the horrendously borders in Africa USSR, Asia were validated by "international law" opening the door to ethnic cleansing of native people like in Karabach, Yemen, Rwanda, Sudan, Mali etc. But injustice can't be the law. The law can't be international or national, it's universal. Either is applicable to all or to none.
This all with Kosovo,NATO,etc.made world side problems for many countries.Even 5 members of EU dont want to participate in this sharade and dont want to recognize Kosovo.And half of Balkan states are locked like in trap and cant move to EU.Stupid.
Hello, I am from Kosovo. For me and majority of the people Kosovo is an independent country. Kosovo will never ever be part of Serbia. My family was chased away during the war, house was burned down and we have to consider going under Serbia's authority again? Never. Serbia did the most war crimes since WW2 in the history of Europe. Despite the issues that we have here, Kosovo is an independent country and it will last forever. Have a good day, Mr. Ker-Lindsay.
Hello! I am from Serbia and Kosovo and Metohija is its inseparable part. As far as your opinions are concerned, we couldn't care less!!!WAS, HAS ALWAYS BEEN AND WILL REMAIN SERBIAN FOREVER!!! Have a nice day-dreaming until the moment of awakening!!!
Maybe watch the video first? And don’t make assumptions. I was actually extremely critical about Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence at the time. www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
As a Serb I see that the only solution for Kosovo and Metohija is obviously to take you to the Serbia team. 😂 You're amazing, I'm thrilled. The greatest sacrifice is made by the people of Kosovo of all ethnic groups, and the solution is not visible, it is only a weapon in the game of great powers for their interests.
The only reason why so many western countries recognised Kosovo is clearly in order to please their boss, US, esp because EU is American colony and i am certain there was a lot of arm twisting going on. FYI, in 1985 British MI5 or 6 already had a plan and a map how Kosovo was going to be stolen from Serbia.
OK. Even if all that was true, and it isn’t (I have researched this a length and written on it, the West actually wanted to keep Kosovo in Serbia as it knew the wider implications of letting it secede unilaterally), at what point do people in Serbia who believe all this come to accept that it was Milošević’s policies that made it possible? I hear lots of blame of Kosovo Albanians. I hear lots of blame about the West. But I don’t hear blame about Serbia’s policies. Yes, I accept that Serbia was punished in a way other countries weren’t. I also argue that the negotiations were extremely badly handled by Ahtisaari. But Serbia also has to accept its fundamental role in all this. I know conspiracy theories are comforting. But that’s not how the world works. This wasn’t engineered decades in advance. By the way, I discuss all this in my book (in Serbian) www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
@@JamesKerLindsay Kosovo Albanians were working on seccession since the Prizren League, 1878, not sure about the year. So it's nothing to do with Milosevic. Milosevic was the one who finally said NO to Albanians intimidating Serbs and doing ethnic cleansing, and wanted to protect the Serbs. Milosevic was a blessing in disguise for the Albanians. Just what they needed to show the world how they are being oppressed and justify their fight for independence. But the world didn't know the real picture. They were narco terrorists who wanted to have their own ethnically cleansed country and do as they please. For decades they bread mindlessly and did ethnic cleansing, in order to gain majority, thinking, that would be enough to declare independence. They stopped at nothing to get what they wanted. Members of my distant family were killed by having their throats cut in 1946 by the Albanuans. It was a young couple with a 6 years old son. They were killed because the didn't want to give their land to them. You don't mention that after WW2 250.000 Albanians from Albania illigally entered Yugoslav Kosovo. Our authorities turned a blind eye, for humanitarian reasons. But, did the Albs appreciate it? No. It's nevere enough for them. They joined the common goal to overbreed to gain independence. Every family was ordered by their clan leaders to have 8 or more children per family. So, they had 10 to 15 children, blaming YU govt for being poor and for not being able to feed them. What audacity!!! Than they played the poverty card to the world to justufy their fight for independence. To fund their cause, they increased narco dealing, organ trafficking of kidnapped Serbs, and you name it. US called them terrorist and didn't want to have anything to do with them, that is, until they figured out they can pretend to "protect" oppressed Albanians, while moving into Kosovo to keep Russia at bay. Of course, they cooked up a sob story how they are protecting poor Albanians, to look good in the eyes of the world, while doing their own crime. NATO terrorist organisation killed 10 times more people with bombing, than YU army and police did fighting against narco terrorists. Not to mention DU that is still killing people with cancer, and is there to stay. It will take 4,5 billion years for it to decompose. Kindly, when you make a vid about these problems, give a clear picture about the deeper background and the motives behind their claims. Otherwise, it's misleading. Tell the whole truth. Also, tell the world how many teir own Albanins they killed just because they were working for YU companies, govt, or were friends with Serb neighbours. All that was enough to consider them traitors and torture and kill them, because they were not loyal. Hundreds died like that. That's why Specialised Court is charging them now in the Hague. I doubt they will achieve anything with it, since they either kill or intimidate the witnesses. That is why Ramush Haradinaj is free now. He had all the witnesses killed and was declared innocent for lack of evidence. His book about all the killings and torture he bragged about could not be entered as evidence. Obviously US didn't allow it. Nobody is charged with missing Serbs and their organs trafficked.
stolen? Roman Empire / Byzantine Empire stole Kosovo from previous people. Ottoman Empire stole Kosovo from Balkans. Serbia stole Kosovo in 1912. NATO stole Kosovo in 1999.
So, what do you think? Did Serbia ask the wrong question? And, if so, did it do so deliberately?
Thanks for watching. If you found this video useful, please do consider giving it a 'Like' and sharing it with others who might be interested. And do all consider subscribing. It helps the channel to grow! Much appreciated!
Serbia tried to show themselves as the right guy in front of the other UN member states but for them international law was not a thing when they massacred people in Kosovo & Bosnia. I always said it if there was no Serbia in the Balkans the region would be peaceful.
@@merxho95 And the international law says what about organizing an armed insurrectionist terrorist group such as OVK?
Your informative insights are fascinating; while this comment is simplistic; on one hand the USA was quick to recognize the sovereignty of Kosovo (an erstwhile province of Serbia) yet the USA and "the West" completely avoided any support for Catalonia (an erstwhile province of Spain) or Scotland
Well by making Kosovo a part of Serbia again terrifies me a Kosovar because it makes me think how the military of Serbia tried to kill my family in 1998 and how they will not hesitate to do so to take the land which my Grandfather bought 50 years ago because they're excuse ,firstly serbs thought kosovars shouldnt have had the right to by land since they considered us slaves,so the land we live today has been obtained "ilegaly" so the have the right to take it by force if they have to.
@A. R. I dont need to is not an exuse to kill people.
This channel is criminally underrated, you just earned a subscriber
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it! So glad you like the channel. Do let me know if there are any topics that you would like to see me cover. I am always keen to hear ideas.
I cannot agree more
I subscribed too 😉
I can very much! Agree! I watch everything here, never disappointed. Love the obvious non bias, information.
I really like how there were given objective facts in this video so that the viewer can decide and think for themselves about this topic. And I agree with other comments, this is a very underrated channel. Thank you.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I do believe it is important to try to present the facts clearly and let people decide. But I will often hint at where I might stand on things. :-)
Honestly that's my favorite part about this channel
Think about this too, if the Albanians would have killed 13.000 people and raped 22.000 women and girls would you think the way you think now😮
The problem with "anyone who wants independence can get it" as an international legal norm is that it's just a liberal-sounding way of enforcing the principle of "might makes right."
When Albanians wanted independence from Serbia, they had NATO on their side, so they got it (de facto). When Albanians also wanted independence from (Northern) Macedonia and in the Preševo Valley east of Kosovo, NATO didn't intervene in their favor - well, they sort of did in Macedonia - so they didn't get it. When Serbs in northern Kosovo wanted to remain in Serbia, nobody but Serbia recognized their right to do it. When Serbs wanted independence from Bosnia, NATO intervened... to prevent them from getting it. When Serbs wanted independence from Croatia, the Croatian state fought, and eventually won, a war to prevent them from getting it (complete with a 2-year long UN administration in northeastern Croatia after the war). When Croats wanted independence from Bosnia, the United States helped broker an agreement between them and the government to keep the non-Serb part of Bosnia from breaking up.
So what happens when the countries that recognized Kosovo aren't there to keep all the other borders in the former Yugoslavia in place?
Lest you think I'm picking on the West: Russia believes in self-determination for Crimea, but not for Chechnya. India believes in self-determination for Bangladesh, but not for Kashmir. Pakistan believes in self-determination for Kashmir (as long as independence is not an option and it has to choose between India and Pakistan), but not for Balochistan. Israel believes in self-determination for the Jews in the former Mandatory Palestine, but not for the Arabs. Iran believes in self-determination for those Arabs, but not for the ones in Khuzestan. Turkey believes in self-determination for Northern Cyprus, but not for southeastern Anatolia. Catalan independence supporters believe in self-determination for Catalonia, but not for those parts of Catalonia that want to remain Spanish. There, I think I've pissed off enough people.
that is reason why you must use war to determine who can self-determine who can't self-determine.
bruh in macedonia nato supported macedonia and albania still won it was settled another way albanian civillians gained rights + albania is the second language of north macedonia so who is winner think it again about kosovo yeah i am not gonna talk about that everything is clear albania won the war it was albanian land before serbia only can take kosovo by corruption (1943) and civil war (1300) Now they cry cuz they lost it by war
Crimea and Chechnya are two very different issues. Crimea was part of the USR (Ukranian Soviet Republic) after Hruzchev gifted it in 1954. Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics, they became independent states after 1991, Ukraine was one of them. Chechen republic was always part of the Russian lands, during the Soviet Union, Chechnya was part of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic.
@@vitalygolubchik1535 That's a distinction without a difference. Either Chechens and Crimean Russians both have this supposed right to self-determination, or neither do. Trying to restrict it based on an irelevant piece of administrative trivia is a perfect example of the hypocrisy I'm talking about.
@@Stamboul You got no idea what you are talking about.The right for self-determination can only be exercised through a public vote by the people living on a territory in question. People in Crimea , not the parliament, voted to join Russia. When did the Russian government blocked a referendum (public vote) for independence of Chechnya? I would like to know
International law is so arbitrary it is hard to take it seriously at all. Basically facts on the ground are what matter. Edit: making legal decisions based on political opinions also makes the court look weak and compromises it’s integrity.
Dealing with the question of Kosovo's independence is a balancing act, so the ICJ really needed an answer that didn't cause such a stir.
Exactly. The justices would have understood the bond they were in: produce an opinion that would have negated the reality in the ground and led to major tensions or create a precedent for unilateral secession. Going for a ruling that says anyone can say a territory is independent, but it is up to states to recognise it, was a fancy but if footwork. Unsatisfying in many ways, but it gave both sides what they needed, even if they didn’t get what they wanted.
The icj is another waste of space like the United nations,they need to grow a pair
I remember the news in Serbia at the time. The question that was formulated was about whether the "recognition" was legal, not if "the declaration" was legal. However our then prime minister had urgent consultations with Germany, France, and the UK which helped them formulate a "better" wording of the question.
At the time Serbia was applying for EU accession and the media implied that had we not changed our question to the court we would be left behind Croatia at the periphery of the EU.
Serbian politicians sold us out in this regard. Choosing EU membership and hoping to reverse recognition via foreign policy campaigns. We lost our only opportunity to voice our legitimate complaint about this situation.
No, they sold you out when they killed and raped and thought they can go their merry go around scot free😡
Subscribed because of how amazingly you described this disputed topic! You nailed the nuances. Much love from the U.S.A!
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. It is an incredibly difficult case, for all sorts of reasons. And thanks for the subscription. Do let me know if there are other topics you’d be interested in seeing. I do make a note of all suggestions and try to follow up on them. In the meantime, I hope all is well over there. Best regards from London!
Whatever the question was, USA has horrible politics. It supported Kosovo, but not Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia to gain independence.
@@nemanjajovanovic2957 it was a different story
Have been trying to understand the whole jigsaw for a long time. You did make it much easy. Thank you.
Great. Thanks. Really glad it helped.
This is crystal clear and so helpful... Thank you so much for saving my homework on Iraqi Kurds!
Hi Lena, thanks for the comment. I am really glad it helped!
Interesting, but a court that feels pressured by politics doesn't seem like a independent body that has the autonomy to pass an objective ruling.
To be fair, it felt the pressure from both sides. And international law is a slightly different beast to domestic law. There were a lot of very serious weaknesses to the decision, especially the third part. But on the main point it struck a delicate balance.
Why do you think Western countries recognized Kosovo so fast?
Thanks. I have actually written at length about this. www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
@@JamesKerLindsay thank you
Today Putin met Guterres and used this ICJ ruling to bring some validity to the self-declared independence of the 2 Donbas regions. Thanks for your clear explanation, as it helps understand the geopolitical tensions of 2022.
It seems that due to this precedent, Putin's reasoning is correct. However, the fact that the separatist movements in the Donbas were funded and organised by the Russian government, I don't think that this is a valid claim. While NATO supported Kosovo, it did such after Kosovo had made its intention to leave Serbia clear. It is still a problematic issue though, and I am not sure how I feel about it.
@@GreggOld You really think the KLA wasn't funded and trained by outside forces. Knowing what we know now about the CIA and their meddling. Camp Bondsteel was planned years, maybe decades in advance.
ICY skipped to answer the question by saying that declaration of independence did not violate the international law since it actually has nothing to do with it, it was almost saying its just a paper. Btw, really good analysis by Mr. James, one of the best I ve heard on this issue 👍🏻
Thank you very much indeed! Yes, people don't often realise what the ICJ did and didn't say. I encounter this a lot. Essentially, it said that it could declare independence but that it is then up to states to decide whether that really made it a state.
@@ram-lj9kz well its not legit of course.
@@bambina011 resolution 1244?
As someone from Serbia, this is very frustrating to me. The negotiations in 2007 were pretty much a fait accompli by most of the Western countries, presented as two sides with diametrically different stances, so they decided to support one of the two, with the Ahtisaari's plan of supervised independence that didn't satisfy anyone and only had served as a temporary remedy to ease Serbia's pain. Serbia had had ideas of a two-systems-one-state, a plan implemented by China and Hong Kong, but the Western powers hasten the whole thing. I personally support Kosovo's independence, but this decision by the court only puts us further into the limbo in which we are stuck. After the recognition of Kosovo by most of the Western countries, we can't go back, but we can't go forward either because many other countries don't recognize Kosovo. We are both stuck, and this will probably be the case in decades to come. I would like it if the court decision gave us a direction in which we could find any political frame in which Serbia and Kosovo could have functional relations, instead of being stuck for decades. We see the practical implications of this in relations between Serbia and Russia, in which Serbia is in no position to implement sanctions on Russia, a country whose support is crucial to Serbia in the UN Security Council.
Thank you so much. I completely agree. In fact, I fully understand your position. I actually wrote about the status negotiations and was extremely critical about the way they were handled. Ahtisaari behaved atrociously. (I actually interviewed him twice about the talks.) And I was very critical about the implications of the outcome on wider international relations. If you are interested, the book has been published in Serbia www.biblio.com/book/kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na/d/489156706
That said, I also agree that the best outcome would be independence - albeit after proper talks to decide the final terms of the split. (Including autonomy for the religious sites and the Serbian community.) The current situation is not good for anyone - except for Moscow, which has done a very good job of exploiting its veto in the Security Council to ensure that Serbia remains a compliant regional actor.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you, I will look at it.
I think the overwhelming sentiment in both societies is in favor of solving practical and cultural issues. The main problem in both countries is that there are strong elements who think they have the upper hand. In Serbia, most people think that Serbia has the upper hand on the legal ground, while in Kosovo many think they have the upper hand on the international stage, and, after the ruling, on the legal ground as well. In my opinion, the ruling itself only makes things worse, because both sides can take what they like from the ruling. On the other hand, I understand that this was too much to ask from a court. In the end, the solution needs to be political. When we finally decide is Kosovo a country or not, all the rest will be just details really.
@Stefan You resolve your own point about "two-systems-one-state" nicely; Kosovo declared unilateral independence whereas Hong Kong haven't.
It is actually not so complicated. Kingdom of Serbia, with which Republic of Serbia can establish some loose legal continuity, got in Kosovo in 1912. There is no valid legal record of Serbia occupying todays Kosovo territory before. Just some Serbian state-Propaganda about the continuity with some mythical Medieval state which is not factual and draws no legal consequence to what happens today. So having in mind the circumstances and the war crimes Kingdom off Serbia committed in 1912. which are well documented in Carnegie Reports, Serbia should have never been in Kosovo at the first place. Admit your crimes, get some closure and move on. Kosovo will never again be Serbian and it should has never been.
13:53 to 14:10 Why it is not possible to apply this to the Crimean situation? If I understood it correctly, at the end of the day the fact that matters is how the international community welcomes you as a State. Someone will say no, someone will say yes.
And more: is it illegal to recognize Crimea, or Kosovo as independent States? Crimea, if I remember well, declared independence and then held a referendum to join the Russian Federation as a federated republic.
Sorry for all of those questions but I found them very tricky and interesting.
There is not really a paralel between Kosovo and Crimea.
👉While Kosovo is mainly ethnic albanian, Albania never played a role in kosovo war (kosovars fought with no arms or finnances support from albania, all self-relied - until NATO of course) unlike crimea that was actually annexed by Russia.
👉Kosovo was a constitutional unit in Yugoslavia and had the right to vote for any desicion in the federal government of the time, just like Serbia, montenegro, croatia, bosnia, slovenia and macedonia.
Indeed the recognition and acception from international community plays a really central role in a new nation's statehood but the very existence of Kosovo inside yugoslavia as a constituional federal unit helped on recognition and acceptance of Kosovo.
This is fascinating - complex, yet articulate. Thank you
Thank you very much.
James, the content you produce is absolutely incredible. I've taken a real interest in geo-politics in the past year and having watched hundreds of different RUclipsrs- many of which are good, but you are on another level. Totally objective and you make potentially complicated matters easy to understand.
Keep it up :)
Thank you so much. It’s incredibly kind of you. I am so glad you like the videos. I love making them. It’s actually a wonderful learning process for me as well. And all worthwhile to get such nice comments. I really appreciate it! :-)
@@JamesKerLindsay Hi James. It just came to me that I never asked what I wanted to a few weeks ago. What would the implications have been if Serbia had asked the court whether or not States who recognised Kosovo had in fact undermined the territorial integrity of Serbia? It's obvious why they didn't but still an interesting 'what if'!
The two of these criterias are fulfilled as far I know:It was colonized in early 6 century when slavic HORDES moved in to the region (by plundering the indigenious Albanian pupullace) ,It was indipendent (co-ruled with otomans) during otoman period,then OCUPIED after wwI and wwII when the tide worked in serbian favor.
Thank you for your great video!! Apart from the legality of the secession, I think it is possible to say that Serbia asked the question for their interest correctly. For example, Vuk Jelemic was clearly saying that the ICJ did not answer the question of the legality of the secession, meaning that it is a Serbian victory. As many scholars say, Serbian decision makers tried to get legitimacy by referring to the advisory opinion rhetorically (quite post-modern way).
Thanks so much. This is a very interesting point. There is certainly an argument to be made that Serbia gained a victory by even managing to get the case before the Court. Also, the fact that the Court didn't pronounce on Kosovo's statehood did leave the door open for Serbia to continue its campaign to prevent the recognition of Kosovo. It really was a very interesting case in so many ways, wasn't it!?
James Ker-Lindsay Thank you for your reply. Yes, I agree that this is very interesting and I hope everyone who writes papers on this issue will watch your videos. I think Kosovo AO is too important not only for international law scholars but also for international relations scholars. As this AO increased the number of recognitions in short run for some reason + opened up the dialogues between Serbia and Kosovo, the influence of Kosovo AO was narrated as a positive one by some people. But as you say, if we focus on how ICJ did not answer a question related to remedial secessions and how Serbian decision-makers behaved later, I think this AO rather influenced the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo negatively. As the number of recognition of Kosovo doesn’t increase any more + counter-secession occurs and the US became a mediator for the dialogues, influence of Kosovo AO cannot be just positive.
Thanks. Again, some great points. It is interesting to see how often the reference to the AO is made I. Official documents, but few people seem to know exactly what this means in real terms. As I said, many believe the ICJ said Kosovo is a state. It didn’t. It steered well clear of this. But it did say that the declaration or independence was not contrary to international law and so if countries want to recognise Kosovo, there is no reason for them not to do so on this basis. (Although they may not want to recognise it for other reasons.) All in all, it was very carefully worded.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you for your great comments . I read a book written by Juan Francisco ESCUDERO ESPINOSA many times and it took time for me to understand the logic of Kosovo case. Yes, I agree that it is difficult to say Kosovo AO is a reason not to recognize Kosovo. At the same time, I think it made some people think that different interpretations of the legality of remedial secession are possible. As far as I read in Japanese (I am from Japan), Japanese international lawyers correctly understood that the ICJ didn't answer that point. I don't know how academic discourses influenced decision-making in Japan, but Japanese officials see Kosovo as a pre-mature one and abstained from voting of Unesco and Interpool. According to Japanese source, Japan decided to so as the officials expected that something like the case that the US cut finance for Unesco because of the Palestinian entry would happen. Again I don't know how Kosovo AO influenced the decision, but I think Japan would not have abstained if Kosovo AO clearly stated that Kosovo is a state.
From legal perspective you are both correct, the ICJ did not answer the question clearly but I think that the reality in the ground is different. Kosovo now has all institutions built, they have Passports, President, PM, Parament, Courts, Military, they have a lot of embassies around the globe, so even some countries will not recognize Kosovo this will not remove the fact that now Kosovo is a country in the heart of Europe. I am Albanian and I for sure am in favor of Kosovo recognition but as you know Balkans love football, Kosovo now is also in FIFA and UEFA :)
Peace and love from a biased listener
I found your review to be very clear and precise and the ruling profound, clearing up some of my confusion over the legality of Putin's 'military operation' and annexation of parts of Ukraine. Understandably Putin is obsessed with Kosovo and resents the US having greater powers of persuasion via trade and sanctions when it comes to socially constructing its version of what a nation looks like.
Kosovo represent a precedent.The crimeans voted first time in 31st January 1991 to split from Ukraine.They even declared their independence in 1992.In 2014 voted to split from Ukraine and to become part of Russia because most of them identify themselves as being russians,and Hrushchev never asked them if they want to be part of Ukraine or not.
So Kosovo can but Crimea cannot?
why russia recoginze Crimea but not recoginze Kosovo???
@@allianceofunitedcommunitie5541 Possibly as a bargaining chip down the road. Offer to recognize Kosovo in exchange for recognition of their control of Crimea. Also, a more simple explanation is they're friends with Serbia and recognizing Kosovo would sour that friendship.
@@allianceofunitedcommunitie5541why is turkey recognize Kosovo but not Kurdistan ??? Why the west doesn’t recognize Catalonia ?
A much more important question is why it is still the poorest part of Europe and after 22 years as they say they got rid of Serbia and Milosevic they cannot progress, the standard of living is convincingly the lowest in Europe, unemployment is the highest also, organized crime and corruption is in all institutions , human and minority rights are at the level of an African country, no one wants to live in such a country, everyone runs away, both Albanians and Serbs ...
In order to address this issue, first, let's answer your question. Was Kosovo occupied? The answer is YES. It was always part of Albania under the Turkish empire until the First World War. The creation of Yugoslavia was fake and a historical mistake. Once Yugoslavia disintegrated, Kosovo had all the rights like Slovenia and Croatia to not only be an independent state but to be part of Albania again as it had historically been. The genocide toward Kosovars is long before this century. The roots are in expulsion of Albanians in 1877-1878. The Kingdom of Serbia and Greece occupied most of the present-day Albania. According to Dimitrije Tucovic, Serbia doubled its territory. I could go on with the genocide of Albanians from both Serbia and Greece. However, this is not the place. It is high time for an honest apology to Albanians from both Greece and Serbia for the genocides they have continuously undertaken toward Albanians.
"the creation of Yugoslavia was fake and a historical mistake" -- that's clearly just conjecture. All states are "artificial" creations based on historical, political, and social factors. Yugoslavia is no exception. Meanwhile, the autonomous region of Kosovo pretty clearly did not meet the definition of occupation under established international law, so your point is moot.
Using the precedent you argue for, Russia is entitled to its claims upon Ukraine, Greece is entitled to occupy and annex Istanbul, Mexico would be entitled to invade and occupy the American west, and many other examples. Regardless of whether or not you think it was fair, international law was established with post-WWII borders and trying to undo historical wrongs as it relates to borders only opens up Pandora's Box for countless nations to make claims to historical territories. The borders might not be ideal or even just, but that's the way they were determined to be, and international recognition of separatist territories that don't fall under the technical definitions of "occupation" or "colonization" is not considered legal under international law.
While I wholeheartedly agree that it is high time for nations to apologize for the genocides they committed against the Albanians, none of what you claimed in any way justifies the secession of Kosovo. Ultimately, the ruling simply argued that "might makes right," the exact opposite of what the UN is supposed to exist for. Kosovo got lucky that its supporters happened to be the Western hegemonic powers, but other nations like Ukraine, Cyprus, Georgia, Moldova, etc. haven't been so lucky.
I wonder why Serbia did not instead take the US and other Western countries to the ICJ over their recognition of Kosovo, which most consider having broken the UN Security Councill Resolution 1244. It seems it would be a much more sensible move. Even now I don't understand what stops Serbia from doing that.
Thanks Mark. Great question! I actually investigated this very issue and wrote a chapter in an excellent volume on the ICJ case edited by two international lawyers very close to the proceedings from the different sides. global.oup.com/academic/product/the-law-and-politics-of-the-kosovo-advisory-opinion-9780198717515?cc=us&lang=en& Many also wondered why Serbia didn't go after the US and EU states. It would have been a far stronger case. However, it was apparently warned not to do it. (and it couldn't go after smaller countries as that would have looked like bullying.) It opted to go for a less confrontational approach that would not have alienated it from the EU, but left the door open for a less clear outcome.
@@JamesKerLindsay " it was apparently warned not to do it" but by whom and how? I imagine if the US and the EU were to threaten Serbia with economic sanctions for taking them to the ICJ it would just have made them look bad and weaken their position over Kosovo. I imagine that a lot took place behind closed doors but I cannot find an explanation for Serbia to act the way it did. I assume they were able to hire some very good legal advisers, they should have been able to predict what the ICJ ruling was going to be.
@@markdowding5737 USA and EU countries are much stronger and have unbelievable leverage over politicians in Serbia. Basically they pay Serbian politicians to act a certain way (carrot) or threaten them to close the doors on them in EU integrations (stick). Ever since the collapse of Yugoslavia, it has lost its sovereignity
I am grateful and appreciate this video, since I believe (mis)interpretation of ICJ advisory opinion is one of the most confusing argument regarding Kosovo issue.
Regarding the question from your first comment, my answer is;
Serbia did ask wrong question but did it deliberately.
If the main reason of Serbia's request to ICJ is to prevent recognition of Kosovo's statehood by UN member states,
I think Serbia should have asked legality of the act of those member states, rather than that of Kosovo authority.
Then why did Serbia ask such wrong question? my guessing is that was the only way to proceed to ICJ process, considering the political atmosphere at the time when UNGA adopted the resolution requesting ICJ opinion.
As you mentioned in this video, this resolution (63/3) was adopted by 77 in favor, 6 against, 74 abstention.
Looking at the name of the countries abstained from voting, we will find most of the countries which had been recognizing the Kosovo independence(“Recognizer”) until that time.
But what if the question posed to ICJ has been the one such as "Is the recognition of Kosovo's statehood in accordance with Int'l law? Would those abstaining states have voted in the same way? I do not think so.
I think the request to ICJ itself was uncomfortable one for those "Recognizer". On the other hand, since most of "Recognizer" are from the West, it was difficult for them to oppose the use of ICJ as a tool of peaceful resolution of conflict. So, abstention was a kind of result from this “conflict of interest”. And I think those recognizers would be against the resolution in case their action(recognition), rather than declaration of independence by Kosovo authority, was the subject of consideration, and the request to ICJ itself would be fail.
Under such situation, there was no other way for Serbia but compromising the text of question and prioritizing the adoption of the resolution.
Not necessary. because when Serbia lost war 1999, Serbia already lost saying.
Just like Serbia won Kosovo when Ottoman collapsed, nobody cared what Ottoman and Kosovo (Albanians) say.
If you can't gain something in battlefield, you can never gain it in political talk.
I have a test on this tomorrow and this really helped. Thank you!
Great! Really glad it helped.
Dear James, amazing and insightful video.
Since you asked our opinions, here are my thoughts.
Hasn't the ICJ acted in rather pilatesque way on the matter, ie. avoiding on purpose to act as a proper judge on the matter by not issuing a clear and comprehensive statement?
I mean, it just stated the obvious, geopolitically speaking: the act of unilaterally declaring indipendence (or claiming powern on a certain territory) is in itself neither legal nor illegal. What matters is the recognition other states or powers provide.
But this has been the case since the dawn of civilization: from the Ionian revolt to the Greek war of independence and after.
Many present day balkans states - notably Serbia - are born out of a successful revolt against a legitimate and recognized power.
As you pointed out, it's not that they had much of a choice: the ICJ and UN clearly lack the power to enforce anything on anyone. They couldn't really rule without considering the balance of powers and the possible reaction to their verdict.
But if the matter is like this, can we really talk in terms law? How can there be the rule international law if the institution which should rule on these matter isn't free to rule without being influenced by the de facto balance of powers (as you say: any clear ruling would have set a precedent) and also lacks the power to enforce its verdicts if the parts decide not to respect it?
I personally find that this ruling is an implicit admission that international law isn't a binding force.
Thank you for your time if you find some to answer this comment.
Keep up with the good work! Awesome channel!
Serbia is not the only country that does not recognise the independence of Kosovo.. There are 100 others as well and 5 EU members. If so many countries don't it is pointless to expect from Serbia to recognase. The dialog is also pointless because each side wants the oposite solution and there is nothing in betweeen that can please both. After all, Cyprus was never expected to have a dialog with Turkish Republic of North Cyprus etc etc. If Kosovo beleives its fully independent, they don't need Serbian recognition
You realize he did an entire (excellent) video about which countries do and do not recognize Kosovo.…
Thanks! 😀
Great video, you may not understand this as a Brit, but the ICJ decision is what we Americans would call a “punt”. To be fair, they don’t want to mess up anything else in the Balkans. Not that it really would have changed the situation a ton, as their influence on events is minimal, but they just really didn’t want to touch the live wire
Thanks. Yes. I think you are absolutely right. I think this was exactly what the Court decided to do. Interestingly, I didn’t actually go into detail on the dissenting opinions. They were quite strong in their views and made some really important points. They are really worth a read.
I don't understand how the law does not bring the perspective of the War. If a war happens between two peoples groups inside a nation that results in division of power (since Serbia retreated it forces from Kosovo), then why should it be illegal to recognise a state that since then governs its own?
By the way, that was a very good video.
Thanks so much!
I think the point I always try to get across is that states HATE secession. They have created as many obstacles as possible for territories that want to break away. And they are really worried about anything that can set a precedent. This explains why they generally won’t recognise territories that have broken away without the permission of what we call the ‘parent state’.
In fact, there was a time that if a territory did manage to break away and prove its as a state it would be recognised as such. This was the prevailing norm in the nineteenth century and interestingly explained how many SE European states came into existence. But this is not the model any more. This is why we now have de facto states. Countries that effectively exist as states but won’t be recognised as such by the wider international community.
I hope this helps clarify things.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you for your time to explain to me. Best of wishes with your channel.
Of course. Winners write rules.
Serbia won Ottoman, Greece won Ottoman, they become independent;
13 colonies won British Empire, USA is independent;
Algeria won France, Vietnam won France, they become independent;
Bangladesh won Pakistan, South Sudan won Sudan, they become independent.
Since NATO won Serbia, Kosovo is independent; since Russia won Ukraine, Crimea is part of Russia.
Very easy to understand. Very logical. Very making sense.
And of course very jungle rules.
@@JamesKerLindsay but British Empire didn't want to give up 13 colonies, but native Americans never wanted loss land to European colonizers?
did their fate and position have ever been cared? NO. because they lost war.
Do you think Kosovo's secession should have been recognized? I mean, why serbian populated area of the Croatia back then couldn't break away from Croatia, and why Serb populated part of Bosnia can't? I mean.. Let's be real, America, UK, Germany etc. are being too hypocritical.
Thanks Nemanja. It is an incredibly complex situation. There are various aspects that need to be separated from one another. First, there’s the question of Croatia’s secession. Under the 1974 Constitution the nations had a right of secession. But what this meant was disputed. Serbia argued it applied to the nations as peoples. Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia saw it belonging to the republics as the territorial embodiment of the nations. This was considered by the Badinter Commission, which argued the right was with the republics - a not unrealistic view given the principle of international law on the sanctity if substate boundaries in cases of independence. In this sense, while Croatia’s secession was perhaps regrettable - and I fully believe Germany acted hastily - it was not the same as the RSK’s secession, which clearly went against international principles. The same applies to RS. But, equally, Kosovo was considered to not have the right of secession. In this sense it’s recognition is a contravention of international law. That said, I do believe that many Serbs have never really considered the wider circumstances of the situation. Kosovo existed pretty much as a republic, and has a population that is overwhelmingly opposed to staying under Serbian rule. I understand why a Serbia is unhappy at the way it has been treated over Kosovo. No other state has been stripped of its territory in this way. But I’m not sure what people who want to keep hold of Kosovo expect would happen if it did stay in Serbia. The cost and difficulties of trying to control the territory would be massive. That’s why I have always believed a negotiated secession - perhaps with territorial changes - would make the most sense. But in this context, my bigger question is why was it OK for Croatia to use force to put down a secession, but it wasn’t for Serbia? This is certainly not to say that I advocate using force in either situation! This just is meant to highlight that the international community may frown on armed force to put down secession, but it often tacitly accepts it. But in the case of Kosovo it didn’t. I suspect that it really came down to the fact that many countries were by that point exasperated with Milošević. He used up a lot of political capital in Bosnia and Croatia and so when Kosovo happened there was little patience for his actions. In another situation can there may have been more pressure for a peace agreement based on extensive autonomy, but no one trusted him by that point. That’s why I firmly believe that Milošević lost Kosovo for Serbia. I hope that provides an answer. As I said, it is rather complex.
because winners write rules.
Why USA UK France support Austria-Hungary Empire and Ottoman Empire self-determine but they don't self-determine?
Why USA support de-colonization but refuse native American Self-determine?
Because Austria-Hungary and Ottoman defeated in war; and the colonizers (British French) get defeated in war.
Because Serbia get defeated in war.
@@allianceofunitedcommunitie5541 “Because winners write rules” I agree. I really love UK, France... but I feel big disappointment when it comes to political attitudes of those countries towards Kosovo issue. After our long friendship (alliance in WW1 and WW2) with them, I would never expect their support for Kosovo’s independence. I feel even more disappointed when I think about facts that some Slavic countries like Poland and Czechia also recognized Kosovo’s independence..
On the other hand, Republika Srpska(Serbian populated area of Bosnia) doesn’t have support from UK, France, USA, Poland, Czechia etc. to declare independence. That makes no sense, because there is no logical reason for Kosovo Albanians to have right of independence declaration, and Serbs outside of Serbia not to have that right. That’s not fair.
@@nemanjajovanovic2957
First, the winners rule is the world dirty rules; I never say it is fair nor good nor justice! but it is what it is!
Second, the only reason why countries do anything is pure on interest rather than ideology.
example: British French fight for centuries, when Germany becomes strong, they are good friends!
Iraq dictator, but Saudi Arabia is ok.
British French side with ottoman against Russia empire in crimea war (1850s)
Thirdly, I understand your disappointed, but what about native Americans disappointed? and maybe 1912 kosovo Albanians disappointed even during Ottoman time Balkans disappointed?
Finally, I never write these rules! I only point out the dirty politics even though it cound be offensive.
@@JamesKerLindsay Ok, maybe they didn’t trust him at that point because of 90s wars, but it is still not ok to give some territory right of secession, and not to give that possibility to someone else. I think that politicians should not make decisions in rage and to make some kind of revenge. And besides, in 2008 when Declaration of Independence took place, Milosevic’s ruling days were over long time ago. Then why? Republika Srpska is also a serbian entity, majorly populated by ethnic Serbs and they probably also want independence from Bosnia and Hercegovina, that’s why the war broke out in 90s. Why can Bosnia countrol Serbian entity which also functions pretty much as a Republic, but Kosovo got support to unilaterally declare independence from Serbia? And Republika Srpska also has population that is overwhelmingly opposed to staying under rule of Bosnia and Hercegovina, and still nobody supports them in getting independence. I mean, that really makes no sense. And yeah, how was it okay for Croatia to put down a secession using force, but that was not okay in case of Serbia? You get me James? I just don’t get how neither Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia succeeded in getting independence, but Albanians in Kosovo did in 2008.
First let me start with an compliment on the detailed analysis (both in nuances and complexity) before I offer my opinion. As in many other multilevel issues the micro in the macro and vice versa is crucial.
Did Serbia ask the wrong question? Yes it did. Why? You hinted one reason and I agree with not having any definite facts on it but knowing since the fall of Milosevic regime all following serbian legislations were under tremendous pressure by western political influences often ignoring or not verifying essential serbian interest and placing only geopolitical thus global power player interests first. So the type of question asked by Vuk Jeremic could offer an "not losing face" option to all sides envolved. The ICY did also nothing groundbreaking new by pointing out that it is not what or who announces declerations of independence but who does recognise that declaration is ALL that matters for the political reality. In 2008 following Athisaris recommendation the Albanians unilaterly declared indedepence and over 80 states (such as USA, France, UK, Germany and others) immediately recognized this (self)recommended declaration. Broken and troubled with over a decade of civil war, sanctions, ugly propaganda, bombings and agression Serbia was not able to represent and state their own interest such as protecting it´s sovereignty.
Today in 2020 it is somewhat different though.
1.) Serbia has grown and recovered economically and therefore established it´s position as an important regional country for trade, infrastructure etc. On the field of diplomacy it has been also successfully engaging in representing the countries best interest based on mutual coperations with others.
2.) Also the geopolitical scene today is a different one than in 2008. Much of the neoliberal NATO type of unilateralism is not applicable anymore. With Brexit, China, Russia, EU openly parting on foreign policies with the USA etc. the world has become a different place.
These two factors are going to have major influences on any future Kosovo solutions.
Thank you very much. I’m really glad you found it interesting. I agree that the wider context has indeed changed enormously. Did you see my video on Kosovo recognitions? This rather makes the point that Serbia has been rather successful in its counter-recognition campaign. This has inevitably changed the context of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. However, I’m rather less certain about the wider geopolitical context. Russia is a useful ally, but it is not Serbia’s future. It’s level of support in real terms is minimal and it offers no future for Serbia’s economic or political growth. (In a region heading towards NATO and EU, Serbia will never be a Balkan leader as a Russian ally.) Ultimately, I firmly believe that Serbia’s future lies in the EU. It will need to reach a final settlement with Kosovo to achieve this. And I believe such a deal is genuinely in the interests of all sides. The key question is whether and how Belgrade can leverage the situation to do the best deal possible. It is in a stronger position than it has been since 2008 (or even 1999), but I am not sure that it will last indefinitely.
@@JamesKerLindsay I do share your point that the future of Serbia and actually all former Yougoslavian states lies in the EU. Ironically they will all be together in a federal type of confederation that they had in the first place, but...that´s another story. Mainstream politics in the Ex-YU was always a walking the line game between the west and east with Tito as a master player in that context. Looking at todays situation I think it is safe to say that global powers do not really make "allies" but rather temporary associations along the way if it serves their agenda. Therefore the traditional affiliation with Russia for example is more an emotional one that is relevant as a countermeasure on all the pressure from the west than a economic/political one.
Also the reality de facto is that all former YU states, including Serbia, have to play the neoliberal game and accept the EU standards and regulations even though only Slovenija and Croatia are current members who get to benefit from membership. The hypocrisy of the EU is blatantly obvious since they advocate and strive for unity and "western values" within but change, improvise and double standard rules in the western Balkan. Here the rules change every 20-50 km based on the politics on the ground and resemble more a neo colonial format disrespecting their very own member duties and privileges that they claim are universal in the EU.
So the majority in Serbia is not keen anymore on joining under such conditions and has it´s neighboring Croatia, Romania or Bulgaria as examples what to expect and actually get if you become a EU member. Frankly the situation is pretty much the same (good and bad) in the entire region maybe with Bosnia and Kosovo being the worst economically.
One possible solution could be the forming of common economic confederations such as the "Mini Schengen" project to join and share forces, markets to improve and grow simular to the way how the EU has started originally as a economic project after WWII.
If the "Balkan for the Balkans" would be accepted by Russia, EU and USA is unfortunately to be debated.
Thanks. It is clear that support for the EU has dropped. And I can see why. Everyone looks at it and wonders whether it is still the exclusive club it used to be. Also, there is a sense that it doesn’t uphold its promises anyway. Nevertheless, I do think it remains the main fake in town. The idea of localised cooperation is certainly interesting, and I have long argued that regional cooperation should be pursued regardless of EU integration, but EU integration still remains the main impetus for reform and cooperation. But I see why people are so disillusioned with it all.
@@JamesKerLindsay Unfortunately the EU has lost their integrity by demonstrating on numerous occassions that they do not honour their word. This way they lost any kind of real leverage or negotation offerings. Further you have to take in account that everyone knows that let´s say France and Germany after WWII just needed 5 Yrs to start serious future peaceful projects for the benefit of both peoples where as here the so called international community seems to be more interested to keep the entire region on "red alert" status in the last 20+ yrs. In the best case this demonstrates sheer incapability and in the worst divide et impera.
Wow ok, now this was a brilliant video, i have to admit, i did not expect this. Well done, 9/10, fair and balanced.
What to say on the subject of the video? Its difficult. My first immediate thought is that this ruling switched the international framework from one that was static (and at that time) mostly understood to be in favor of sovereignty and territorial integrity (where UN members were expected to support and favor the integrity and sovereignty of fellow UN members, before that of any rising unilateral claimants) to one where both sovereignty and territorial integrity are not automatically guaranteed as recognized UN borders, but as broad arbitrary interpretation of third parties (neighbors, regional or super powers), who can then trade and peddle these interpretations as they please, and even outright follow opposing principles from case to case.
To put this into practical terms, in the case of Kosovo, US chose to violate both sovereignty and territorial integrity of the parent country, but then in a very similar case of Crimea (or even Caucasian break away republics which are admittedly a slightly different example) 2 decades later, it reverted, and supported the parent country. Then-president Obama even went as far as to mention Kosovo's independence referendum as a standard for referendums when referring to the one held in Crimea (which US dont recognize, naturally). One problem being: Kosovo, of course, never had a independence referendum.
I personally see three things worth mentioning here:
1.) As you said yourself, i dont doubt that this ruling was made with Western interests in mind, and the geo-political consequences a different ruling could have. So in a way what happened here, in my humble opinion, is that the West (namely US and UK as the main event drivers in case of Kosovo) has achieved a post-factum political vindication of its intervention and state building in Kosovo. But. While this was a undisputed win at the time, i also think this really turned around and bit them in the proverbial behind, starting with Russia-Georgia war of 08' and certainly and fairly self evidently in the case of Crimean reunification. Both US and UK have attempted - and promptly failed - to gather not only the traditional "international community" (a horrible phrase that really just means US + allies + US dependencies), but in this case properly, the real international community - meaning the rest of the world. Countries such as India, China, Brazil and so on, who then promptly looked back at US and UK and went like "you w0t m8 lol no". And specifically because of this ruling. If you remember the Balkan affairs of that time, it was also when US diplomats started aggressively referring to Kosovo as "unique case", in an attempt to persuade people that what happened there does not apply elsewhere and that we are back to sovereignty & territorial integrity. Naturally nobody bought that nonsense, just as nobody buys it when they use it in case of Bosnia.
2.) The person who was managing/handling this whole affair from Serbian side was one Vuk Jeremic - who later went on to become president of the UN general assembly. A feat that would be EXTREMELY difficult to achieve had he managed to previously piss off (or even annoy) Americans / the West in any way shape of form. And something that i personally choose to believe was more of a reward of what had previously been a mutually beneficial partnership. Perhaps. I do agree that the question was asked in a criminally bad way though. Maybe i shouldnt attribute to malice that what can adequately be described by incompetence. Maybe. But im not a professor nor an analyst, so i can be petty.
3.) If you are a small country and you have hope that the post World War 2 UN framework exists to protect you against abuse of major powers, boy are you living in a world of fantasies. And while you may say "gee Joe, did you just figure this out?", i would like to point out this: if this is our new normal - that US (or anyone else) can simply choose overnight to set up a new country on your territory - what argument can those of us who are against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, provide back? How can i blame Iran or North Korea for wanting to have nuclear bombs, if we live in the world where the measure of your sovereignty and territorial integrity is not based on international laws and UN documents, but is directly proportional to your ability to lob a thermonuclear bomb to Washington/Moscow/Beijing/any future would be power?
Thanks. Elements of the Opinion were in fact incredibly weak. The third part on the provisional institutions made little sense. But, as I noted, the question asked was deliberately designed to be more ambiguous than many realise. It gave the judges a way out that they might not have had if the question had focused on the obligation of member states to respect I’ve another’s territorial integrity. I’d also say that I am a little more positive about international law favouring small states. But , I agree, trying to enforce rulings is next to impossible. Aside from Russia’s bad behaviour in Crimea, you might also want to take a look at my video on the Chagos Islands. This has not been Britain’s finest hour! ruclips.net/video/3mK6XJOqe9E/видео.html (I also keep meaning to do a video on the US and Hawaii. Now there’s an interesting story!)
And than you wander why the Muslims ☪️ hate america talk about double standards,the countrys that don't recognise Kosovo spain russia china etc you can figure out why
@James Ker-Lindsay
Well, I don't think it is the matter how, what or which question Serbia would ask. Because of the very delicated political situation and the political implications the court would try in any circumstance to avoid an answer where you get a clear statement.
However let us take a look in France: the Basque country, the Bretagne, Corsica,
in Turkey: Kurdistan;
in Spain: Catalonia, Galicia
in GB: Scottland, Northern Ireland
just to mention a few (but there are more). Let them give independence and then this hypocritical countries could also ask the court about legality of declaration of independence. They could then ask the " *RIGHT* " questions and let us see what this international "court of justice" will answer. This is obviously more a circus for certain purposes then a real objective court - imho.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Sagledajte i podjelite naš kanal:
ruclips.net/channel/UCWCFuNrKMDF2K7KBqRB20kA
Bezplatna online-knjiga za sve!:
drive.google.com/file/d/1ar5jIzoEeS9w7Ikej8pf_WMMsvX5PFny/view
No worry.
When Kurdish freedom fighters win Turkey, when Catalonia freedom fighters, and Scottish Freedom fighters win UK; they will be independent.
(Texas vs. White: There is no right to secede, except Revolution or consent of states.)
This is a really underated chanel love from kosovo it self
Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. Very best regards from London.
This is an incredible analysis, I will buy your book!
May I ask what is your opinion on the reasons behind the US and NATO's pro-Kosovo stance and the intervention, considering both the US and NATO strongly pushed for Kosovo's independence and intervened through Operation Allied Force?
I wrote multiple essays during my studies about Operation Allied Force-how it was described as a humanitarian intervention while actually being a way for the US especially with NATO to obtain certain power in the Balkan region through the newly independent Kosovo. The reasoning I have is that while the operation was described as humanitarian, it was not only done without the UN Security Council's approval, but also large amounts of depleted uranium were used, eventually spreading to parts of Kosovo as well, where Albanians reside (so the humanitarian aspect then is not the true intention, if the oppressed population is affected by the operation).
Maybe I'm wrong, what are your thoughts?
Thanks so much. Ultimately, I think the problem was Milošević. It’s very hard for people in Serbia, especially the young, to realise how much damage he did to Serbia in the 1990s. I know many people like to think that the West hated Yugoslavia and wanted to destroy it. That simply wasn’t the case. Germany certainly made a stupid decision to push for the recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, but there wasn’t a conspiracy against Serbia. The problem is that Milošević, instead of letting the republics go and pushing for strong Serb minority rights, supported efforts to keep all Serbs in one country. But even this wasn’t the real issue. It was the way that he lied, cheated and deceived negotiators throughout ten wars. All this meant that by the time Kosovo erupted there just wasn’t any trust left. Many saw this as Milošević stirring things up again. Taken with ten view after Srebrenica and Rwanda that the international community couldn’t stand aside in the face of human rights abuses, there were calls to act when the situation in Kosovo deteriorated. I have written that I don’t think the West set out to create an independent Kosovo. Instead, once they had intervened, they were forced to accept it. It soon became clear that any attempt to return Kosovo to Serb rule would lead to an Albanian uprising. It was a case of seemingly good intentions gone wrong. I fully understand why many Serbs feel angry about what happened. But it is also depressing how few will now try to understand the context of the time and accept that Kosovo is the price Serbia pays for Milošević.
@@JamesKerLindsay I agree with what you've said and unfortunately people don't understand that the situation would've perhaps turned out differently if Milosevic didn't do what he did. I do believe though that the reason why Serbs think the West is to be blamed too, is because of other situations in the world where the West has acted/is acting differently, therefore making the Serbs wonder if the point of interventions is justice or it is about other motives (e.g. the US support of Israel right now, etc, appears hypocritical).
Thank you for your insight!! Always good to see/hear different perspectives and opinions
Man speaks well but one thing here west make rules,beak them, rewrite etc...That is power.Everyone knows how unilateral declaration of independence in any case is wrong and again they all acting like it's fine.And deliberately reject to answer the real question...As Serb its sad to me to see west always against Serbia and taking side on muslim separatists creating narco,mafia one clear islamic state in europe controlled by USA...
Stop spreading false information and anti-muslim propaganda. The west stopped WW1 and WW2. They make better decisions and understand politics better than you do. No wonder every ex-yugoslavia state hates Serbia. Criminal people living there who still haven't seen justice.
@@niccolomachiavelli8763 get brainwashed
Stefan, what your last name means?
Visiting post at the University of Pristina... and not a qualified lawyer to boot
Yes. And also affiliated to the University of Belgrade and whose work criticising the path to Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence has been translated into Serbian. www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
And while I am not a lawyer, I do hold a PhD in International relations and am the author of the leading text on how states prevent secession published by Oxford University Press global.oup.com/academic/product/the-foreign-policy-of-counter-secession-9780199698394?cc=ro&lang=en&
Anyway, nice try. 👏👏👏🙂
The history of Kosovo is very complicated due to the numerous occupations, so they manipulated the history of the Albanians at a time when the Albanian people were fighting for their existence.
But after many wars, sufferings and pains, today we have come to a time when the voice of the Albanian people has begun to be heard, and this hinders our former occupiers!
European historians know that we are the oldest people in the Balkans and perhaps the continent, but the past centuries have often ignored the injustices done to the Albanian people because of the interests and powers of the time such as Russia!
But with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the unification of Germany, something positive began for the Albanians as well!
Kosovo is a state with the desire of more than 95% of the population living in it!
Let’s not push nationalist agenda. Double standards if it doesn’t apply to Albanians as well as the Serbian coalition.
If the court believes declaration of independence is legal then what is Kosovo in their eyes if not a state?
Also, if the US and European powers weren't set on Kosovo becoming independent, do you think the court would have found arguments to rule the declaration was illegal? On the same note, aren't the countries that recognize Kosovo independence being hypocritical by not recognizing Catalonia's independence?
It’d be interesting what our reaction to Kosovo would have been if the Lewinsky affair never occurred.
Kosovo is a Serbian land. Albanians moved to Kosovo during the Ottoman occupation. The Ottoman census of 1455 shows that 99% of Kosovo's population at that time was Serb. Albanians begin immigrating to Kosovo after the Great Migration of Serbs in 1690. When Serbs were forced to leave Kosovo massively under Turkish persecution ... However, Serbs made up the majority of the population in Kosovo until 1878 and the persecution committed by Albanians and Turks during the Serbian War of Independence 1876 - 1878. But Kosovo is a Serbian land and an example of population replacement, which also awaiting Europe ... Likewise, Europe's native Christian population will gradually be replaced by Muslim Immigrants...
Serbia made the great mistake of not expelling all Albanians in the time of Kosovo's liberation from the Turks in 1912. In the time of Yugoslavia, Albanians in Kosovo had an autonomy that no minority nation in the world had, they even had a university in Albanian language. Albanians used their autonomous government power to continue harassing and persecuting the remaining Serbs from Kosovo, until Serbia intervened in 1990. Albanians have no right to live in Kosovo, and especially have no right to proclaim their "state" in the Serbian Holy Land, because Kosovo for Serbs is the same as Jerusalem for Jews. As from 0% of Kosovo's population, Albanians came to 90%. It will also return to 0% again. There is no measure that can describe the degree of hatred of Serbs towards Albanians. Albanians simply have no future in Kosovo, the Serbs will arm themselves, create a strong and modernly equipped army. And when the time comes, we will expel Albanian invaders from Serbian Kosovo. If anything, we would rather burn Kosovo with Nuclear Weapons than leave Kosovo to Albanians. It is best for all Albanians to move out. Germany, USA, Canada, Australia have a great need for immigrants. Albanians would also be better off there than in Kosovo.
If Kosovo have right to independence, than i don"t know why Republika Srpska can"t also have referendum on independence! Greetings from Slovenia!
Serbians agreed to the dayton agreement, where a bosnian federation would include reoublika srpska. Bosnian Serbs have equal rights in the federation and wish to remain part of bosnia
Great video! I have a question. Does this opinion from ICJ indirectly could mean, that right of the people to self-determination is more primary than inviolability of borders? I mean some could easily interpret this case as a precedent. Some even trying to right now
Thanks. Great question. The ruling was really an attempt by the Court to steer a middle ground. It knew saying the declaration was illegal would just mean that many countries , in particular the US, would ignore it. This would weaken the ICJ’s standing. But saying it was legal would open up all sorts of problems. It therefore adopted a very narrow reading of the question. It avoided the question of whether Kosovo is an independent state. It essentially said that any territory could declare independence (except if there was a formal international prohibition on this, such as a UN resolution), but that didn’t make it a state. What matters is recognition. Do other countries accept it as independent? In essence the Court made it a free speech issue!
@@JamesKerLindsay Yeah, i get that from video. It's just frustrates me in seeking for some stable ground on this matter. I mean countries could have their own interest on un/recognising someone. And how to know who is in the right here? Every time I hear about Crimea incident it comes with "international law" in one sentence, but then i remember this case of Kosovo and its becoming more complicated. Anyway, thanks for the video and an answer
Sometimes you look at the Western Balkans and think, "so, why was Yugoslavia such a bad idea, again?"
Yes. Not a popular view, but certainly a legitimate one.
Because of Western policy it will get recognized as a UN member. The same way they established courts in Yugoslavia and Ruanda. Breaching all law.
Prussia was said to be an army with a State. Kosovo is a criminal organization with a State.
If Kosovo is a criminal organisation then what does that make Serbia? The ISIS of Europe?
Lately, Kosovo Government has wanted to take a genocide case against Serbia to an international court. How will this effect on the region, do you have any opinion?
Thanks. This has actually been talked about for years. To be honest, I’m not sure what Pristina would hope to achieve by it at this stage. It will just further ramp up tensions and make finding a settlement more difficult. Frankly, at this stage, I’d like to see more effort from all sides to find a workable final deal.
Kosovo je srbija 🇵🇱🇷🇸🇷🇺🇭🇷🇸🇰🇸🇮🇨🇿
Haha Poland is one of the biggest supporter of Kosovo as Independent state..
@@perpaimbe8849 No.
Kid ask your mother before ypu post next time
Absolutely brilliant 👏
Thank you very much indeed! It was a fascinating case in so many ways.
Fantastic channel James!
Thanks so much, Gregor! Really looking forward to chatting about YT when we next see you.
You forgot to say: Uck attacked Serbian police with the help of Us & EU providing them weapons to provoke Serbian Militairy...
Thanks. I’m sure you understand that I can’t possibly hope to go into every detail. A guerrilla campaign rather presupposes attacks against police and army units. As fit the assertion that the EU and US supplied the KLA with arms directly, I have seen no evidence to support this. In fact, in 1998, the year before, the US still viewed it as a terrorist movement. Ultimately, it was Milošević’s atrocious actions (not just in Kosovo, but also earlier in Bosnia) that led NATO to step in. I am extremely critical of the way the status process was handled. But equally people in Serbia need to understand how Kosovo was really lost!
Serbia wanted to invade Kosovo, so UQK was protecting their Land dude, everyone would protect their land 🇽🇰🇦🇱🇽🇰
@@MJ-cg5yt their non existing Land
@Ledi Shabani You forget that Kosovo&Metohija is Serbian province and that "Kosovar" as an identity is made up term. Also you forget that US got on the KLA's side just so they can later construct camp Bondsteel when "Kosovo" declare independence. Also you forget that KLA("Kosovars") was listed as an terrorist organization and that there is a certain "yellow house" in Albania. With all that said your comment seems uneducated.
Why don’t Somaliland do the same thing in the ICJ regarding it once was a country recognised by the UN and with the same boarders?
Hello James. Thank you so much for creating such informative content these last few months. I would love to hear more about post-independence agriculture policy and trade in Kosovo circa 2008-2009. Thank you again for sharing this wealth of information with us. Love the channel!
Hi Dylan, thanks so much for the comment. I am so glad you like the channel. Regarding the question about agriculture, let me have a think about some people who might be able to help and then get back to you. I got the email.
@@JamesKerLindsay Thank you! Much appreciated.
BYE BYE KOSMET! Never coming back. Serbian policies are to blame for all of their recent losses, not just Kosovo.
Bye Bye ISTRIA
🇮🇹🇮🇹🇮🇹🇮🇹🇮🇹🇮🇹🇮🇹
Interesting how you sir take last 20 or so years as the reason of the conflict regarding Kosovo. One question for you, how did Albanians get to be in the territory of Serbia in the 1st place? Now that is the history and explains everything as well as the final result that we know and have today.
Thank you.
I’ve done previous videos on Kosovo. And I certainly know the background history to the issue. I was actually critical of the independence process and gave written extensively on it www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354 But I have no time for the arguments from either side about an exclusive historical right to land. Arguments about who was there first are just silly and irrelevant. After hundreds of years, it really doesn’t matter.
Hello sir, how far back you want to go?
Quote from Wikipedia:
"Slavic migrations to the Balkans took place between the 6th to 7th centuries."
So, please tell me when Slavs arrived in the Balkans were there no Albanians at all at that time? Or were Slavs invading, enslaving and assimilating the autochthonous population of the Balkans? They managed to come as far as Durres (North Albania - Adriatic Coast) raiding and settling in the Balkans.
Or, maybe you'll say that Proto-Albanians didn't exist and put something like we come from Turkey/Otoman Empire even that our language and archeological facts tell the opposite.
Please, double check your facts. Even tho, I agree with what @James Ker-Lindsay said, that it doesn't really matter after all those years I felt like responding to you. I don't mean to offend you at all and I would be happy to reply to any argument or question you might have. Have a nice day from Kosova.
How did Serbs or Slavs then and Serbs now occupied Albanian and Dardanian territory ? They Claim that they fight the battle of Kosova, of which they never won in first place , and secondly you can have a fight in foreign Land , it doesn't necessarily make it yours. Albanian fought and win many battles in 1444 against Ottomans in few places around our neighbours, like North Macedonia , Monte Negro or Perhaps Serbia (Not Dardania included),
But we are not creating mythology over it .
Albanians never “got to be” in the territory my man, they were always living there in the first place.
Any argument about "the first people" is absurd. Migrations happen all the time, and are no objective ground for right over the land.
Can you do a video on Manchukuo's declaration of independence from China in 1931?
Hej James what about resolution of 1244?
What about the TEMPORARY program of resolution 1244 ?
@@arijan5079 Resolution is still on power
@@ntx.2731 Its since 2008 de facto invalid
Personally I recognise the independence of Kosovo.
Yes 👍👍 Kosova is independent, Sanxhak is Albanian, Hungary is Ukraine, Slovakia and Czech is Germany, Poland is Germany, Slovenia is Croatia, Romania is Albanian! Long live Albania
@@user-xv9gz5tl6x krejt europen pe marrum nanen pi ja qim 😂😂😂
@@user-xv9gz5tl6x Liar.
Its good that your opinion doesnt matter anyway
@Lazer Blade Lazar well its independent either way
Hello! Do you think Albania and Kosovo will ever unite? And if they do, how would Serbia react.
Немања 03 Thanks. Very good question. It is very difficult to say if it will happen. I could certainly see circumstances where it does. If full recognition and UN membership seems impossible, then voices for unification - albeit as a very decentralised federation or confederation - may grow. As for Serbia’s reaction, obviously there would be official government outrage. However, I suspect that it might not be viewed as a disaster by any means. It is actually far easier to Belgrade to accept this than to have to recognise an independent Republic of Kosovo. In fact, politically it solves a lot of problems for Serbia. Serbia recognises Albania. That could continue. Belgrade could say that it doesn’t recognise the ‘annexation’ of Kosovo, but otherwise maintains very good relations with Tirana ‘despite their dispute over Kosovo’. The situation would be even easier if the north of Kosovo remains under Serb rule in such a scenario. Albania claims all of Kosovo, but only controls the area under the Ibar. Serbia claims all of Kosovo, but only controls the area north of the Ibar. They bury claim all of Kosovo, but in the meantime they just get on with things. In many ways, this situation would sort of parallel Northern Ireland. So, could I see it happening? Yes. How would Serbia react? Publicly outraged, but secretly probably rather OK with the situation. What do you think?
@@JamesKerLindsay interesting. Also, this might sound random, how would the west react if China invaded Taiwan considering a war with China would be catastrophic because it would destroy the global economy and kill thousands, if not millions of people.
@@РепубликаСрпска-в6у, and who is Serbia ? And what is Serbia gonna do? Start another war and face another defeat? Land belong to NO man,
@@eaglesland8093 i think that serbia cant really start a war again Because Of ne the US President which i think would directly attack serbia but i think this can even start ww3 .
@@JamesKerLindsay I can just say this, very soon faster than any of nato and usa can imagine. Just look Serbian history and how long we will wait to get back Kosovo,
Do you thinkiNg what are you saying PEACE AFTER ALL? Can you explain what did it USA AND EU to Serbia and why? Dont be idiot . This is just question of time , and Serbia has all the time of the world to bring back Kosovo . Just wait and be pation
Hello James, as usual very informative and enjoyable video. Have you ever visited Kosovo yourself?
Thanks a lot. Yes. I have been to Kosovo many times. In fact, I was a (non-resident) visiting scholar at the University of Pristina a few years ago.
James Ker-Lindsay great! Did you enjoyed it?
@@JamesKerLindsay Prishtina*
What do you think could've stopped the war, or what would the solution be to such problem where a genocide was taking place?
Great video as always. One thing that I'm wondering about is to which extent (if at all) does the fact that UN1244 mention the "sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the other countries of the region" explicitly, play a role in the decision of ICJ? The problem with that wording is that Serbia and Montenegro (and later Serbia) were subsequently denied their request to be seen as the legal successor of the FRY. Is the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia also implied by the statement, or are we speaking of some premeditated legal sleight of hand (to an even larger extent than we normally are)? At any rate, to me, the whole ICJ opinion business smells of a cop-out based on technicalities, coupled with hypocritical avoidance of establishing a precedent. These double standards (everyone can secede from Yugoslavia and Serbia, but Serbs cannot secede from anywhere) are probably the biggest problem the Serbs have with the international community and institutions.
Edit: Oh my, we seem to have started an even worse dumpster fire with this one 🙂
1244 is not valid in Kosovo anymore since 17.02.2008, so buddy 1244 is dead wake up
@@perpaimbe8849 I have no idea what is valid there, honestly I don't want to know, but last time I checked it was the only UN document talking about the status of the disputed territory.
Technically, it is actually still valid. It may not be effectively *enforced* any longer, but it still remains *in force*. Resolution 1244 was a very strange resolution. Indeed, I think it is unique. Most UN resolutions putting in place a UN mission have to be renewed on a regular basis. For example, the UN renews the peacekeeping force in Cyprus every six months. However, Resolution 1244 is in force until the Security Council says that it isn’t. So, while it doesn’t operate as it was envisaged in 1999, it does actually remain valid, even if only in a theoretical sense.
Thanks so much. This is such an interesting point. It is something that I have often thought about (and rather hoped no one would raise! 🤫😀). There is a really interesting discussion to be had here on the legal complexity thrown up by the ambiguous status of Yugoslavia and Serbia at the time of the resolution and what subsequent changes meant for Serbia’s claim to Kosovo. In truth, though, I think that it was takes as given that the context of the debate was Kosovo’s relationship to Serbia, not least of all due to its historical place as a man autonomy’s province of Serbia and that its status as a part of Serbia - rather than as an effective republic of Yugoslavia - has been essentially accepted by the Badinter Commission that had been asked by the EU to look into all these issues at the start of the wars. I don’t touch on it, but I very briefly allude to it in the video when I say that Kosovo’s calls for independence we’re rejected by Serbia and the international community. So, for all these reasons, I think we can regard the terms of 1244 as applying to Serbia, even though as you absolutely currently point out, there were very real questions about the exact legal situation. It really is a fascinating subject, isn’t it! And thanks for bringing it up, even though I rather hoped no one would. 😂
@@JamesKerLindsay It can be "valid" but in Kosoovo territory valide as suprime legal act is the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, we will soon kick out UNMIK out of Kosovo as relict of history ...
Did the court consider Serbian Law.? No. The court is biased to the West. Why isn't Wales independent?
I’m not a legal analyst, but in the beginning you stated that independence is claimed and given to invaded countries. Serbia invaded Kosovo in 1912. The same year Albania declared independence from Turkey . In an other video you did cover how most of Albanian ethnic lands were left out or allowed to be occupied by the neighboring countries ( Montenegro, Greece , Macedonia and Serbia ) at the same period of time. Prior All these lands including Albania were under Turkish empire since the occupation 500 years ago. The neighboring countries had already declared independence from Turkey 70-80 years prior and claimed their natural lands. One of the issues that Serbia had was is the question , if Kosovo or Kosova as it was called prior to the Serb invasion , is Serbian land. That may have created a bigger issue beside the political one that you so elaborately explained and open the Pandora’s box for Serbia and the other neighboring countries , were large ethnic Albanians live that Serbia most likely wants to avoid. Today I see a lot of their so called historians trying hard to make the claim that they were there before Albanias and that not only Albanians but even them the Serbs ( that are actually slavs and started to move to the Balkan region In the 4th century AD ) are connected to the Illyrians or their descendants. So the question is Kosovo an invaded country, may have not been to their interest.
I think the important thing to realise is that international law changed dramatically after 1945. New principles emerged. Moreover, the borders established in Europe, and in the Balkans, following Ottoman rule were confirmed by treaties. So, while many might claim certain territories were occupied, or even that they could be considered colonies, in a strictly legal sense they weren’t.
Albanian history is still part of debate, it is not facts. As records of your people are not found till the 11 st. And with Dna halpogrups testing it's becoming prevalent that Dinaric people are mostly ingenious to Balkan.
@@rakun-raccoon1907
If you want to make a claim then you have to tell the whole story. It looks that we were there before you. Sorry!
Below is word for word from Wikipedia:
The origin of the Albanians has long been a matter of debate within scholarship. The Albanians first appear in the historical record in Byzantine sources of the 11th century. At this point, they were already fully Christianized. The Albanian language forms a separate branch of Indo-European, first attested in the 15th century, and is considered to have evolved from one of the Paleo-Balkan languages of antiquity.[1] The surviving pre-Christian Albanian culture shows that Albanian mythology and folklore are of Paleo-Balkanic origin and that almost all of their elements are pagan.[2]
The main theories on Albanian origins all suppose a Paleo-Balkanic main origin, but they vary between attributing this origin to Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, or another Paleo-Balkan people whose language was unattested; among those who support an Illyrian origin, there is a distinction between the theory of continuity from Illyrian times, and those proposing an in-migration of a different Illyrian population. These propositions are however not mutually exclusive. The Albanians are also one of Europe's populations with the highest number of common ancestors within their own ethnic group even though they share ancestors with other ethnic groups.[3]
Debate Edit
Those who argue in favour of an Illyrian origin maintain that the indigenous Illyrian tribes dwelling in South Illyria went up into the mountains when Slavs occupied the lowlands,[4][5] while another version of this hypothesis states that the Albanians are the descendants of Illyrian tribes located between Dalmatia and the Danube who spilled south.[6]
Scholars who support a Dacian origin maintain on their side that Albanians moved southwards between the 3rd and 6th centuries AD from the Moesian area, in present-day Romania.[7] Others argue instead for a Thracian origin and maintain that the proto-Albanians are to be located in the area between Niš, Skopje, Sofia and Albania[8] or between the Rhodope and Balkan Mountains, from which they moved to present-day Albania before the arrival of the Slavs.[9]
The general consensus is that Albanians, ethnically and linguistically, originate from one or possibly a mixture of Paleo-Balkan peoples but which specific peoples is a matter of continuing debate.[10][11][12][13][14]
HAHAHA THERE WAS GENOCIDE MADE BY ALBANIANS BROOOO
@@srle6711 there was never a genocide made by Albanians but in the contrary there were many made by servs
Such a great analysis James, you have earned a subscriber!
Great! Thanks so much. :-) I am really pleased you like the channel. Do let me know if there are any topics you would like to see me cover. I’m always keen to hear ideas.
Since you put the Kosovo as a separate country on Europe map then for you it is. But for us living in country where Kosovo is the part of Serbia then the answer is no.
You are right indeed. This question wasnt asked because serbian government was back than, very deep influensed by US secret service. You could cover the recent questions that Serbia is asking in dialogue with Kosovo, they do really look like the right ones. Thank you for this article
Thanks a lot. It is interesting to consider whether the current government in Serbia would have taken a different approach. There was a lot of pressure brought to beat on Belgrade over the issue. On the current talks, I’m not sure anyone has any idea where they are going now. The EU seemed more interested in making sure that the US doesn’t run things than on really considering what it wants to achieve in the dialogue. Personally, I favour a final comprehensive agreement. In my experience, pursuing little agreements here and there is really a waste of time. Far better for Serbia and Kosovo to draw a line under the issue. The question is what will the cost have to be to reach an agreement?
Kosovo was colonized. What are you saying dude?
No, it wasn’t. Colonisation for the purposes of self-determination refers to the overseas colonisation of European powers. Many in Kosovo may regard it as colonisation but it doesn’t fit the standard accepted definition of the term.
@@JamesKerLindsay what else would you call it ?
Kosovo itself Is a Serb word.
How did THEY colonise them?
The cowardness of not accepting the opinion of ICJ of those asking the question in the first place still amazes me.
The ICJ opinion has been manipulated by the politicians on both sides to fit the preferred narrative.
The ICJ was asked an irrelevant pro forma question, and its ruling has been formulated in a way that neither confirms nor denies Kosovo's statehood.
It did not bind either side to anything which disputes your argument entirely.
@@ukilectric The court knew what they were asking (Is Kosovo able to unilaterally declare itself independent = Is it independent), but chose to parse the language to give a meaningless answer so as not to upset the US.
Serbs often point out how all this is not fair, many actually believe that everyone hates Serbs because they are so much better than everyone else, but this is another story.
It is probably not fair, but still it did not happen all at once as there is a clear path that lead to everything described here. Long story short, Serbian leadership during the nineties never played a proper game so after so many fails it is too late to call things unfair.
I remember a show from the eighties very popular in Yugoslavia: "You Asked For It - Watch It!"
Thanks James
I see a pro serb approach at your videos!
I would like to get your opinion Canary Islands and Politicals situation Marroco-Spain at the some time CEuta-Melilla. I positive know maybe you can't put your finger on it as of yet.But you did catch up with the Catalonia problem. Because there is an eerie silence about it, even more the Spanish parliment gave a negative answer to accept all inmigrants can be share among the spanish communities. Almiral Nelson went off with the tail into the legs. But I am confident that in an hipotetic case, UK, Sweden , Norway , Germany will be the firsts in backing up this resolution.
I like your way of thinking and your strife to be completely objective. In that sence, i would urge you to reconsider and look into your statement at 3:11 as i think that "guerrilla campaign" is a VAST understatement concidering their actions before, during and after the Kosovo war . I think that "terrorist campaign" would be a more suitable term as the KLA was concidered by the US to be a terrorist organization up until shortly before the war.
😂😂😂KLA was terrorist based instead Milosevic Serbian troops were the good guys doing some routine ethnic cleaning in the balkans with bosnians and albanians
The KLA may have been terrorist but they were a necessary evil.
“At the end of the day it is a two-ended stick and the second end will come back and hit them in the face.”
Nice video as always. Is it forseeable that there would be an exchange of lands between Serbia and Kosovo to finally finish this dispute? Which places should be on it? Could it lead to Kosovo integrating in Albania?
Hello there, I'm from Kosovo. This idea is very opposed in Kosovo and integration(if by integration you mean unification) with Albania is something only a small percentage of people really want.
@@dimba8119 Hi why would people of kosovo oppose unification with albania?
@@Omni-mal A number of reasons: 1. Because there is a strong Kosovan identity growing, 2. I believe that unification with Albania would be very costly, 3. Kosovans fought for the freedom and statehood of Kosovo and don't want to throw that away by becoming another province, even if it is in Albania
@@dimba8119 would it be opposed too if Kosovo was given Presevo valley and membership to NATO and EU?
Kosovo would have to change their flag!
Kosovo is Serbia
when it is fully integrated with serbia i will accept that, also all the other independent states that do the same.
@auto I don't know what you mean by that, but the kingdom has no connection with the Serbian region and you know, then we were all Slavs together.
@auto bruh no
@auto lol you are brainwashed
The serbian government has no power or authority over the land of Kosovo 🌚
You just have a new sub. Just for the fact you know the matter. Without being subjective... Do you honestly think the Albanians deserved their independence and did history treated them well? What’s your view on the the Albanian division. Thank you and keep up the good work.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate it.
Great question. My answer isn’t particularly straightforward unfortunately. But it does have a logic. I was actually very critical of the declaration of independence in 2008, not because I had any hostility towards Kosovo, but because I was worried that it would be used by others, such as Russia and China, for their own ends. That said, there was always an argument for giving Kosovo a chance to decide on its future. It was essentially equivalent to a republic. But to be honest, I think Ahtisaari made a complete mess of things. I interviewed him for a book I wrote on the status process and it was clear his approach was all wrong. This has cost both Serbia and Kosovo dearly (when a good mediator could have found a way to manage it so they could both accept the outcome). But he didn’t bother. As a result Pristina are locked in a stalemate that neither can lose, but neither can win.
Frankly, I just want to see them have a normal relationship. I know Serbia well and have very close ties to the country. But, equally, I have a real affection for Kosovo and was a visiting scholar at the University of Pristina. I want to see them both do well. And unlike many others who work on the Balkans, I don’t think it should be about being pro-Serb or pro-Albanian. It is about supporting their European integration and cooperation - or not.
I hope that makes some sense.
@@JamesKerLindsay By russia or china do you mean like the situation in crimea and wouldnt that be very hippocritical for them to not recognize kosovo by doing that
@@soul8938
Crimea was always Russian. It was given to Ukraine in 1954 and that was fine while Soviet Union was whole. But after Ukraine claimed independence, it should have been given back to Russia, whose it always was. Hrushchov didn't know what was coming, otherwise i doubt he would give it away. After all, it's not his private property to do with it as he pleases.
Russia had every right to take it back, just as Serbia will take Kosovo back.
It is not the Balkans. It's former Yugoslavia the West destroyed and occupied. Warsauw pact fell, NATO took over the countries west of the Ukraine. Yugoslavia had to be destroyed so NATO could secure that part of Europe for it self too. The largest NATO base is in southern Serbian province of Kosowo and Metohiya. Large NATO bases are in Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Poland. NATO troops in the Baltic states. This is not about international law, international law was burried by the West. This is about encircling Russia and preparing for the invasion of Russia.
My request honestly is that you do a video on the looming New Caledonia referendum next month
And also about the separatist fighters in Mali who want to create a country called Azawad and why they want to do it
Thanks a lot, Omar. Always grateful! I certainly plan to cover Chuuk. As ever, I want to try to say something ‘bigger’ about independence and secession. What interesting light does it cast on the subject. I’m therefore considering the angle to take. And thanks for the Mali suggestion. I will look into it.
You’re most welcome brother
Am already excited for your next video
They have in fact created it, it’s largely or totally unrecognized by other countries though.
So if someone would have asked you, should Kosovo be an independed state or not?
In my city called FERIZAJ in kosova / DARDANIA, it was occupied in 1913. My grandfather's words. He was born in 1903. He saw it with his own eyes. Further north west started in 1800s. Nish 1895. Russian occupied. BELIGRADE was occupied in 1840s.
Thats Uroševac not Ferizaj.
Mr. Ker-Lindsay. Your videos are very interesting and your opinion is very much objective. I'd like to add some extra information on the political events that occurred in Kosova during the 90s. After the autonomy was abolished by the Serbian government, members of the Kosovar parliament declared Kosova as a republic within the Yugoslav federation on the 2nd of July 1990. Then, on the 7th of September 1990, those members approved the Constitution of the Republic in the town Kaçanik. Afterwards, on the 26th of September 1991 was held a referendum for independence which was recognized by the Republic of Albania only. Also, in 1992 were held first democratic presidential and parliamentary elections. After a peaceful political process led by the Kosovar president, Ibrahim Rugova, the life conditions in the terrain became exceptional. Kosova wasn't included in the Dayton and the hopes for a peaceful solution died away. In 1997, Kosovar students organized a massive demonstration on the 1st of October which protest was stopped by force by the Serbian police.
The other part of history is said in the video.
1990 is now 30years ago. What happened in that area 45years before 1990?
Thanks. Point well taken and thank you for the further details. Unfortunately, there is only so much history I can cover in a 10-15 minute video. I tend to focus solely on the things that people who don’t know the situation well need in order to make sense of the main point I’m making.
Ovdje je situacija jasna Albanci su vođeni snagom zapada očekivali da dobiju državu na srpskoj teritoriji Srbija samo treba da proglasi okupaciju svog teritorija od strane NATO pakta i da tuži sve članice koje su učestvovale u bombardovanju osiromašenim uranijumom da plate odštetu.
@luaye1764 Nikada druže to je srpska zemlja
@luaye1764 Srbija nije nikada zahtjevala tudje zemlje samo ono što je vjekovno njeno
The anwser is very simple: It was NOT legal and it is NOT a state and it will never be the state.
@Big D Im talking about the reality, and you are dreaming....
@@milanstanisic2810 it is not integrated into serbia, therefore not being connected to serbia. disclaimer im not trying to start a discussion.
@@zimpulse4960 First learn History than we can talk. But the real International Worldwide History not fake-Albanian History.
@@milanstanisic2810 im not from albania and i understand that kosovo was serbian land before.
@@zimpulse4960 That the Point. Have a nice day !
Putin agree with you view. It is why He help independence of Crimea
Is Kosovo a State?
Short Answer: Yes
Long Answer: Yes it is a State.
Did you actually watch the video?
yes!by winning independence war
How you define colonisation and foreign occupation?
Is Kosovo a colony of Serbs? Yes,
Kosovo was the land of Romanians and Metohija of Albanians when the Serbs arrived.
Was Kosovo occupied by Serbia? Yes, after the fall of the Ottomans, Kosovo was "liberated" by force without Kosovars having a say.
In the view of the international junta, their rules apply only for the future and all the empires or colonial provinces and the horrendously borders in Africa USSR, Asia were validated by "international law" opening the door to ethnic cleansing of native people like in Karabach, Yemen, Rwanda, Sudan, Mali etc.
But injustice can't be the law.
The law can't be international or national, it's universal. Either is applicable to all or to none.
And what happened to WesternSahara?
I have done a video on that recently.
This all with Kosovo,NATO,etc.made world side problems for many countries.Even 5 members of EU dont want to participate in this sharade and dont want to recognize Kosovo.And half of Balkan states are locked like in trap and cant move to EU.Stupid.
God is in Melbourne Australia
Hello, I am from Kosovo. For me and majority of the people Kosovo is an independent country. Kosovo will never ever be part of Serbia. My family was chased away during the war, house was burned down and we have to consider going under Serbia's authority again? Never. Serbia did the most war crimes since WW2 in the history of Europe. Despite the issues that we have here, Kosovo is an independent country and it will last forever. Have a good day, Mr. Ker-Lindsay.
Hello! I am from Serbia and Kosovo and Metohija is its inseparable part. As far as your opinions are concerned, we couldn't care less!!!WAS, HAS ALWAYS BEEN AND WILL REMAIN SERBIAN FOREVER!!!
Have a nice day-dreaming until the moment of awakening!!!
@@ЈованаБожовић Happy Bombing Campaign Anniversary. Never forget that. 🥰
@@ЈованаБожовић idc
@Agim Skifteraj "Only those who know the past can anticipate the future." - and that isn't you! 😌
@@ЈованаБожовић yeah sure, just make sure you bring your passport when you cross the border
No it was illegal. I didn't watch the video. But I think I probably know you're going to say it's legal. Which is wrong.
Maybe watch the video first? And don’t make assumptions. I was actually extremely critical about Kosovo’s Declaration of Independence at the time. www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
So, Kosovo (and terrorist KLA) is "legal", but Scotland, N.Ireland, Catalonia, Basque, Crimea etc etc is illegal..?
No. Watch again.
No, it's not a state, not a province and not a separate country. It is Serbia.
What kind of weed do you smoke?
@@kaloresi333 probably some albanian weed
😂
Allahu akbar!
make new video about ilegal prespa agriment off macedonija
As a Serb I see that the only solution for Kosovo and Metohija is obviously to take you to the Serbia team. 😂 You're amazing, I'm thrilled. The greatest sacrifice is made by the people of Kosovo of all ethnic groups, and the solution is not visible, it is only a weapon in the game of great powers for their interests.
Yes. and it is the rule of the world.
By defeating Ottoman, you Serbia being independent!
By defeating Serbia, you Kosovo being independent!
The only reason why so many western countries recognised Kosovo is clearly in order to please their boss, US, esp because EU is American colony and i am certain there was a lot of arm twisting going on.
FYI, in 1985 British MI5 or 6 already had a plan and a map how Kosovo was going to be stolen from Serbia.
OK. Even if all that was true, and it isn’t (I have researched this a length and written on it, the West actually wanted to keep Kosovo in Serbia as it knew the wider implications of letting it secede unilaterally), at what point do people in Serbia who believe all this come to accept that it was Milošević’s policies that made it possible? I hear lots of blame of Kosovo Albanians. I hear lots of blame about the West. But I don’t hear blame about Serbia’s policies. Yes, I accept that Serbia was punished in a way other countries weren’t. I also argue that the negotiations were extremely badly handled by Ahtisaari. But Serbia also has to accept its fundamental role in all this. I know conspiracy theories are comforting. But that’s not how the world works. This wasn’t engineered decades in advance.
By the way, I discuss all this in my book (in Serbian) www.knjizara.com/Kosovo-put-ka-osporenoj-drzavnosti-na-Balkanu-Dzejms-Ker-Lindzi-133354
@@JamesKerLindsay That is a very precise and correct answer.
Serbs supported Milosevic strongly and very few opposed his ideas.
@@JamesKerLindsay
Kosovo Albanians were working on seccession since the Prizren League, 1878, not sure about the year. So it's nothing to do with Milosevic. Milosevic was the one who finally said NO to Albanians intimidating Serbs and doing ethnic cleansing, and wanted to protect the Serbs.
Milosevic was a blessing in disguise for the Albanians. Just what they needed to show the world how they are being oppressed and justify their fight for independence. But the world didn't know the real picture. They were narco terrorists who wanted to have their own ethnically cleansed country and do as they please.
For decades they bread mindlessly and did ethnic cleansing, in order to gain majority, thinking, that would be enough to declare independence. They stopped at nothing to get what they wanted.
Members of my distant family were killed by having their throats cut in 1946 by the Albanuans. It was a young couple with a 6 years old son. They were killed because the didn't want to give their land to them.
You don't mention that after WW2 250.000 Albanians from Albania illigally entered Yugoslav Kosovo. Our authorities turned a blind eye, for humanitarian reasons. But, did the Albs appreciate it? No. It's nevere enough for them. They joined the common goal to overbreed to gain independence.
Every family was ordered by their clan leaders to have 8 or more children per family. So, they had 10 to 15 children, blaming YU govt for being poor and for not being able to feed them. What audacity!!! Than they played the poverty card to the world to justufy their fight for independence.
To fund their cause, they increased narco dealing, organ trafficking of kidnapped Serbs, and you name it. US called them terrorist and didn't want to have anything to do with them, that is, until they figured out they can pretend to "protect" oppressed Albanians, while moving into Kosovo to keep Russia at bay. Of course, they cooked up a sob story how they are protecting poor Albanians, to look good in the eyes of the world, while doing their own crime.
NATO terrorist organisation killed 10 times more people with bombing, than YU army and police did fighting against narco terrorists. Not to mention DU that is still killing people with cancer, and is there to stay. It will take 4,5 billion years for it to decompose.
Kindly, when you make a vid about these problems, give a clear picture about the deeper background and the motives behind their claims. Otherwise, it's misleading. Tell the whole truth.
Also, tell the world how many teir own Albanins they killed just because they were working for YU companies, govt, or were friends with Serb neighbours. All that was enough to consider them traitors and torture and kill them, because they were not loyal. Hundreds died like that. That's why Specialised Court is charging them now in the Hague. I doubt they will achieve anything with it, since they either kill or intimidate the witnesses. That is why Ramush Haradinaj is free now. He had all the witnesses killed and was declared innocent for lack of evidence. His book about all the killings and torture he bragged about could not be entered as evidence. Obviously US didn't allow it.
Nobody is charged with missing Serbs and their organs trafficked.
stolen?
Roman Empire / Byzantine Empire stole Kosovo from previous people.
Ottoman Empire stole Kosovo from Balkans.
Serbia stole Kosovo in 1912.
NATO stole Kosovo in 1999.
@@vericacvetkovic9093 wait??? you can secede ottoman empire? Albania can't ??