![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
The following kinks indicate that more recognitions are coming soon.
84.134.90.188 ( talk) 20:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course it is relevant. Please move Macedonia to the "Soon to recognize" section. 84.134.75.180 ( talk) 15:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree.
84.134.111.103 (
talk)
11:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
B92 New Kosovo ReportArab States expected to "recognise very soon, again". Maybe they will, maybe they won't. How soon is soon. Saudi Arabia has been saying soon since April, surely the recognition reprocess can't take that long. What they waiting for? Ijanderson ( talk) 05:57, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is a little bit more specifically.
84.134.106.174 ( talk) 09:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Now (with Russian recognition) that Abkazia and South Ossetia meet the minimum de facto definition of a state, thier entires should be moved to 'other states' along with the Vatican, PA, SADR, and TRNC. 141.166.152.188 ( talk) 16:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Why are you talking nonsense again? 84.134.121.122 ( talk) 19:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
They are all hypocritical. Those who recognized Kosovo now talk about international law, United Nations etc. and Russia well it's obvious. Serbia stated it is devoted to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia. Serbia did not recognize Kurdistan to get back at Turkey or Casamance to Senegal so it wont recognize these two if Georgia recognizes Kosovo either. Some lower officials of the Serbian Government have condemned Georgia by saying that this is a result of their soft approach to Kosovo issue.-- Avala ( talk) 19:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is also being discussed at Template talk:Countries of Europe. For what it's worth, I very much doubt that any other state will recognize the breakaways - it's too much of a precedent for their own separatists and in the case of Russia's neighbours, they will be very conscious of the large ethnic Russian communities on their territories. They have too much to lose. -- ChrisO ( talk) 20:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is not a forum. 84.134.121.122 ( talk) 20:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I said thats not a forum. And Tocino should be reported to an admin. 84.134.122.185 ( talk) 11:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
New Recognitions are expected in the near future.
To be consistent, I would suggest that we change the name of this page to "International recognition of Kosovo."
Yea or nay?
Canadian Bobby ( talk) 21:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Glad my suggestions drew positive feedback. :-) I must by the way remind that any proposed move of this article should go through WP:RM due to its likely controversial nature. Hús ö nd 01:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
move}}
with a new name has been placed atop this discussion page as well. --
Mareklug
talk
02:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)B92 According to a senior Russian official. I can't really tell what the source is saying. What can we make of it? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
[10] “Macedonia has already accepted Kosovo’s passports and soon it will officially recognise its independence,” According to Ali Ahmeti. How can we use this? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Ali Ahmeti's part is in coalition with current Macedonian government. Macedonia actually has already taken the decision. The announcement is a matter of time;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.82.78 ( talk) 19:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
yeh yeh i heard Ijanderson ( talk) 20:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Given what we know today, and developments in Macedonia, Kosovo and elsewhere, why should we not move Macedonia to immiment recognizers category and whittle down the ridiculous amount of hedging put in its write-up? I think it's difficult to contrue any reasons other than partisan. Please give me a reasonable argument (or just make the edit I'm suggesting). -- Mareklug talk 03:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the category should simply be "Imminent recognizers" and leave it at that. -- Mareklug talk 03:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC) And so it is. -- Mareklug talk 04:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
its in German They are to recognise soon Ijanderson ( talk) 20:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep an eye on Dkis ( talk · contribs). Colchicum ( talk) 20:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The quote contained in the Haitian response isn't quite proper English, though close. Could someone clean that up please? Menrunningpast ( talk) 01:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Why are Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the TRNC listed in "Other States" along with the Vatican and Palestine? On the International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia page, Kosovo, Hamas-Gaza and the TRNC are listed under "Other entities." This is unfair and biased. Kosovo has far more recognition than the TRNC, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Hamas is in an even more bizarre position, so to equate them all is to demean Kosovo. I would propose that the TRNC, Abkhazia and South Ossetia be moved to the "Regions aspiring for more autonomy/independence" section, as that's essentially what they're doing, anyway. You may now bitch at me. Canadian Bobby ( talk) 02:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Please move Macedonia and Portugal to the imminent recognisers. 84.134.87.92 ( talk) 07:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You should have more respect toward other people. 84.134.68.247 ( talk) 15:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I only wanted him to see how he is. Maybe I have made that the wrong way. 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 17:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Where is that rule? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Again: Why are you talking to me in that offensiv way? I meant there is no rule which demands that I must do that. Why are you want that from me? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You are like my aunt everytime you say "do these, do that" no please, nothing. Being polite wouldn't hurt anyone. 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Whats that suposed to mean? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
She is not correct. I have already done so. 84.134.81.195 ( talk) 07:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Why? What does that mean? I have done everything you wanted! 84.134.73.75 ( talk) 11:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Something about Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
84.134.87.92 ( talk) 07:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
More in this article, which I think is what's referred to in the first article: [12] Bazonka ( talk) 10:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Kevin Lajm (UK Ambassador to Mont.) believes that Mont. will recognize just before EU summit. Read here (in Albanian/Shqip). Ari 0384 ( talk) 22:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Seem to coming after all.
Max Mux ( talk) 09:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Please add Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait in that section. Thank you. Max Mux ( talk) 14:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Please read the article carefully. It isn't just wishful thinking he has contact to officials of these countries. Max Mux ( talk) 14:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Something about Macedonia again, sadly not from the goverment.
Max Mux ( talk) 18:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
But it belongs to the "International reaction".
84.134.87.125 (
talk)
20:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
@Jakezing WP:NPA Ijanderson ( talk) 22:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
@Jakezing WP:CIVIL Ijanderson ( talk) 07:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Source? 84.134.100.171 ( talk) 13:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Today they said the demarcation is going per 1974 plan, not the Ahtisaari plan. They also need to sort out the gift of the Serbian government to Macedonian government of a large part of land in 2001.-- Avala ( talk) 21:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
See: http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/3237/2/ -- Mareklug talk 07:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Macedonian Foreign Ministry expressed content with the hitherto progress of borderline demarcation process between Macedonia and Kosovo.
As they underlined, the process is being realised according to the established frameworks of Ahtisaari’s plan.
Pertaining to some media allegations, relying on statements by inhabitants from border village Debalde, the Foreign Ministry remarks that the official mixed Macedonian-Kosovo committee was in charge of the demarcation and its work progressed in accordance with the international agreements.
“The Foreign Ministry agrees with Kosovo Demarcation Committee Vice President Murat Meha’s statement for Pristina Agency Kosovapress where he underlines that no incident has been registered since the beginning of the demarcation of the borderline with Macedonia and we expect this condition to be maintained until the end of the demarcation process”, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Petar Culev stated.
Is the neutrality of this article still disputed? I believe it to be NPOV. If it isn't, that banner at the top should be removed. Also if the neutrality is still disputed, please specify and we can hep correct what is seen as POV. Ijanderson ( talk) 06:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I put the POV template there, and none of what motivated my adding it has been resolved. It's all detailed in the archives. The archiving, I suppose, is a great way to sweep unresolved complaints under the carpet. I'll just list the states grossly misrepresented: Bosnia, Uruguay, Slovakia, Ukraine, China, India, Cuba, Libya. Fix their state write-ups to NPOV, and I'll be the first to celebrate a truly NPOV article. -- Mareklug talk 15:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
South Ossetia don't recognize Kosovo.
Max Mux ( talk) 19:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Contents
1 Serbia's non-recognition 2 States which formally recognise Kosovo as independent 2.1 UN member states 2.2 Non-UN member states 2.3 Imminent recognisers 3 Other states 3.1 UN member states 3.2 Non-UN member states 4 Non-states 5 International organisations 5.1 Governmental organisations 5.2 Non-governmental organisations 6 See also 7 Notes and references
As you can see above, I redid the headings, which were hurting. Now they agree with the map legend, which itself has been stable for months, so it's a good baseline, against which to organize our content. And we haven't redone the headings systematically, even though we got rid of a lot of content, and moved other content around. Please discuss the new headings nad propose changes if any, instead of edit warring. :) Thank you. -- Mareklug talk 05:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
a draft parliamentary resolution demanding the recognition of Kosovo’s independence has been filed by the DPA, main opposition party. They said "Now is the real moment for this to happen. It is about time that Macedonia joins pro- western states". [20] Worth adding to the article? Ijanderson ( talk) 10:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Max Mux ( talk) 15:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently in the "other states" section there is "Non-UN member states" and then there is a "Non states" section. There is a mix-up here. In both sections are put entities from the List of unrecognized countries. As far as I understand in the "Non-UN member states" section should be put all entities from the List of unrecognized countries and in the "Non states" section all other entities like those from Government in exile and List of active autonomist and secessionist movements.
Thus "Transnistria" and "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" should be moved FROM "Non states" TO "Non-UN member states" (or otherwise the whole of the "Non-UN member states" list should be moved TO "Non states" with the exception of "Holy See"). Alinor ( talk) 17:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I am opposed to the new name, "International reaction to the declaration of independence of Kosovo". In 2008 it was the second time Kosovo declared independence, first time in 1990. So with this new name, we will have to include sources and information on the previous declaration of independence, so this completely changes the article. Also this controversial edit of changing the name was not done with a consensus or support. I demand for it to be reverted until a consensus is reached on a new name. Ijanderson ( talk) 21:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Abkhazia will recognize Kosovo, if Kosovo recognized them in turn.
Max Mux ( talk) 09:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. 84.134.110.159 ( talk) 18:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
B92 source and focus-fen. It says all the conditions have been fulfilled for Macedonia to recognise Kosovo. Shall we add it to the article? Ijanderson ( talk) 17:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I think its quite clear. Max Mux ( talk) 18:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Maybe BalkanFever can produce a Macedonian source of higher verifyiability, and if he does, then moving this to Imminent Recognisers will be the thing to do. -- Mareklug talk 18:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
What about these above mentioned oones? What is wrong with them? 84.134.118.155 ( talk) 18:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Why? I must repeat myself, the sources are clear enough in my opinion. What should be wrong? Max Mux ( talk) 19:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
This is a rumour, perfectly normal thing and other media report on it but it simply has no place in this article.-- Avala ( talk) 20:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
So far I'd say that Macedonia, Montenegro and Malaysia have been the most complicated and the most problematic by far. They give all these different statements every month. I don't know if it's something with the letter M or maybe they truly have no plan but it is annoying.-- Avala ( talk) 21:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I have noticed we still use media reports for something (recognition) that requires an official document. Recognising is done through some kind of a decree, act etc. not a media statement and countries listed here are still not sourced to the official website and therefore we don't have an access to the recognition document. For an example regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia we have such Russia Nicaragua. We should try to fix this by finding permanent official sources with texts of the recognition not only reports on it.
We could also use MFA links for embassies/diplomatic relations of:
-- Avala ( talk) 23:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Later I try to tell you the others. 84.134.97.80 ( talk) 08:49, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
That are official sources. 84.134.124.49 ( talk) 19:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Czech MFA web page listing the embassy in Pristina: [32], [33]. — Emil J. 14:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
OK one by one change because they are the official MFA source, we can assume they are more permanent and official than media report. -- Avala ( talk) 12:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Change reference 53 with [1] -- Avala ( talk) 15:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Change reference 88 with [2] -- Avala ( talk) 16:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder how much additional effort will this trivial maintenance request take. So, here's the third attempt.
{{
editprotected}}
In section "States which formally recognise Kosovo as independent", please replace
| 19 ||
Switzerland
[4] ||
2008-02-27 || Embassy of Switzerland in Pristina from 28 March 2008
[5]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Bern (to open)
[3]||
with
| 19 ||
Switzerland
[6] ||
2008-02-27 || Embassy of Switzerland in Pristina from 28 March 2008
[7]
[8]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Bern (to open)
[3]||
and replace
| 41 ||
Czech Republic
[9] ||
2008-05-21 || Embassy of the Czech Republic in Pristina from 16 July 2008
[10]
[11]
For details see:
Czech Republic's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence ||
EU member state
NATO member state
with
| 41 ||
Czech Republic
[12] ||
2008-05-21 || Embassy of the Czech Republic in Pristina from 16 July 2008
[13]
[14]
For details see:
Czech Republic's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence ||
EU member state
NATO member state
— Emil J. 14:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree Ijanderson ( talk) 17:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree Canadian Bobby ( talk) 23:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree - link maintenance is not contoversial. Thanks EmilJ for the effort to make the request in official tone.-- Avala ( talk) 19:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Since it seems there is some dispute as to these it's best to be dealt within the talk page. I don't think the sourcing for Haiti is similar to that for Uruguay, which cites anonymous sources, but I also think anonymous government sources at least justify a mention in the article.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 03:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
This is the list of things you reverted which are block worthy
You've got issues, that's what I think. I mean no one would vandalise like this for fun, you are either on a mission to destroy this article or something else which I can't understand. Either way your edit was extremely malicious and will not go away unnoticed if you continue to pursue it.-- Avala ( talk) 18:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the {{[[Template:|]]|editprotect}}
procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for Cuba that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
|-
|
Cuba || Cuba has not issued an official position regarding the independence of Kosovo
[15]
[16]
[17]. In a newspaper article, ex-President
Fidel Castro attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's independence. To Fidel Castro, Javier Solana is the synthesis of pure unreasonableness and injustice, as Kosovo's independence might create a precedent for
Catalonia's independence, or that of the
Basque Country.
[18]
No Caribbean state has gone on record officially to embrace, oppose or even react to Kosovo's independence, according to a neighboring Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement made in April.
[19]
||
Well your references would work in a version like this:
|-
|
Cuba || Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo
[20]
[21]
[22], however in a newspaper article,
Fidel Castro, ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to
Raul Castro, writing unofficially, attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's independence. To Fidel Castro, Javier Solana is the synthesis of pure unreasonableness and injustice, as Kosovo's independence might create a precedent for
Catalonia's independence, or that of the
Basque Country.
[18]
||
Do you agree? -- Avala ( talk) 12:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)-- Avala ( talk) 12:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current Cuba entry is fine. It explains the role Fidel has Cuban politics during his post-presidency and why Cuba won't recognize. -- Tocino 17:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the editprotect procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for China that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
{{ editprotect}}
Dear Administrator, please replace the China tabular entry under Other states>UN members. Consensus has been achieved. See below.
|-
|
People's Republic of China || People's Republic of China has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. The Chinese Foreign Minister has made a statement stressing that the PRC "expresses grave concern" over Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. The Minister's remarks go on to add that "The resolution of the Kosovo issue bears on peace and stability of the Balkan region, the fundamental norms governing international relations as well as the authority and role of the UN Security Council. China always believes that a plan acceptable to both Serbia and Kosovo through negotiations is the best way to resolve this issue", that "the unilateral move taken by Kosovo will lead to a series of consequences. China is deeply worried about its severe and negative impact on peace and stability of the Balkan region and the goal of establishing a multi-ethnic society in Kosovo", stressing that "China calls upon Serbia and Kosovo to continue negotiations for a proper resolution within the framework of the international law and work together to safeguard peace and stability of the Balkan region", and adding that "the international community should create favorable conditions for that".
[23]
[24] On
15 May
2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in
Ekaterinburg in
Russia. The host minister,
Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position, phrased in language not used by India or China elsewhere before or since: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory".
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28] ||
permanent member of the UNSC
-- from: International Herald Tribune (a respected neutral world press newspaper, "China could gain from Russian moves on Georgia", 3 September 2008.China also objected to Russia's attempt to use a Chinese-dominated regional body, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, to endorse its recognition of the rebel Georgian regions, Tsang said. Beijing has always insisted the grouping, which met last week in Tajikistan, is not a political alliance and doesn't pose a threat to any other nation or multilateral institution.
"It's not meant to rebuke Russia as much as it is to show the world that the SCO under Chinese stewardship is a constructive force," Tsang said.
Please replace China with this version.
|-
|
People's Republic of China || The Chinese Foreign Minister has made a statement stressing that the PRC "expresses grave concern" over Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. The Minister's remarks go on to add that "The resolution of the Kosovo issue bears on peace and stability of the Balkan region, the fundamental norms governing international relations as well as the authority and role of the UN Security Council. China always believes that a plan acceptable to both Serbia and Kosovo through negotiations is the best way to resolve this issue", that "the unilateral move taken by Kosovo will lead to a series of consequences. China is deeply worried about its severe and negative impact on peace and stability of the Balkan region and the goal of establishing a multi-ethnic society in Kosovo", stressing that "China calls upon Serbia and Kosovo to continue negotiations for a proper resolution within the framework of the international law and work together to safeguard peace and stability of the Balkan region", and adding that "the international community should create favorable conditions for that".
[29]
[30] On
15 May
2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in
Ekaterinburg in
Russia. The host minister,
Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory".
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28] ||
permanent member of the UNSC
Removed WP:OR and the language thing. Agree we should add it? Ijanderson ( talk) 11:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current entry for China is fine. It lists the two responses they've made - one through the Foreign Ministry and the other a joint statement China made with India and Russia. -- Tocino 17:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the {{[[Template:|]]|editprotect}}
procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for India that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
|-
|
India || India has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. Official communique of the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs is cautious and ambiguous: "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation." "It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[31] On the other hand, statements ascribed by the Serbian media over the months to the Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby are pro-Serbia:
On 15 May 2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in Ekaterinburg in Russia. The host minister, Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position, phrased in language not used by India or China elsewhere before or since: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory". [25] [26] [27] [28] ||
Please replace India with this version.
|-
|
India || India has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. Official communique of the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs is cautious and ambiguous: "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation." "It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[34] However Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby has said the following; "India's position on Kosovo has been and still is consistent, and that is that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country must be fully respected by all other countries."; On
19 June
2008: "Kosovo can set a very dangerous precedent for similar cases around the world".
[35] and on the
31 July
2008: "India abides by the principles of international law and does not recognise Kosovo's secession".
[36]
Removed WP:OR, WP:POV parts and the language thing. Agree we should add it? Ijanderson ( talk) 11:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
How about this:
|-
|
India | Official communique of the Foreign Ministrz issued in February said "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation. It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[37] In later months Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby has said the following; "India's position on Kosovo has been and still is consistent, and that is that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country must be fully respected by all other countries."; On
19 June
2008: "Kosovo can set a very dangerous precedent for similar cases around the world".
[38] and on the
31 July
2008: "India abides by the principles of international law and does not recognise Kosovo's secession".
[39]
It has no summarizations just sheer quotes and let the readers decide.-- Avala ( talk) 11:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
@Ian you are mistaken here, going with the flow with Avala and letting his contention that what you removed is OR or POV. It is the absence of true information and POV impression created by selective choice of quoted material by Avala -- with exclusive use of Russian sources where he should be avoiding them, because Russian is partisan and so are Russian sources -- that is OR. Is this so hard to grasp? We got in this mess precisely because of the potential for abuse in carefully, progagandistically tailoring choice of evidence -- in the form of quotes -- and stitching them into wholes, purportedly representing state positions. That is both OR and crafty partisan activity. Please be savvy. We are being manipulated here, as is reality. A good, well-sourced summary informing the reader without bias as to the true current state of affairs is the essence of encyclopedic writing. Sheer quotes, as demonstrated by Avala, are no cure for sheer distortion and do just fine to spread lies. -- Mareklug talk 12:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current India entry is fine and has all of the information without the spin. To leave off the joint statement India, China, and Russia made in Sverdlovsk would be criminal. -- Tocino 17:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Criminal? I don't think so! Max Mux ( talk) 18:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Any news from that meeting today? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.190.77 ( talk) 16:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Here is a link. [ [38]] 84.134.97.116 ( talk) 17:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be moved to International reaction to Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence?
It would make more sense, you know. -- 92.16.151.24 ( talk) 18:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
The current title is simply a more formal form of language, there is no need to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.90.28.194 ( talk) 19:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I still prefer "International recognition of Kosovo." Canadian Bobby ( talk) 19:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Husond ( talk · contribs) is a total weirdo! He protected this page without consensus. I have urged him to unprotect this page so you won't have to wait for a SYSOP to add an entry for you. Anyway, I agree with the article title being changed. Maybe back to the original title: International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. Don't you all agree? -- 92.0.197.9 ( talk) 19:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
See [39]. M.M.S. ( talk) 10:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Wishful thinking on Thaci's part. The Greek foreign ministry has said: "There is the basic principle of respect for the territorial integrity and independence of states. Based on this principle – which is of long-standing importance to, and is a fundamental constant of, the Greek foreign policy of all Greek governments – Greece did not recognise Kosovo and does not recognise the secessionist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia." Link here = [41] . -- Tocino 16:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Macedonian Foreign Minister Antonio Milošoski was asked by a journalist today: "Will you recognise Kosovo?". He didn't answer. BalkanFevernot a fan? say so! 10:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)<br /
Source? 84.134.100.171 (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Today they said the demarcation is going per 1974 plan, not the Ahtisaari plan. They also need to sort out the gift of the Serbian government to Macedonian government of a large part of land in 2001.--Avala (talk) 21:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Who said that? The MFA spokesman for Macedonia directly contradicts this: ...a quote with an external link to Macedonian MFA official speaking...'
The only thing I found from a Greek source is that Greece wants stability and the protection of minorities in Kosovo. The Greek official said that there is no specific support for either Serbia or Kosovo on the recognition issue. Greece also took note of Serbia's move to go to the ICJ about Kosovo, but didn't imply explicit endorsement of the move. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Its clear enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.134.58.146 ( talk) 15:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Avala, enough of your sophistry and fancy dancin'. A link to a the official issue of the Greek MFA (in either Greek or English) stating what you keep claiming it said would do wonders. I'm sure you would nave produced by now, if it existed. But all you have is partisan media accounts. It doesn't exist as a source, and coloring Greece red on your maps is blatant lying and reality distortion. So. Please stop already your campaign of Selling Serbia (Propaganda) by the Pound. If Greece ever rejects Kosovo indepen dence, I'm sure you'll have no trouble linking to its MFA. It hasn't and you can't. Enough already. -- Mareklug talk 06:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Herew's another source for Belize:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90853/6469070.html
84.134.58.146 ( talk) 15:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Whilst looking for a Greek source on their potential recognition, I across the following article: [45]. This states that "The recognition of Kosovo by FYROM should make Pristina act similarly and recognise FYROM’s constitutional name, the FYROM President said Wednesday". This is a bit ambiguous, but could be interpreted as that they've already recognised Kosovo. Bazonka ( talk) 11:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
have we got any more? Ijanderson ( talk) 14:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Is that not enough? 84.134.123.166 ( talk) 15:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
IP84 is trying to fool us here or what? For an example source 38 says how Kosovo officials told Macedonians they don't want to be blackmailed. How does that mean "Macedonia is recognising Kosovo"?-- Avala ( talk) 19:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Please don't come back with your pro-serbian propaganda. 84.134.114.64 ( talk) 19:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
That wasn't a personal attack, just a fact. Max Mux ( talk) 19:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
You are talking false things. The most of sources clearly indicates that Macedonia is going to recognize Kosovo. If you like that or not. 84.134.114.64 ( talk) 20:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Nope, definitely no recognition yet. The current entry adequately reflects the situation IMO (although I am a tad biased since I wrote it ;) ). Again, if anyone thinks Crvenkovski's quote about the constitutional name should go in, speak up. BTW, who is this anon? S/he is a bit annoying. Balkan Fever not a fan? say so! 10:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not annoying. Please stop your useless attacks. 84.134.124.81 ( talk) 14:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please restore them. Cheers Ijanderson ( talk) 17:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Noting states that recognise Kosovo and then reffering to states that do not as simply "other states" is a shocking breach of neutrality. An admin should fix this section title immediately to make clear that these states do not recognise Kosovo. ʄ!• ¿talk? 23:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I motivated changing the heading to Other states to follow the usage engrained on the page courtesy of the map legend, which has been stable and referencing the gray-marked portion of the world as other states since, what is it, March? Somehow this consequence of adopting a map that only shows recognitions by states and treats every other state as "other" wasn't a burning issue all this time. Now that the article headings actually reflect the terminology of the map and its legend used all along, we mysteriously acquired an issue worthy of immediate correction by an admin!
Once the article finally is allowd to be titled properly as international recognition of Kosovo (for that is what it is about, just as the corresponding articles on Wikipedia about Abkhasia, South Ossetia and Northern Cyprus), this dissonance will dissapear and the headings will be 100% coherent and congruent with the article title. And again, a non-issue. The present dissoance -- "a shocking breach of neutrality" -- is only apparent and not real -- unlike official recognition, the other states comprises a spectrum of reaction, ranging from about to recognize any day now to over our dead Serbian bodies (if one is to believe the propaganda coming out of the Serbia MFA). The shocking breach, is the actual shocking breach of accuracy and verifiability, an ongoing travesty also since March or even before, a compendium of POV edits, OR, and edit warring carried out by certain partisan nationalistically-minded editors. -- Mareklug talk 06:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Other states is poor wording and isn't definitive enough. "States that do not recognize" is much more descriptive. -- Tocino 16:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Dissagree under this articles name. The articles name is "International reaction to the 2008 declaration of independence by Kosovo", so this article contains ifnormation about the International reaction in general, which includes: states which have recognised Kosovo, states which are willing to do so, states which will do so in the near future, states which will do so in the future, states which support more dialogue between Prishtina and Beograd, states which will not recognise Kosovo, until their regime will change, states which will not recognise Kosovo until US recognises S. Osettia :-), states which will never recognise Kosovo (doubious statment), etc. SO, grouping all of states` (exept of them who recognise) reaction in a group which says "states that do not recognise Kosovo" is certainly POV.
Agree under another name If the name of the article was "Recognition of Kosovo", than the proposed change would be normal and needed.
balkanian (
talk)
20:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
User:balkanian(and possibly to a much lesser extent user:Mareklug), if I understand you correctly you seem to be advocating WP:POINT. ʄ!• ¿talk? 23:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I got lost reading through this. What are you all arguing over? Canadian Bobby ( talk) 00:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Source: Lithuania Foreign Ministry The official date of the establishment of diplomatic relations is the 1st September 2008. -- Digitalpaper ( talk) 10:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} Please change Lithuania from this
| 39 ||
Lithuania
[40] ||
2008-05-06 || Diplomatic relations commenced 16 July 2008
[41]||
EU member state
NATO member state
|-
to this please
| 39 ||
Lithuania
[42] ||
2008-05-06 || Diplomatic relations with Kosovo established on
1 September
2008
[43]||
EU member state
NATO member state
|-
This is an uncontroversial edit request, it uses the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania as its reference to prove diplomatic relations have been established. Thanks Ijanderson ( talk) 11:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/https://www.urm.lt/index.php?-767438118 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 22:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Telegrafi.com reports that Samoa has recognised the independence of Kosovo. Please report other sources and that's act upon this news. If verified, we should add it asap. Here is the url: [54] Many thanks, Kosovar ( talk) 20:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} I propose we add this
| 47 ||
Samoa
[44]
[45] ||
15 September
2008 || ||
|-
Agree?
Agree. The source is indeed the Kosovo Government (MFA) as is described in the PDF linked here. --
alchaemia (
talk)
21:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Serbs will never stop trying to stop it. It's official. Samoa has recognized Kosovo as independent and sovereign state. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.114.94.6 (
talk)
22:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
For all of you aren't native to the Albanian language, I have provided an adequate translation:
In the office of Minsitry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo, today at 19.30 arrived the official recognition of Republic of Kosovo from the state Samoa via fax.
In the note writen to the President of Republic of Kosovo, sir Fatmir Sejdiu reads: "Dear President,
I am referring to the note you sent on the date of February 17 2008 in which you declare
Kosovo an independent country and ask for diplomatic recogntion of the Republic of Kosovo as a soverign power.
I would like to inform you that the Government of the Samoas has decided to recognize the independence of Kosovo.
We hope that the independence of Kosovo will bring close relations, it will close the conflicts of the '90s that
damaged Western Balkan and bring stability in your region. I wish you and your people of Kosovo
success in the building of your own country". The official note of recogition is signed by the Prime of Samoas, sir Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele
Malielegaoi. ETC ETC.
68.187.140.5 (
talk)
02:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} Now that Samoa is listed as recognizing Kosovar independence, please update the date at the beginning of the second paragraph to read "As of 15 September 2008" -- comment added by User:Benjamin22b ( talk) 13:05, 16 September 2008
Kosovar diplomatic sources have stated that they have indications that Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and Qatar will join the list of countries that have recognized Kosovo soon
http://www.newkosovareport.com/200809151219/Politics/Samoa-recognizes-indepedent-Kosovo.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 21:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Thats not true. 84.134.81.173 ( talk) 08:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Its from diplomat sources, we can use that. Please move
to the imminent recognizers. Max Mux ( talk) 09:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC) They will do it despite what Avala would hope. Max Mux ( talk) 09:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Here And discuss it there. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:34, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Please correct the date. Max Mux ( talk) 09:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
" As of 21 August 2008, 47 out of 192 sovereign United Nations member states have formally recognised.." 84.134.81.173 ( talk) 09:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
It should be 15 September 2008, ....". 84.134.59.188 ( talk) 13:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
"It is a matter of days Skopje to recognize Kosovo, Greek Elefteros Typos newspaper reports citing information according to which there has been a strong support of US George Bush administration in the frames of the negotiations around the attempts the name dispute between Athens and Skopje to be resolved. Skopje’s decision will be announced on September 23 at the session of the UN General Assembly in New York, which will be attended by the Greece Minister of Foreign Affairs Dora Bakoyannis and representatives of FYROM."
Considering that the "rumors" are becoming more frequent and from many sources maybe it's time to add Macedonia to Imminent recognisers. - what do you think?
Source:
http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n152918
Emetko (
talk)
09:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you. Max Mux ( talk) 09:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
B92 Reports about daily Danas which writes that Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski has had informal meetings with representatives of Albanian parliamentary parties, and that he has agreed to recognize Kosovo’s independence for the “sake of the country’s stability,”
Here is the link to article
http://www.danas.co.rs/vesti/politika/skoplje_priznaje_kosovo_22_septembra.56.html?news_id=139421 but it is in a Slavic Language. Maybe someone can help to translate it? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.106.255.42 (
talk)
08:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The ruling party in the government Socialist Democratic Party of Montenegro has introduced the request to speaker of the montengro parliament ranku krivokapicu, The resolution includes the process of integration of montengro into european union, euro atlantic structures, The resolution also includes the discussion for the recognition of Kosovo. Source I think thats what it says, Avala can help check if its been translated correctly Ijanderson ( talk) 17:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I found the quote in English:
-- Avala ( talk) 19:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Then lets move Montenegro to "Imminent recognisers". 84.134.116.136 ( talk) 18:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Its from the government. Its clear enough to move it. 84.134.116.136 ( talk) 18:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
2008 (UTC)
Monenegro to recognize on on October 3rd
http://rtklive.com/?newsId=26267
The problem has been, and this is especially true of Montenegro and Macedonia, that if our criteria for "imminent recognisers" was as you (Exo) suggest then they would have been put in that section when the article was created and would still be there today. Balkan Fever 12:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we add this line to Montenegro in the article.
In September 2008, Official diplomatic sources from Montenegro stated that "Montenegro is ready to recognise the political reality created in Kosovo". The Montenegro Parliament is scheduled to discuss Kosovo further in October. [46]
Making Montenegro look like this in the article.
|
Montenegro || On 24 June, Prime Minister
Milo Đukanović said "Many important member states of the EU and the international community as a whole have already recognised Kosovo so I do not believe that any serious person would like the wheel of history to go back. We are acting rather cautiously for two reasons. The first is that we are a neighbour of both Kosovo and Serbia, so we should help rather than feed fuel to the fire by making rush moves. The second is that we have been independent for only two years now and we have achieved this independence by leaving the Union with Serbia. Our independence has left some traumas on the Serbia-Montenegro relationship."
[47] Three days later an official with the governing
DPS party said that recognising Kosovo "is not currently on the agenda of national priorities."
[48] On 7 July 2008 Montenegrin Minister of Foreign Affairs told
Podgorica media that his government will recognise Kosovo’s independence. He did not, however, say when the government would make such an announcement. When he asked whether it will be sooner or later he responded with "Neither I nor anyone else can say at this moment. It shall happen as soon as we conclude that it is politically best for Montenegro."
[49] However, on 15 July, in an interview with a Russian radio station, Prime Minister Đukanović said that his nation has not yet taken a position on recognition, adding that this "restraint" was caused by the need to contribute, as a neighbor, to stability in the region and improve relations with Serbia.
[50] In September 2008, Official diplomatic sources from Montenegro stated that ""Montenegro is ready to recognise the political reality created in Kosovo". The Montenegro Parliament is scheduled to discuss Kosovo further in October 2008.
[51]||
|-
Agree? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
You are not right, Avala. I agree with Ijanderson 84.134.56.213 ( talk) 17:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The PM says Montenegro will recognize Kosovo. The ruling coalition signs a project-resolution to aling it's policy with NATO and EU. And we're still discussing whether Montenegro should move to the imminent recognizers list? I don't know what logic is working behind that but someone please explain what's going on. Exo ( talk) 17:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Avala must see that he should face the truce. 84.134.56.213 ( talk) 19:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree - with the proposal to edit btw. Exo ( talk) 05:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Daily: Macedonia to recognize Kosovo
Daily: Macedonia to recognize Kosovo 17 September 2008 | 09:03 | Source: Danas BELGRADE -- Macedonia will recognize Kosovo’s independence on September 22, writes daily Danas.
Danas writes that Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski has had informal meetings with representatives of Albanian parliamentary parties, and that he has agreed to recognize Kosovo’s independence for the “sake of the country’s stability,” sources from the Albanian parties claim.
Gruevski believes that recognition of Kosovo, reportedly scheduled for September 22, might solve the parliamentary crisis in Macedonia.
The daily’s sources in Skople claim that the key factor was the decision of former Deputy Prime Minister Imer Selmani from a breakaway faction of Menduh Thaci’s Democratic Party of Albanians (DPA) to suspend his “obedience” to Gruevski’s cabinet.
http://b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=17&nav_id=53531 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.114.94.6 (
talk)
09:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Its a fact. Can't anyone see that? 84.134.110.159 ( talk) 09:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Another reliable source:
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/13187/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 16:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
[60] and heres another source saying 23rd Ijanderson ( talk) 10:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Thats nonsense and you know that. Please answer my question. Max Mux ( talk) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Macedonia should be removed from the "Other Countries" list, since it is already in the "Imminent Recognizers" list... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.105.213 ( talk) 19:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
[61] Turkey has OPENED its' embassy in Pristina, Kosovo. Please change on the page from TO OPEN ---> OPENED (DATE).
Ari 0384 ( talk) 12:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Source is accurate. Reliable and independent. I am currently in Kosovo and I attended the inauguration of the opening of the Turkish Embassy.
Please add. Avala's excuses are bogus, purely biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 17:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
editprotect}}
Above is the consensus required for an edit request.
Please change Turkey from this
| 5 ||
Turkey
[52] ||
2008-02-18 || Embassy of Turkey in
Pristina (to open)
[53]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Ankara (to open)
[54]|| NATO member state
EU candidate country
|-
to this
| 5 ||
Turkey
[52] ||
2008-02-18 || Embassy of Turkey in
Pristina
[55]
[56]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Ankara (to open)
[57]|| NATO member state
EU candidate country
|-
Thanks Ijanderson ( talk) 15:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Can I suggest this link: [62] be added to reference 12. 87.114.39.80 ( talk) 16:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I think this would be an important encyclopedic article to have. Any name suggestions? Ijanderson ( talk) 10:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Here are some suggestions:
Source [ [63]] 84.134.100.17 ( talk) 12:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The article should be there. Its important to know. By the way what about answering my question? 84.134.100.17 ( talk) 13:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't this just the approval to get the Serbian resolution in the general assembly? I think the actual vote will happen next week or smth, this was just a vote on whether to put the issue up for a vote or not. Exo ( talk) 13:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Now that vote has been moved to the general assembly, the article can be made, as countries like Malaysia and Indonesia have already made public statements about the ICJ. The new article might help us keep this one a little more concise. Excelsioreverupward ( talk) 20:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
A new page should be opened, however the information on that page will pretty much have to appear here as well, since the way each country will vote is a relevant piece of information for this article also. Exo ( talk) 22:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Here's a bit of quoting from the horse's mouth, the Greek FM as displayed on the Greek MFA site in English:
“From the very first moments of the crisis in South Ossetia, Greece has conducted itself in accordance with the fundamental principles that have always guided its foreign policy through the years.
Paramount among these principles is respect for the independence and territorial integrity of states. We have implemented this policy of principles and respect for international law consistently with regard to a number of issues.
Regarding the matter of the crisis in Georgia, in both the Council of the European Union and the NATO Council, Greece gave its full support to the need for immediate implementation of the 6-point peace plan to end the crisis – which was signed by both Moscow and Tbilisi – and we gave our full support to the need to respect Georgia’s territorial integrity.
We express our dismay at today’s developments and we subscribe to the French Presidency’s statement condemning the decision to recognise the regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in their secession from Georgia.”
We had a very useful discussion with the Minister. You are very familiar with Greece’s positions on and relations with Serbia.
Our steps, our stance, have been very cautious through to today. That is how we will continue.
Regardless of Kosovo’s status, what is of vital importance to Greece is the improvement of the day-to-day lives of those living in Kosovo – particularly the minorities.
This is a significant parameter of the task of the European Force in Kosovo (EULEX). We believe that its presence will contribute to stability and security in the region.
It’s presence must not be linked to the issue of Kosovo’s status. Greece’s participation certainly does not imply recognition.
Vuk and I had an extensive discussion of Serbia’s EU accession course. Greece has a leading role in this effort.
We are satisfied with the developments on the issue of Serbia’s cooperation with the International Criminal Court. We believe that these developments open the way to a further strengthening of EU-Serbian relations.
A further step in this process will be the submission – at some point – of an application for accession to the Union. This particular moment in time – with the Irish referendum – may not be ideal. But Greece is prepared to support Serbia when Serbia decides to take this step.
The strengthening of NATO-Serbian relations cannot be left out of the equation, of course. This will strengthen the peace and stability of the wider region.
I don’t need to say much about our bilateral relations. Our cooperation is excellent and we are constantly looking for new fields in which to strengthen it.
“Today’s Council dealt principally with the issue of Georgia; with the discussions and decisions taken regarding the observation mission in Georgia based, as you know, on the agreement between President Sarkozy, President Barroso, Javier Solana and President Medvedev following their recent meeting in Russia. The Greek position is well known. Let me repeat it, we strongly support the initiatives of the French Presidency. We believe that these initiatives led the European Union – “maybe” for the first time – to make such an intervention in an international crisis. All of us are, of course, fully aware that we are at the beginning of a very difficult course, but we think it is of crucial importance for European observers to go to Georgia in the coming month, to be followed, of course, by a second OSCE observation mission. Greece will take part in this European effort. First of all, we’ve said we will send eight Greek military personnel and two vehicles and, at the same time, put our Centre in Piraeus at their disposal in order to facilitate their naval transfer.
The second issue that was discussed over lunch and took up a lot of our time was the issue of Serbia. As you know, the issue of unfreezing the interim agreement with Serbia has been raised following the arrest of R. Karadzic. There was a very intense discussion on this issue over lunch. Our position was – and we were the first who spoke and put forward these arguments – that the agreement with Serbia must absolutely move forward, that it is extremely important to send a positive signal to the Serbian people, i.e. a message that Europe keeps its promises and that we see that it is the Serbian government’s sincere wish to cooperate closely with the International Court of Justice. Despite the efforts made, there is still one country that maintains its objections. I hope that in October, a decision on this issue could be taken in Luxembourg that will move in the right direction. I must say that the support which we were given – which Serbia was given – was very strong within the Council. There were many countries that took a favourable position. But we still haven’t been able to overcome the objections in order to reach unanimity on this issue. I hope that we will be ready to do that in October.
As you know, Serbia has submitted a request for a referral of the Kosovo issue to the ICJ in The Hague seeking the Court’s opinion. In terms of positions of principle, Greece could not oppose a referral to the Court. But the effort we are making – and we will continue to make within the next ten days – is to reach a common European position on this issue. Europe remained united on the very difficult management of the crisis in Georgia. It is very important for us to have a single position on this issue as well, on the issue of the International Court of Justice. There was also a discussion on that. We are not there yet, but I hope that we will be able to reach a position – which could also be to abstain – before the UN General Assembly. But it should be a common and single position of all Europeans.”
In closing, we can always rely on the excellent website of Greek MFA to learn their true position wrt recognition of Kosovo. The link is http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/en-US/
I hope these texts puts in perspective the partisan disinformation spread on this talk page by parties, without whose editing, this article would never have been locked and made to contain content misstating reality (such as the Montenegro or Bosnia write-ups, to name two, and as it happens, Greece as well). -- Mareklug talk 05:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
There is the basic principle of respect for the territorial integrity and independence of states. Based on this principle – which is of long-standing importance to, and is a fundamental constant of, the Greek foreign policy of all Greek governments – >>>Greece did not recognise Kosovo<<< and does not recognise the secessionist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Now please stop. You are very well aware of this. You called this quote "sophistry and fancy dancin'" (?!), propaganda selling and "blatant lying and reality distortion" in an attempt to discredit it but regardless you know about it and not even a megabyte of text posted by you can bury this quote.-- Avala ( talk) 15:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
It seems that Greece has supported Kosovo's desire to open a diplomatic mission in Greece. Here's the source [66]. How should be proceed about adding this to Greece's box? -- alchaemia ( talk) 16:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Avala, as far as anyone with eyes can see, you have been the only one that has spread POV through crafty wording in the country description boxes. Brazil, India, China, Cuba etc etc... And I don't think people from either Serbia or Kosovo are any different than people from any other country in the world when it comes to POV. There could be people from Greece or Slovakia who come and spread POV. Why would they be any different from Serbia or Kosovo? Obviously when Greece recognizes passports and allows a diplomatic mission from The Republic of Kosovo to be opened in it's own country, that is relevant. Because this diplomatic mission will not be from UNMIK Kosovo, it will be from The Rep of Kosovo. Obviously that is to be noted and very relevant when describing Greece's attitude towards Kosovo and it's independence. It does not recognize the independence, but it does recognize it's passports and it allows Kosovo to have a diplomatic mission in it's country. Exo ( talk) 18:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not indenting anymore. Yes, basically I agree with Exo. The consent of the host state is required when opening diplomatic offices and that in and of itself constitutes a reaction. -- alchaemia ( talk) 20:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, the passports thing should be added. I read it in Macedonian news, but that shouldn't be used as a source for this if it doesn't need to. Somebody, if they haven't already, should look at Greek news and government sites. Balkan Fever 22:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/Articles/en-US/110908_alp_1619.htm
There's no chance Greece officially recognizing Kosovan passports, at least for the time being, they will be allowed entry as Serbian citizens. My personal opinion is that you should be very carefull analyzing any relative source, the political cost of a significant step towards recognition is enough reason, especially for this government with an electoral base that contains an important number of nationalists. The Greek press can easily portray such a movement as a "betrayal" of Greek-Serbian friendship. Let alone not serving national interests regarding Cyprus for example. Of course all things in life have a price, for this matter it would be very high to consider it probable.-- Zakronian ( talk) 02:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Serbia recognises Macedonia under constitutional name, not in spite to Greece but because Mitsotakis and Milosevic had that insane plan to invade Macedonia and divide it in half after the good cop-bad cop game where Serbia was supposed to lure Macedonia back to FR Yugoslavia.-- Avala ( talk) 14:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes, like in the vague case of Kuwait, we do need to specify who made a statement. In that example, the ambassador to Russia, because it is in the context of discussions between Kuwait and Russia, not Kuwait and the world. However, when the statement is made by a PRIME MINISTER or a PRESIDENT or a MOFA personel, why do we have to specify every single time who it was? I propose we use the name of the country as a default in order to save the boxes from overcrowding and TMI. Like for example:
If people wanna look up the names, they should click the reference link or use the search box in the left. We don't have to overcrowd the country description boxes with so much information that sometimes it's so stuffy, it diverts the reader from what the actual stance of the country is! I used Greece as an example because with all the names and cluttered quotes, you can't even make out a clear position. It's just a bunch of names and titles back and forthing extra-long quotes. Exo ( talk) 11:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as the crowded descriptions, I wanna know what editors think about it. I've noticed there's alot of presumed, useless or repetitive information that clutters up the boxes and the actual position of a country becomes very confusing. Like of example, in the case of high leveled officials: "Greek foreign minister Dora Bokoyannis said during a visit in Tirana that..." That's pretty much summed up with: "Greece said that..." Exo ( talk) 13:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree - It should be noted who said what and when. WP is not a paper encyclopedia so we would have to cut it. -- Avala ( talk) 14:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Let's have CONSENSUS VOTE on whether we should include the following information in Greece's description box after the following announcement:
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/13285/
A) Greece to recognize Kosovo passports
B) Kosovo to open diplomatic mission in Athens
A) Agree - Recognition of passports is a reaction from Greece towards the travel documents which were issued as a result of the declaration of independence
B) Agree - Kosovo will represent it's interests as an independent country through a diplomatic office in Athens, and Greece has given it permission to do so.
Exo (
talk)
A) Agree
B) Agree --
alchaemia (
talk)
19:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A) Agree
B) Agree Just calmly identify the sources in the text, analogously to Avala having kept
Tanjung (
http://www.B92.net ) report in the Greece section, as well as his attributing expresly the
The Kosova Report one, both rather unoffically quoting the *ceremonial powers only* President of Greece and his assessments concerning independent Kosovo. It was not strictly correct for us to have written (my fault for letting it creep in) that Greece announced these things. But they were announced as sourced to a named Greek government official in Pristina, and that is far more substantive sourcing than some anonymous sources in Uruguay reported on one minor Spanish-language website, based on which Avala colored Uruguay as having already officially rejected Kosovo's independence. :) IMHO this content can be returned to the article in a properly modified form even right now, and will not constitue edit warring, only a further refinement of objected to attribution. --
Mareklug
talk
20:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your comments. Please note that on Wikipedia,
consensus is determined by
discussion, not voting, and it is the quality of arguments that counts, not the number of people supporting a position. Consider reading about the
deletion policy for a brief overview for the deletion process, and how we decide what to keep and what to delete. We hope you decide to stay and contribute even more. Thank you! --
Avala (
talk)
19:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Wait, are you telling me that the policy now is to "wait for official source" ? You gotta be kidding, right? How many pro-Serbia sources have you personally added that are not official, but based on newspaper reports? You want me to go ahead and post them here for you? The official website of the Prime Minister of Kosovo (you can find the link in the discussion above) posted an article confirming the recognition of passports and the opening of a diplomatic office. If that's not official, I don't know what is. Regarding that little thing you posted at the bottom, I've told you once and I'll tell you again: maybe you yourself should read those first before you start waving them around randomly. Your behavior here has been nothing but obstructive and you have been called on it several times. Again, STRONG AGREE -- alchaemia ( talk) 19:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
How do we make an edit on this matter, when Avala keeps reverting edits under the pretext that a consensus hasn't been reached because he keeps twisting words around? Who is Avala to deem the quality of his arguments stronger than ours? Exo ( talk) 20:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree with both, at least we can agree to wait for the Greek press reaction, even a delayed one, if the position of the MFA has changed (before it was actually implemented, even for a week) from "visas to another piece of paper" to an act of recognition by putting visas on Kosovan passports there is going to be a political crucifixion orgy by the opposition and media. If we accept it as a fact then the "silence" so far in Greece, even by the communist party, is scandalous, do you understand that ? -- Zakronian ( talk) 21:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A) Agree
B) Agree----
Supersexyspacemonkey (
talk)
03:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
agree to them both but it doesn't mean Greece will recognise soon, so we shouldn't imply this. Include it neutrally. Ijanderson ( talk) 09:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
On 19 September 2008 Greece announced through its liason office in Pristina, Kosovo, that it would recognize the new Kosovo passports and issue visas for their holders. It was also announced then and there that Kosovo would open a diplomatic office in Athens. [58] Exo ( talk) 10:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Untill a reasonable explanation is given as to why since the Greek goevernment has announced something like that there is no reaction whatsoever from inside Greece i will remove it again. As simple as that.-- Zakronian ( talk) 10:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
...sigh. Exo, relent already with this metonymic use of "Greece". It only obfuscates and gets the hackles up of people who oppose this edit, with some reasonable cause, I'd say. Let's try this version:
On 19 September 2008, after a meeting between Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci and Dimitris Moschopoulos, Head of the Greek Liaison Office in Pristina, the two announced that Kosovo will open a diplomatic office in Athens, and that Greece will recognize the new Kosovo passports, and issue visas for their holders in Pristina. [59]
If this is ok with everyone, I suggest it be added to the article at the end of the Greece writeup. Zakronian, why don't you ask Mr. Moschopoulos, why. Ours is not to reason why, but to report verified information from trustworthy sources. This one fits the definition. -- Mareklug talk 10:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
And here is a dispatch from a .yu (Yugoslavia :)) domain, on this subject. It includies a picture of the two named gentlemen:
Greece recognizes Kosovo passport
20. September 2008. | 09:22
Source: EMportal
Greece will recognise Kosovo’s passports even though it has not yet recognised Kosovo’s independence.
The Greek government decided to recognize the passports of citizens from Kosovo and to start issuing visas in the Greek office in Pristina.
This was said by the Head of the office Dimitris Moskopoulos, cited by the Serbian Tanjug news agency.
After a meeting with the Kosovo PM Hasim Thaci, Moskopoulos noted that Thaci introduced him to the decision of the Greek Government to recognize Kosovo passports even though it hasn't recognized the independence of Kosovo.
Starting from next week, Kosovars will be able travel to Greece on new passports issued by the Republic of Kosovo.
After a meeting between Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci and Dimitris Moschopoulos, Head of the Greek Liaison Office in Pristina, the two announced that Kosovo will open a diplomatic office in Athens.
Until now Kosovar citizens could travel to Greece on former Yugoslavian passports and travel documents issued by the UN mission in Kosovo, UNMIK.
Since travelers going to Greece start using Kosovan passports next week, we can't delay, waiting for the Greek media and the Greek MFA who may well remain silent, a kind of tabu. The Serbian FM was told of this development ahead of time. Let us serve the Wikipedia readers. Somebody, please put this in the article already. Let's not have any pointless edit wars over this. Clearly these offices -- the Greek one in Prishtina, and the Kosovan one in Athens, are de facto consular offices dispensing visas. -- Mareklug talk 19:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
And here is the complete dispatch from http://B92.net/ dated 19 September 2008. I wikified some names for emphasis:
Greece to recognize Kosovo passports
19 September 2008 | 14:47 | Source: Tanjug
PRIŠTINA -- The Greek govt. has decided to recognize Kosovo passports, says head of the Greek office in Priština Dimitris Mokopoulos.
After a meeting with Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, Mokopoulos said that he had informed Thaci of the Greek government’s decision to accept the new Kosovo passports, even though Greece has not recognized the province’s independence.This will allow Kosovo citizens to obtain visas at the Greek office in Priština.
Montenegro and Macedonia have also recognized the Kosovo passports, even though they have not recognized Kosovo independence.
In principle I don't disagree with adding it but I find it extremely odd that no Greek media made a report on this. Also as far as I can see it is all copies of the same news article, though I am not sure who was the original publisher.-- Avala ( talk) 20:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Your article dates to September 10th. The news of passport recognition and diplomatic office from credible valid sources came out after an announcement on September 19th. Your source is outdated. Exo ( talk) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Aha sorry I didn't read it indeed. This is the only official thing that we have. Apparently they don't recognise passports but have some process (to my knowning it could be the same as with Macedonian passports where at the border they don't look at passports because they don't recognise them, they look at a special document including visa that is issued in the embassy):
Ms. Antoniou: With regard to the new passports issued by Kosovo, does Greece recognise them or not?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Kosovo passports are not recognised. There is, however, a specific process where the visa is on a separate piece of paper.
And obviously it can't be outdated in the same week. Greek MFA if they talked about passports before would certainly talk about them again if the situation changes. My guess is that the officer in Pristina talked about this specific process. -- Avala ( talk) 23:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
FAQs from the Greek MFA site, look a the answer in the question No5 "How and how often is the site updated ?".-- Zakronian ( talk) 07:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Now it's clear
-- Avala ( talk) 13:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok, let's establish what we believe. @Avala, @Zakronian, as of today, 22 September 2008, based on what we know:
-- Mareklug talk 16:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/Articles/en-US/110908_alp_1619.htm
Oh, and a reaction not to the independence but the declaration of independence might even be that a Greek official visited and had a talk about the weather with Thaci.-- Zakronian ( talk) 23:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
From 22 September 2008 Kosovan passport holders can be issued visas in Pristina and there seems to be an agreement about the opening of a Kosovan liaison office in Athens. [61]
I updated Montenegro with their announcement that the position will be revealed by President Vujanovic at UNGA. And I am waiting for BalkanFever to update the article on Macedonia. Their PM spoke about recognition rumors today. [76] -- Avala ( talk) 18:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Added Gruevski's comments to Macedonia. I'll work on shortening some of the section later. Balkan Fever 23:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
84.134.117.252 ( talk) 19:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Nobody could have produced a more Serbian propaganda peace than this Times of India dispatch does. Everything in it is Jeremic this, Jeremic that. No Indian official is ever quoted. All we have is the the words of dear old Mr. Jeremic (Foreign Minister of Serbia) who came ot India.
Mr. Jeremic: back to Harvard for you. You're shaming the Old Maroon with this shameless nonsense. You obviously need to retake basic international law and human rights. Self-determination of peoples is enshrined in it. It is a basic human right. Nothing trumps it.
Deear 84.134.117.252: This talk page is for article improvement. A little bit of critical reading and judicious selection is expected. -- Mareklug talk 20:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I invite editors to read the Castro editorial [62] that is the basis of our original Cuba entry. Then tell me, if my rewrite is accurate or not. See the articles Radio Rebelde and Granma (newspaper). Note how Granma's content is characterized:
Granma regularly features:
Entity | Evidence | Notes |
---|---|---|
![]() |
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo.
[63]
[64]
[65]
On 29 February 2008, writing in his personal "Reflections of Fidel" column, which is published in the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Cuba, Granma Internacional (and since translated into English and archived on the Radio Rebelde website), Fidel Castro, the ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to Raúl Castro, attacked Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's "independence", and by doing so, putting at risk the ethnic cohesion and the very state integrity of Spain or The United Kingdom, both of which experience separatist movements of their own. Referring to Kosovo "independence" (in quotes), Catro made no identifiable statement concerning Cuba possibly witholding its recognition of Kosovo, or granting it. [62] |
Thoughts? I put it in the article. If it is not there, it was reverted, instead of objected to here. -- Mareklug talk 05:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree to this:
Entity | Evidence | Notes |
---|---|---|
![]() |
On
29 February
2008, writing in his personal "Reflections of Fidel" column, which is published in the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Cuba,
Granma Internacional,
Fidel Castro, the ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to President
Raúl Castro, attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's "independence", and by doing so, putting at risk the ethnic cohesion and the very state integrity of
Spain or
The United Kingdom, both of which experience separatist movements of their own..
[66]
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo. [67] [68] [69] |
-- Avala ( talk) 13:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
The Castro editorial is now referenced in English, and at the time the Cuba entry created, it was referenced in Spanish, and later, to a summary in Catalan. For the first time, dare I say, we can revise our (misleading) entry for Cuba while all editors who read English can verify that we are truthful. If editors think we are saying too much, let's really say even less, without creating an impression, that Cuba officially rejected Kosovo, which is what is at issue both here and elsewhere, where this entry is used as basis: Image:Kosovo_relations.svg/ Image:Kosovo_relations.png -- Mareklug talk 00:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
After removing the whole reference to his election to a post of a foreign policy advisor in Cuban parliament a few months ago now you are claiming it must be some OR and POV effort by Avala to claim that he is holding such a position. Remarkable spin!-- Avala ( talk) 10:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
84.134.94.141 ( talk) 19:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not spaming. Please no personal attacks! 84.134.94.141 ( talk) 20:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't tell me what I should do. Better tell me why do you hate me! 84.134.123.39 ( talk) 13:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Say that to Jakezing. For days now I'm trying to solve the problem but I does not even tell me why he is angry with me. 84.134.123.39 ( talk) 15:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
There is no need to tread a colleague that way.EOD on this page! 84.134.63.1 ( talk) 07:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
gee, I don't know. Maybe some editors should apologize to Max Mux a.k.a IP.84.134.*.*... Do you think that our Armenia write-up, even though it was using the same quote, was really saying the same thing? IMHO MM could have genuinely thought he was reporting a change in position by Armenia, after he read what was there.
![]() |
On 3 September 2008 President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan stated: "Today one is wondering from time to time why Armenia is not recognizing the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The answer is simple: for the same reason that it did not recognize Kosovo’s independence. Having the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenia can not recognize another entity in the same situation as long as it has not recognized the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic." A nation’s right to self-determination "takes times", requiring the understanding of "all interested parties". Accordingly, Armenia is trying to "convince" Azerbaijan to accept the loss of Karabakh, stated the president. [70] [71] |
![]() |
Despite expressing his support for the right to self-determination and that any "possible recognition of Kosovo's independence will not strain the Armenian-Russian relations" [72], President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan has stated that Armenia will not recognise either Kosovo or Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He said that Armenia cannot recognise another entity in the same situation as long as it has not recognised the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. [73] |
When we put in those 2 refs, we did not use {{
cite news}}
or {{
cite web}}
, which admins asked for on this page. Should anyone feel inclined to make further improvements here, I now myself use full citations all the time. I also consistently use (accurate, truthful) edit summaries, too. When I am forced to revert, I reveal this unambiguously. --
Mareklug
talk
10:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help) Cite error: The named reference "cuba" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
help page).
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (
link)
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (
link)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
The following kinks indicate that more recognitions are coming soon.
84.134.90.188 ( talk) 20:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course it is relevant. Please move Macedonia to the "Soon to recognize" section. 84.134.75.180 ( talk) 15:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree.
84.134.111.103 (
talk)
11:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
B92 New Kosovo ReportArab States expected to "recognise very soon, again". Maybe they will, maybe they won't. How soon is soon. Saudi Arabia has been saying soon since April, surely the recognition reprocess can't take that long. What they waiting for? Ijanderson ( talk) 05:57, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is a little bit more specifically.
84.134.106.174 ( talk) 09:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Now (with Russian recognition) that Abkazia and South Ossetia meet the minimum de facto definition of a state, thier entires should be moved to 'other states' along with the Vatican, PA, SADR, and TRNC. 141.166.152.188 ( talk) 16:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Why are you talking nonsense again? 84.134.121.122 ( talk) 19:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
They are all hypocritical. Those who recognized Kosovo now talk about international law, United Nations etc. and Russia well it's obvious. Serbia stated it is devoted to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia. Serbia did not recognize Kurdistan to get back at Turkey or Casamance to Senegal so it wont recognize these two if Georgia recognizes Kosovo either. Some lower officials of the Serbian Government have condemned Georgia by saying that this is a result of their soft approach to Kosovo issue.-- Avala ( talk) 19:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is also being discussed at Template talk:Countries of Europe. For what it's worth, I very much doubt that any other state will recognize the breakaways - it's too much of a precedent for their own separatists and in the case of Russia's neighbours, they will be very conscious of the large ethnic Russian communities on their territories. They have too much to lose. -- ChrisO ( talk) 20:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
This is not a forum. 84.134.121.122 ( talk) 20:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I said thats not a forum. And Tocino should be reported to an admin. 84.134.122.185 ( talk) 11:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
New Recognitions are expected in the near future.
To be consistent, I would suggest that we change the name of this page to "International recognition of Kosovo."
Yea or nay?
Canadian Bobby ( talk) 21:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Glad my suggestions drew positive feedback. :-) I must by the way remind that any proposed move of this article should go through WP:RM due to its likely controversial nature. Hús ö nd 01:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
{{
move}}
with a new name has been placed atop this discussion page as well. --
Mareklug
talk
02:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)B92 According to a senior Russian official. I can't really tell what the source is saying. What can we make of it? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
[10] “Macedonia has already accepted Kosovo’s passports and soon it will officially recognise its independence,” According to Ali Ahmeti. How can we use this? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Ali Ahmeti's part is in coalition with current Macedonian government. Macedonia actually has already taken the decision. The announcement is a matter of time;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.82.78 ( talk) 19:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
yeh yeh i heard Ijanderson ( talk) 20:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Given what we know today, and developments in Macedonia, Kosovo and elsewhere, why should we not move Macedonia to immiment recognizers category and whittle down the ridiculous amount of hedging put in its write-up? I think it's difficult to contrue any reasons other than partisan. Please give me a reasonable argument (or just make the edit I'm suggesting). -- Mareklug talk 03:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the category should simply be "Imminent recognizers" and leave it at that. -- Mareklug talk 03:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC) And so it is. -- Mareklug talk 04:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
its in German They are to recognise soon Ijanderson ( talk) 20:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep an eye on Dkis ( talk · contribs). Colchicum ( talk) 20:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
The quote contained in the Haitian response isn't quite proper English, though close. Could someone clean that up please? Menrunningpast ( talk) 01:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Why are Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the TRNC listed in "Other States" along with the Vatican and Palestine? On the International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia page, Kosovo, Hamas-Gaza and the TRNC are listed under "Other entities." This is unfair and biased. Kosovo has far more recognition than the TRNC, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and Hamas is in an even more bizarre position, so to equate them all is to demean Kosovo. I would propose that the TRNC, Abkhazia and South Ossetia be moved to the "Regions aspiring for more autonomy/independence" section, as that's essentially what they're doing, anyway. You may now bitch at me. Canadian Bobby ( talk) 02:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Please move Macedonia and Portugal to the imminent recognisers. 84.134.87.92 ( talk) 07:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You should have more respect toward other people. 84.134.68.247 ( talk) 15:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I only wanted him to see how he is. Maybe I have made that the wrong way. 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 17:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Where is that rule? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Again: Why are you talking to me in that offensiv way? I meant there is no rule which demands that I must do that. Why are you want that from me? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You are like my aunt everytime you say "do these, do that" no please, nothing. Being polite wouldn't hurt anyone. 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Whats that suposed to mean? 84.134.63.65 ( talk) 18:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
She is not correct. I have already done so. 84.134.81.195 ( talk) 07:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Why? What does that mean? I have done everything you wanted! 84.134.73.75 ( talk) 11:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Something about Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
84.134.87.92 ( talk) 07:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
More in this article, which I think is what's referred to in the first article: [12] Bazonka ( talk) 10:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Kevin Lajm (UK Ambassador to Mont.) believes that Mont. will recognize just before EU summit. Read here (in Albanian/Shqip). Ari 0384 ( talk) 22:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Seem to coming after all.
Max Mux ( talk) 09:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Please add Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait in that section. Thank you. Max Mux ( talk) 14:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Please read the article carefully. It isn't just wishful thinking he has contact to officials of these countries. Max Mux ( talk) 14:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Something about Macedonia again, sadly not from the goverment.
Max Mux ( talk) 18:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
But it belongs to the "International reaction".
84.134.87.125 (
talk)
20:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
@Jakezing WP:NPA Ijanderson ( talk) 22:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
@Jakezing WP:CIVIL Ijanderson ( talk) 07:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Source? 84.134.100.171 ( talk) 13:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Today they said the demarcation is going per 1974 plan, not the Ahtisaari plan. They also need to sort out the gift of the Serbian government to Macedonian government of a large part of land in 2001.-- Avala ( talk) 21:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
See: http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/3237/2/ -- Mareklug talk 07:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Macedonian Foreign Ministry expressed content with the hitherto progress of borderline demarcation process between Macedonia and Kosovo.
As they underlined, the process is being realised according to the established frameworks of Ahtisaari’s plan.
Pertaining to some media allegations, relying on statements by inhabitants from border village Debalde, the Foreign Ministry remarks that the official mixed Macedonian-Kosovo committee was in charge of the demarcation and its work progressed in accordance with the international agreements.
“The Foreign Ministry agrees with Kosovo Demarcation Committee Vice President Murat Meha’s statement for Pristina Agency Kosovapress where he underlines that no incident has been registered since the beginning of the demarcation of the borderline with Macedonia and we expect this condition to be maintained until the end of the demarcation process”, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Petar Culev stated.
Is the neutrality of this article still disputed? I believe it to be NPOV. If it isn't, that banner at the top should be removed. Also if the neutrality is still disputed, please specify and we can hep correct what is seen as POV. Ijanderson ( talk) 06:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I put the POV template there, and none of what motivated my adding it has been resolved. It's all detailed in the archives. The archiving, I suppose, is a great way to sweep unresolved complaints under the carpet. I'll just list the states grossly misrepresented: Bosnia, Uruguay, Slovakia, Ukraine, China, India, Cuba, Libya. Fix their state write-ups to NPOV, and I'll be the first to celebrate a truly NPOV article. -- Mareklug talk 15:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
South Ossetia don't recognize Kosovo.
Max Mux ( talk) 19:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Contents
1 Serbia's non-recognition 2 States which formally recognise Kosovo as independent 2.1 UN member states 2.2 Non-UN member states 2.3 Imminent recognisers 3 Other states 3.1 UN member states 3.2 Non-UN member states 4 Non-states 5 International organisations 5.1 Governmental organisations 5.2 Non-governmental organisations 6 See also 7 Notes and references
As you can see above, I redid the headings, which were hurting. Now they agree with the map legend, which itself has been stable for months, so it's a good baseline, against which to organize our content. And we haven't redone the headings systematically, even though we got rid of a lot of content, and moved other content around. Please discuss the new headings nad propose changes if any, instead of edit warring. :) Thank you. -- Mareklug talk 05:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
a draft parliamentary resolution demanding the recognition of Kosovo’s independence has been filed by the DPA, main opposition party. They said "Now is the real moment for this to happen. It is about time that Macedonia joins pro- western states". [20] Worth adding to the article? Ijanderson ( talk) 10:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Max Mux ( talk) 15:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently in the "other states" section there is "Non-UN member states" and then there is a "Non states" section. There is a mix-up here. In both sections are put entities from the List of unrecognized countries. As far as I understand in the "Non-UN member states" section should be put all entities from the List of unrecognized countries and in the "Non states" section all other entities like those from Government in exile and List of active autonomist and secessionist movements.
Thus "Transnistria" and "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" should be moved FROM "Non states" TO "Non-UN member states" (or otherwise the whole of the "Non-UN member states" list should be moved TO "Non states" with the exception of "Holy See"). Alinor ( talk) 17:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I am opposed to the new name, "International reaction to the declaration of independence of Kosovo". In 2008 it was the second time Kosovo declared independence, first time in 1990. So with this new name, we will have to include sources and information on the previous declaration of independence, so this completely changes the article. Also this controversial edit of changing the name was not done with a consensus or support. I demand for it to be reverted until a consensus is reached on a new name. Ijanderson ( talk) 21:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Abkhazia will recognize Kosovo, if Kosovo recognized them in turn.
Max Mux ( talk) 09:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. 84.134.110.159 ( talk) 18:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
B92 source and focus-fen. It says all the conditions have been fulfilled for Macedonia to recognise Kosovo. Shall we add it to the article? Ijanderson ( talk) 17:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I think its quite clear. Max Mux ( talk) 18:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Maybe BalkanFever can produce a Macedonian source of higher verifyiability, and if he does, then moving this to Imminent Recognisers will be the thing to do. -- Mareklug talk 18:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
What about these above mentioned oones? What is wrong with them? 84.134.118.155 ( talk) 18:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Why? I must repeat myself, the sources are clear enough in my opinion. What should be wrong? Max Mux ( talk) 19:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
This is a rumour, perfectly normal thing and other media report on it but it simply has no place in this article.-- Avala ( talk) 20:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
So far I'd say that Macedonia, Montenegro and Malaysia have been the most complicated and the most problematic by far. They give all these different statements every month. I don't know if it's something with the letter M or maybe they truly have no plan but it is annoying.-- Avala ( talk) 21:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I have noticed we still use media reports for something (recognition) that requires an official document. Recognising is done through some kind of a decree, act etc. not a media statement and countries listed here are still not sourced to the official website and therefore we don't have an access to the recognition document. For an example regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia we have such Russia Nicaragua. We should try to fix this by finding permanent official sources with texts of the recognition not only reports on it.
We could also use MFA links for embassies/diplomatic relations of:
-- Avala ( talk) 23:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Later I try to tell you the others. 84.134.97.80 ( talk) 08:49, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
That are official sources. 84.134.124.49 ( talk) 19:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Czech MFA web page listing the embassy in Pristina: [32], [33]. — Emil J. 14:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
OK one by one change because they are the official MFA source, we can assume they are more permanent and official than media report. -- Avala ( talk) 12:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Change reference 53 with [1] -- Avala ( talk) 15:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Change reference 88 with [2] -- Avala ( talk) 16:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder how much additional effort will this trivial maintenance request take. So, here's the third attempt.
{{
editprotected}}
In section "States which formally recognise Kosovo as independent", please replace
| 19 ||
Switzerland
[4] ||
2008-02-27 || Embassy of Switzerland in Pristina from 28 March 2008
[5]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Bern (to open)
[3]||
with
| 19 ||
Switzerland
[6] ||
2008-02-27 || Embassy of Switzerland in Pristina from 28 March 2008
[7]
[8]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Bern (to open)
[3]||
and replace
| 41 ||
Czech Republic
[9] ||
2008-05-21 || Embassy of the Czech Republic in Pristina from 16 July 2008
[10]
[11]
For details see:
Czech Republic's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence ||
EU member state
NATO member state
with
| 41 ||
Czech Republic
[12] ||
2008-05-21 || Embassy of the Czech Republic in Pristina from 16 July 2008
[13]
[14]
For details see:
Czech Republic's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence ||
EU member state
NATO member state
— Emil J. 14:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree Ijanderson ( talk) 17:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree Canadian Bobby ( talk) 23:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree - link maintenance is not contoversial. Thanks EmilJ for the effort to make the request in official tone.-- Avala ( talk) 19:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Since it seems there is some dispute as to these it's best to be dealt within the talk page. I don't think the sourcing for Haiti is similar to that for Uruguay, which cites anonymous sources, but I also think anonymous government sources at least justify a mention in the article.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 03:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
This is the list of things you reverted which are block worthy
You've got issues, that's what I think. I mean no one would vandalise like this for fun, you are either on a mission to destroy this article or something else which I can't understand. Either way your edit was extremely malicious and will not go away unnoticed if you continue to pursue it.-- Avala ( talk) 18:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the {{[[Template:|]]|editprotect}}
procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for Cuba that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
|-
|
Cuba || Cuba has not issued an official position regarding the independence of Kosovo
[15]
[16]
[17]. In a newspaper article, ex-President
Fidel Castro attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's independence. To Fidel Castro, Javier Solana is the synthesis of pure unreasonableness and injustice, as Kosovo's independence might create a precedent for
Catalonia's independence, or that of the
Basque Country.
[18]
No Caribbean state has gone on record officially to embrace, oppose or even react to Kosovo's independence, according to a neighboring Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement made in April.
[19]
||
Well your references would work in a version like this:
|-
|
Cuba || Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo
[20]
[21]
[22], however in a newspaper article,
Fidel Castro, ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to
Raul Castro, writing unofficially, attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's independence. To Fidel Castro, Javier Solana is the synthesis of pure unreasonableness and injustice, as Kosovo's independence might create a precedent for
Catalonia's independence, or that of the
Basque Country.
[18]
||
Do you agree? -- Avala ( talk) 12:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)-- Avala ( talk) 12:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current Cuba entry is fine. It explains the role Fidel has Cuban politics during his post-presidency and why Cuba won't recognize. -- Tocino 17:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the editprotect procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for China that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
{{ editprotect}}
Dear Administrator, please replace the China tabular entry under Other states>UN members. Consensus has been achieved. See below.
|-
|
People's Republic of China || People's Republic of China has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. The Chinese Foreign Minister has made a statement stressing that the PRC "expresses grave concern" over Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. The Minister's remarks go on to add that "The resolution of the Kosovo issue bears on peace and stability of the Balkan region, the fundamental norms governing international relations as well as the authority and role of the UN Security Council. China always believes that a plan acceptable to both Serbia and Kosovo through negotiations is the best way to resolve this issue", that "the unilateral move taken by Kosovo will lead to a series of consequences. China is deeply worried about its severe and negative impact on peace and stability of the Balkan region and the goal of establishing a multi-ethnic society in Kosovo", stressing that "China calls upon Serbia and Kosovo to continue negotiations for a proper resolution within the framework of the international law and work together to safeguard peace and stability of the Balkan region", and adding that "the international community should create favorable conditions for that".
[23]
[24] On
15 May
2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in
Ekaterinburg in
Russia. The host minister,
Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position, phrased in language not used by India or China elsewhere before or since: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory".
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28] ||
permanent member of the UNSC
-- from: International Herald Tribune (a respected neutral world press newspaper, "China could gain from Russian moves on Georgia", 3 September 2008.China also objected to Russia's attempt to use a Chinese-dominated regional body, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, to endorse its recognition of the rebel Georgian regions, Tsang said. Beijing has always insisted the grouping, which met last week in Tajikistan, is not a political alliance and doesn't pose a threat to any other nation or multilateral institution.
"It's not meant to rebuke Russia as much as it is to show the world that the SCO under Chinese stewardship is a constructive force," Tsang said.
Please replace China with this version.
|-
|
People's Republic of China || The Chinese Foreign Minister has made a statement stressing that the PRC "expresses grave concern" over Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. The Minister's remarks go on to add that "The resolution of the Kosovo issue bears on peace and stability of the Balkan region, the fundamental norms governing international relations as well as the authority and role of the UN Security Council. China always believes that a plan acceptable to both Serbia and Kosovo through negotiations is the best way to resolve this issue", that "the unilateral move taken by Kosovo will lead to a series of consequences. China is deeply worried about its severe and negative impact on peace and stability of the Balkan region and the goal of establishing a multi-ethnic society in Kosovo", stressing that "China calls upon Serbia and Kosovo to continue negotiations for a proper resolution within the framework of the international law and work together to safeguard peace and stability of the Balkan region", and adding that "the international community should create favorable conditions for that".
[29]
[30] On
15 May
2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in
Ekaterinburg in
Russia. The host minister,
Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory".
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28] ||
permanent member of the UNSC
Removed WP:OR and the language thing. Agree we should add it? Ijanderson ( talk) 11:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current entry for China is fine. It lists the two responses they've made - one through the Foreign Ministry and the other a joint statement China made with India and Russia. -- Tocino 17:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been protected again, right after user:Avala performed an unmarked revert of an NPOVed versioning of the Cuba, India, and China write-ups. He marked his edit summary: "rm OR". What he has done in fact, is to return the article to the OR/POV state for these three countries, that he himself has crafted.
Now, we, the editors working to make this article neutral and ubiased, must go through the {{[[Template:|]]|editprotect}}
procedure in order to make improvements.
This section contains the write-up for India that Avala reverted as OR. Please comment on it, and if and when we achieve consensus, the above editprotect template will activated, in order to attract an administrator:
|-
|
India || India has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. Official communique of the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs is cautious and ambiguous: "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation." "It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[31] On the other hand, statements ascribed by the Serbian media over the months to the Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby are pro-Serbia:
On 15 May 2008 foreign ministers of India, Russia and China met in Ekaterinburg in Russia. The host minister, Sergey Lavrov read a statement purportedly reflecting their joint position, phrased in language not used by India or China elsewhere before or since: "In our statement, we recorded our fundamental position that the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo contradicts Resolution 1244. Russia, India and China encourage Belgrade and Pristina to resume talks within the framework of international law and hope they reach an agreement on all problems of that Serbian territory". [25] [26] [27] [28] ||
Please replace India with this version.
|-
|
India || India has yet to come up with a final position regarding the independence of Kosovo. Official communique of the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs is cautious and ambiguous: "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation." "It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[34] However Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby has said the following; "India's position on Kosovo has been and still is consistent, and that is that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country must be fully respected by all other countries."; On
19 June
2008: "Kosovo can set a very dangerous precedent for similar cases around the world".
[35] and on the
31 July
2008: "India abides by the principles of international law and does not recognise Kosovo's secession".
[36]
Removed WP:OR, WP:POV parts and the language thing. Agree we should add it? Ijanderson ( talk) 11:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
How about this:
|-
|
India | Official communique of the Foreign Ministrz issued in February said "We have taken note of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by Kosovo. There are several legal issues involved in this Declaration. We are studying the evolving situation. It has been India's consistent position that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be fully respected by all states. We have believed that the Kosovo issue should have been resolved through peaceful means and through consultation and dialogue between the concerned parties."
[37] In later months Indian Ambassador in Serbia
Ajay Swarupby has said the following; "India's position on Kosovo has been and still is consistent, and that is that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country must be fully respected by all other countries."; On
19 June
2008: "Kosovo can set a very dangerous precedent for similar cases around the world".
[38] and on the
31 July
2008: "India abides by the principles of international law and does not recognise Kosovo's secession".
[39]
It has no summarizations just sheer quotes and let the readers decide.-- Avala ( talk) 11:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
@Ian you are mistaken here, going with the flow with Avala and letting his contention that what you removed is OR or POV. It is the absence of true information and POV impression created by selective choice of quoted material by Avala -- with exclusive use of Russian sources where he should be avoiding them, because Russian is partisan and so are Russian sources -- that is OR. Is this so hard to grasp? We got in this mess precisely because of the potential for abuse in carefully, progagandistically tailoring choice of evidence -- in the form of quotes -- and stitching them into wholes, purportedly representing state positions. That is both OR and crafty partisan activity. Please be savvy. We are being manipulated here, as is reality. A good, well-sourced summary informing the reader without bias as to the true current state of affairs is the essence of encyclopedic writing. Sheer quotes, as demonstrated by Avala, are no cure for sheer distortion and do just fine to spread lies. -- Mareklug talk 12:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - Current India entry is fine and has all of the information without the spin. To leave off the joint statement India, China, and Russia made in Sverdlovsk would be criminal. -- Tocino 17:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Criminal? I don't think so! Max Mux ( talk) 18:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Any news from that meeting today? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.190.77 ( talk) 16:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Here is a link. [ [38]] 84.134.97.116 ( talk) 17:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be moved to International reaction to Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence?
It would make more sense, you know. -- 92.16.151.24 ( talk) 18:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
The current title is simply a more formal form of language, there is no need to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.90.28.194 ( talk) 19:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I still prefer "International recognition of Kosovo." Canadian Bobby ( talk) 19:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Husond ( talk · contribs) is a total weirdo! He protected this page without consensus. I have urged him to unprotect this page so you won't have to wait for a SYSOP to add an entry for you. Anyway, I agree with the article title being changed. Maybe back to the original title: International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. Don't you all agree? -- 92.0.197.9 ( talk) 19:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
See [39]. M.M.S. ( talk) 10:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Wishful thinking on Thaci's part. The Greek foreign ministry has said: "There is the basic principle of respect for the territorial integrity and independence of states. Based on this principle – which is of long-standing importance to, and is a fundamental constant of, the Greek foreign policy of all Greek governments – Greece did not recognise Kosovo and does not recognise the secessionist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia." Link here = [41] . -- Tocino 16:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Macedonian Foreign Minister Antonio Milošoski was asked by a journalist today: "Will you recognise Kosovo?". He didn't answer. BalkanFevernot a fan? say so! 10:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)<br /
Source? 84.134.100.171 (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Today they said the demarcation is going per 1974 plan, not the Ahtisaari plan. They also need to sort out the gift of the Serbian government to Macedonian government of a large part of land in 2001.--Avala (talk) 21:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Who said that? The MFA spokesman for Macedonia directly contradicts this: ...a quote with an external link to Macedonian MFA official speaking...'
The only thing I found from a Greek source is that Greece wants stability and the protection of minorities in Kosovo. The Greek official said that there is no specific support for either Serbia or Kosovo on the recognition issue. Greece also took note of Serbia's move to go to the ICJ about Kosovo, but didn't imply explicit endorsement of the move. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Its clear enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.134.58.146 ( talk) 15:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Avala, enough of your sophistry and fancy dancin'. A link to a the official issue of the Greek MFA (in either Greek or English) stating what you keep claiming it said would do wonders. I'm sure you would nave produced by now, if it existed. But all you have is partisan media accounts. It doesn't exist as a source, and coloring Greece red on your maps is blatant lying and reality distortion. So. Please stop already your campaign of Selling Serbia (Propaganda) by the Pound. If Greece ever rejects Kosovo indepen dence, I'm sure you'll have no trouble linking to its MFA. It hasn't and you can't. Enough already. -- Mareklug talk 06:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Herew's another source for Belize:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90853/6469070.html
84.134.58.146 ( talk) 15:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Whilst looking for a Greek source on their potential recognition, I across the following article: [45]. This states that "The recognition of Kosovo by FYROM should make Pristina act similarly and recognise FYROM’s constitutional name, the FYROM President said Wednesday". This is a bit ambiguous, but could be interpreted as that they've already recognised Kosovo. Bazonka ( talk) 11:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
have we got any more? Ijanderson ( talk) 14:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Is that not enough? 84.134.123.166 ( talk) 15:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
IP84 is trying to fool us here or what? For an example source 38 says how Kosovo officials told Macedonians they don't want to be blackmailed. How does that mean "Macedonia is recognising Kosovo"?-- Avala ( talk) 19:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Please don't come back with your pro-serbian propaganda. 84.134.114.64 ( talk) 19:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
That wasn't a personal attack, just a fact. Max Mux ( talk) 19:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
You are talking false things. The most of sources clearly indicates that Macedonia is going to recognize Kosovo. If you like that or not. 84.134.114.64 ( talk) 20:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Nope, definitely no recognition yet. The current entry adequately reflects the situation IMO (although I am a tad biased since I wrote it ;) ). Again, if anyone thinks Crvenkovski's quote about the constitutional name should go in, speak up. BTW, who is this anon? S/he is a bit annoying. Balkan Fever not a fan? say so! 10:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not annoying. Please stop your useless attacks. 84.134.124.81 ( talk) 14:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please restore them. Cheers Ijanderson ( talk) 17:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Noting states that recognise Kosovo and then reffering to states that do not as simply "other states" is a shocking breach of neutrality. An admin should fix this section title immediately to make clear that these states do not recognise Kosovo. ʄ!• ¿talk? 23:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I motivated changing the heading to Other states to follow the usage engrained on the page courtesy of the map legend, which has been stable and referencing the gray-marked portion of the world as other states since, what is it, March? Somehow this consequence of adopting a map that only shows recognitions by states and treats every other state as "other" wasn't a burning issue all this time. Now that the article headings actually reflect the terminology of the map and its legend used all along, we mysteriously acquired an issue worthy of immediate correction by an admin!
Once the article finally is allowd to be titled properly as international recognition of Kosovo (for that is what it is about, just as the corresponding articles on Wikipedia about Abkhasia, South Ossetia and Northern Cyprus), this dissonance will dissapear and the headings will be 100% coherent and congruent with the article title. And again, a non-issue. The present dissoance -- "a shocking breach of neutrality" -- is only apparent and not real -- unlike official recognition, the other states comprises a spectrum of reaction, ranging from about to recognize any day now to over our dead Serbian bodies (if one is to believe the propaganda coming out of the Serbia MFA). The shocking breach, is the actual shocking breach of accuracy and verifiability, an ongoing travesty also since March or even before, a compendium of POV edits, OR, and edit warring carried out by certain partisan nationalistically-minded editors. -- Mareklug talk 06:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Other states is poor wording and isn't definitive enough. "States that do not recognize" is much more descriptive. -- Tocino 16:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Dissagree under this articles name. The articles name is "International reaction to the 2008 declaration of independence by Kosovo", so this article contains ifnormation about the International reaction in general, which includes: states which have recognised Kosovo, states which are willing to do so, states which will do so in the near future, states which will do so in the future, states which support more dialogue between Prishtina and Beograd, states which will not recognise Kosovo, until their regime will change, states which will not recognise Kosovo until US recognises S. Osettia :-), states which will never recognise Kosovo (doubious statment), etc. SO, grouping all of states` (exept of them who recognise) reaction in a group which says "states that do not recognise Kosovo" is certainly POV.
Agree under another name If the name of the article was "Recognition of Kosovo", than the proposed change would be normal and needed.
balkanian (
talk)
20:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
User:balkanian(and possibly to a much lesser extent user:Mareklug), if I understand you correctly you seem to be advocating WP:POINT. ʄ!• ¿talk? 23:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I got lost reading through this. What are you all arguing over? Canadian Bobby ( talk) 00:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Source: Lithuania Foreign Ministry The official date of the establishment of diplomatic relations is the 1st September 2008. -- Digitalpaper ( talk) 10:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} Please change Lithuania from this
| 39 ||
Lithuania
[40] ||
2008-05-06 || Diplomatic relations commenced 16 July 2008
[41]||
EU member state
NATO member state
|-
to this please
| 39 ||
Lithuania
[42] ||
2008-05-06 || Diplomatic relations with Kosovo established on
1 September
2008
[43]||
EU member state
NATO member state
|-
This is an uncontroversial edit request, it uses the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania as its reference to prove diplomatic relations have been established. Thanks Ijanderson ( talk) 11:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/https://www.urm.lt/index.php?-767438118 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 22:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Telegrafi.com reports that Samoa has recognised the independence of Kosovo. Please report other sources and that's act upon this news. If verified, we should add it asap. Here is the url: [54] Many thanks, Kosovar ( talk) 20:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} I propose we add this
| 47 ||
Samoa
[44]
[45] ||
15 September
2008 || ||
|-
Agree?
Agree. The source is indeed the Kosovo Government (MFA) as is described in the PDF linked here. --
alchaemia (
talk)
21:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Serbs will never stop trying to stop it. It's official. Samoa has recognized Kosovo as independent and sovereign state. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.114.94.6 (
talk)
22:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
For all of you aren't native to the Albanian language, I have provided an adequate translation:
In the office of Minsitry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo, today at 19.30 arrived the official recognition of Republic of Kosovo from the state Samoa via fax.
In the note writen to the President of Republic of Kosovo, sir Fatmir Sejdiu reads: "Dear President,
I am referring to the note you sent on the date of February 17 2008 in which you declare
Kosovo an independent country and ask for diplomatic recogntion of the Republic of Kosovo as a soverign power.
I would like to inform you that the Government of the Samoas has decided to recognize the independence of Kosovo.
We hope that the independence of Kosovo will bring close relations, it will close the conflicts of the '90s that
damaged Western Balkan and bring stability in your region. I wish you and your people of Kosovo
success in the building of your own country". The official note of recogition is signed by the Prime of Samoas, sir Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele
Malielegaoi. ETC ETC.
68.187.140.5 (
talk)
02:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotect}} Now that Samoa is listed as recognizing Kosovar independence, please update the date at the beginning of the second paragraph to read "As of 15 September 2008" -- comment added by User:Benjamin22b ( talk) 13:05, 16 September 2008
Kosovar diplomatic sources have stated that they have indications that Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait and Qatar will join the list of countries that have recognized Kosovo soon
http://www.newkosovareport.com/200809151219/Politics/Samoa-recognizes-indepedent-Kosovo.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 21:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Thats not true. 84.134.81.173 ( talk) 08:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Its from diplomat sources, we can use that. Please move
to the imminent recognizers. Max Mux ( talk) 09:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC) They will do it despite what Avala would hope. Max Mux ( talk) 09:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Here And discuss it there. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 06:34, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Please correct the date. Max Mux ( talk) 09:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
" As of 21 August 2008, 47 out of 192 sovereign United Nations member states have formally recognised.." 84.134.81.173 ( talk) 09:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
It should be 15 September 2008, ....". 84.134.59.188 ( talk) 13:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
"It is a matter of days Skopje to recognize Kosovo, Greek Elefteros Typos newspaper reports citing information according to which there has been a strong support of US George Bush administration in the frames of the negotiations around the attempts the name dispute between Athens and Skopje to be resolved. Skopje’s decision will be announced on September 23 at the session of the UN General Assembly in New York, which will be attended by the Greece Minister of Foreign Affairs Dora Bakoyannis and representatives of FYROM."
Considering that the "rumors" are becoming more frequent and from many sources maybe it's time to add Macedonia to Imminent recognisers. - what do you think?
Source:
http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n152918
Emetko (
talk)
09:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you. Max Mux ( talk) 09:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
B92 Reports about daily Danas which writes that Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski has had informal meetings with representatives of Albanian parliamentary parties, and that he has agreed to recognize Kosovo’s independence for the “sake of the country’s stability,”
Here is the link to article
http://www.danas.co.rs/vesti/politika/skoplje_priznaje_kosovo_22_septembra.56.html?news_id=139421 but it is in a Slavic Language. Maybe someone can help to translate it? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.106.255.42 (
talk)
08:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The ruling party in the government Socialist Democratic Party of Montenegro has introduced the request to speaker of the montengro parliament ranku krivokapicu, The resolution includes the process of integration of montengro into european union, euro atlantic structures, The resolution also includes the discussion for the recognition of Kosovo. Source I think thats what it says, Avala can help check if its been translated correctly Ijanderson ( talk) 17:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I found the quote in English:
-- Avala ( talk) 19:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Then lets move Montenegro to "Imminent recognisers". 84.134.116.136 ( talk) 18:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Its from the government. Its clear enough to move it. 84.134.116.136 ( talk) 18:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
2008 (UTC)
Monenegro to recognize on on October 3rd
http://rtklive.com/?newsId=26267
The problem has been, and this is especially true of Montenegro and Macedonia, that if our criteria for "imminent recognisers" was as you (Exo) suggest then they would have been put in that section when the article was created and would still be there today. Balkan Fever 12:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we add this line to Montenegro in the article.
In September 2008, Official diplomatic sources from Montenegro stated that "Montenegro is ready to recognise the political reality created in Kosovo". The Montenegro Parliament is scheduled to discuss Kosovo further in October. [46]
Making Montenegro look like this in the article.
|
Montenegro || On 24 June, Prime Minister
Milo Đukanović said "Many important member states of the EU and the international community as a whole have already recognised Kosovo so I do not believe that any serious person would like the wheel of history to go back. We are acting rather cautiously for two reasons. The first is that we are a neighbour of both Kosovo and Serbia, so we should help rather than feed fuel to the fire by making rush moves. The second is that we have been independent for only two years now and we have achieved this independence by leaving the Union with Serbia. Our independence has left some traumas on the Serbia-Montenegro relationship."
[47] Three days later an official with the governing
DPS party said that recognising Kosovo "is not currently on the agenda of national priorities."
[48] On 7 July 2008 Montenegrin Minister of Foreign Affairs told
Podgorica media that his government will recognise Kosovo’s independence. He did not, however, say when the government would make such an announcement. When he asked whether it will be sooner or later he responded with "Neither I nor anyone else can say at this moment. It shall happen as soon as we conclude that it is politically best for Montenegro."
[49] However, on 15 July, in an interview with a Russian radio station, Prime Minister Đukanović said that his nation has not yet taken a position on recognition, adding that this "restraint" was caused by the need to contribute, as a neighbor, to stability in the region and improve relations with Serbia.
[50] In September 2008, Official diplomatic sources from Montenegro stated that ""Montenegro is ready to recognise the political reality created in Kosovo". The Montenegro Parliament is scheduled to discuss Kosovo further in October 2008.
[51]||
|-
Agree? Ijanderson ( talk) 15:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
You are not right, Avala. I agree with Ijanderson 84.134.56.213 ( talk) 17:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
The PM says Montenegro will recognize Kosovo. The ruling coalition signs a project-resolution to aling it's policy with NATO and EU. And we're still discussing whether Montenegro should move to the imminent recognizers list? I don't know what logic is working behind that but someone please explain what's going on. Exo ( talk) 17:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Avala must see that he should face the truce. 84.134.56.213 ( talk) 19:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree - with the proposal to edit btw. Exo ( talk) 05:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Daily: Macedonia to recognize Kosovo
Daily: Macedonia to recognize Kosovo 17 September 2008 | 09:03 | Source: Danas BELGRADE -- Macedonia will recognize Kosovo’s independence on September 22, writes daily Danas.
Danas writes that Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski has had informal meetings with representatives of Albanian parliamentary parties, and that he has agreed to recognize Kosovo’s independence for the “sake of the country’s stability,” sources from the Albanian parties claim.
Gruevski believes that recognition of Kosovo, reportedly scheduled for September 22, might solve the parliamentary crisis in Macedonia.
The daily’s sources in Skople claim that the key factor was the decision of former Deputy Prime Minister Imer Selmani from a breakaway faction of Menduh Thaci’s Democratic Party of Albanians (DPA) to suspend his “obedience” to Gruevski’s cabinet.
http://b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2008&mm=09&dd=17&nav_id=53531 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.114.94.6 (
talk)
09:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Its a fact. Can't anyone see that? 84.134.110.159 ( talk) 09:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Another reliable source:
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/13187/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 16:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
[60] and heres another source saying 23rd Ijanderson ( talk) 10:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Thats nonsense and you know that. Please answer my question. Max Mux ( talk) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Macedonia should be removed from the "Other Countries" list, since it is already in the "Imminent Recognizers" list... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.105.213 ( talk) 19:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
[61] Turkey has OPENED its' embassy in Pristina, Kosovo. Please change on the page from TO OPEN ---> OPENED (DATE).
Ari 0384 ( talk) 12:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Source is accurate. Reliable and independent. I am currently in Kosovo and I attended the inauguration of the opening of the Turkish Embassy.
Please add. Avala's excuses are bogus, purely biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.94.6 ( talk) 17:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
editprotect}}
Above is the consensus required for an edit request.
Please change Turkey from this
| 5 ||
Turkey
[52] ||
2008-02-18 || Embassy of Turkey in
Pristina (to open)
[53]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Ankara (to open)
[54]|| NATO member state
EU candidate country
|-
to this
| 5 ||
Turkey
[52] ||
2008-02-18 || Embassy of Turkey in
Pristina
[55]
[56]
Embassy of Kosovo in
Ankara (to open)
[57]|| NATO member state
EU candidate country
|-
Thanks Ijanderson ( talk) 15:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Can I suggest this link: [62] be added to reference 12. 87.114.39.80 ( talk) 16:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I think this would be an important encyclopedic article to have. Any name suggestions? Ijanderson ( talk) 10:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Here are some suggestions:
Source [ [63]] 84.134.100.17 ( talk) 12:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The article should be there. Its important to know. By the way what about answering my question? 84.134.100.17 ( talk) 13:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't this just the approval to get the Serbian resolution in the general assembly? I think the actual vote will happen next week or smth, this was just a vote on whether to put the issue up for a vote or not. Exo ( talk) 13:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Now that vote has been moved to the general assembly, the article can be made, as countries like Malaysia and Indonesia have already made public statements about the ICJ. The new article might help us keep this one a little more concise. Excelsioreverupward ( talk) 20:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
A new page should be opened, however the information on that page will pretty much have to appear here as well, since the way each country will vote is a relevant piece of information for this article also. Exo ( talk) 22:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Here's a bit of quoting from the horse's mouth, the Greek FM as displayed on the Greek MFA site in English:
“From the very first moments of the crisis in South Ossetia, Greece has conducted itself in accordance with the fundamental principles that have always guided its foreign policy through the years.
Paramount among these principles is respect for the independence and territorial integrity of states. We have implemented this policy of principles and respect for international law consistently with regard to a number of issues.
Regarding the matter of the crisis in Georgia, in both the Council of the European Union and the NATO Council, Greece gave its full support to the need for immediate implementation of the 6-point peace plan to end the crisis – which was signed by both Moscow and Tbilisi – and we gave our full support to the need to respect Georgia’s territorial integrity.
We express our dismay at today’s developments and we subscribe to the French Presidency’s statement condemning the decision to recognise the regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in their secession from Georgia.”
We had a very useful discussion with the Minister. You are very familiar with Greece’s positions on and relations with Serbia.
Our steps, our stance, have been very cautious through to today. That is how we will continue.
Regardless of Kosovo’s status, what is of vital importance to Greece is the improvement of the day-to-day lives of those living in Kosovo – particularly the minorities.
This is a significant parameter of the task of the European Force in Kosovo (EULEX). We believe that its presence will contribute to stability and security in the region.
It’s presence must not be linked to the issue of Kosovo’s status. Greece’s participation certainly does not imply recognition.
Vuk and I had an extensive discussion of Serbia’s EU accession course. Greece has a leading role in this effort.
We are satisfied with the developments on the issue of Serbia’s cooperation with the International Criminal Court. We believe that these developments open the way to a further strengthening of EU-Serbian relations.
A further step in this process will be the submission – at some point – of an application for accession to the Union. This particular moment in time – with the Irish referendum – may not be ideal. But Greece is prepared to support Serbia when Serbia decides to take this step.
The strengthening of NATO-Serbian relations cannot be left out of the equation, of course. This will strengthen the peace and stability of the wider region.
I don’t need to say much about our bilateral relations. Our cooperation is excellent and we are constantly looking for new fields in which to strengthen it.
“Today’s Council dealt principally with the issue of Georgia; with the discussions and decisions taken regarding the observation mission in Georgia based, as you know, on the agreement between President Sarkozy, President Barroso, Javier Solana and President Medvedev following their recent meeting in Russia. The Greek position is well known. Let me repeat it, we strongly support the initiatives of the French Presidency. We believe that these initiatives led the European Union – “maybe” for the first time – to make such an intervention in an international crisis. All of us are, of course, fully aware that we are at the beginning of a very difficult course, but we think it is of crucial importance for European observers to go to Georgia in the coming month, to be followed, of course, by a second OSCE observation mission. Greece will take part in this European effort. First of all, we’ve said we will send eight Greek military personnel and two vehicles and, at the same time, put our Centre in Piraeus at their disposal in order to facilitate their naval transfer.
The second issue that was discussed over lunch and took up a lot of our time was the issue of Serbia. As you know, the issue of unfreezing the interim agreement with Serbia has been raised following the arrest of R. Karadzic. There was a very intense discussion on this issue over lunch. Our position was – and we were the first who spoke and put forward these arguments – that the agreement with Serbia must absolutely move forward, that it is extremely important to send a positive signal to the Serbian people, i.e. a message that Europe keeps its promises and that we see that it is the Serbian government’s sincere wish to cooperate closely with the International Court of Justice. Despite the efforts made, there is still one country that maintains its objections. I hope that in October, a decision on this issue could be taken in Luxembourg that will move in the right direction. I must say that the support which we were given – which Serbia was given – was very strong within the Council. There were many countries that took a favourable position. But we still haven’t been able to overcome the objections in order to reach unanimity on this issue. I hope that we will be ready to do that in October.
As you know, Serbia has submitted a request for a referral of the Kosovo issue to the ICJ in The Hague seeking the Court’s opinion. In terms of positions of principle, Greece could not oppose a referral to the Court. But the effort we are making – and we will continue to make within the next ten days – is to reach a common European position on this issue. Europe remained united on the very difficult management of the crisis in Georgia. It is very important for us to have a single position on this issue as well, on the issue of the International Court of Justice. There was also a discussion on that. We are not there yet, but I hope that we will be able to reach a position – which could also be to abstain – before the UN General Assembly. But it should be a common and single position of all Europeans.”
In closing, we can always rely on the excellent website of Greek MFA to learn their true position wrt recognition of Kosovo. The link is http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/en-US/
I hope these texts puts in perspective the partisan disinformation spread on this talk page by parties, without whose editing, this article would never have been locked and made to contain content misstating reality (such as the Montenegro or Bosnia write-ups, to name two, and as it happens, Greece as well). -- Mareklug talk 05:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
There is the basic principle of respect for the territorial integrity and independence of states. Based on this principle – which is of long-standing importance to, and is a fundamental constant of, the Greek foreign policy of all Greek governments – >>>Greece did not recognise Kosovo<<< and does not recognise the secessionist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Now please stop. You are very well aware of this. You called this quote "sophistry and fancy dancin'" (?!), propaganda selling and "blatant lying and reality distortion" in an attempt to discredit it but regardless you know about it and not even a megabyte of text posted by you can bury this quote.-- Avala ( talk) 15:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
It seems that Greece has supported Kosovo's desire to open a diplomatic mission in Greece. Here's the source [66]. How should be proceed about adding this to Greece's box? -- alchaemia ( talk) 16:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Avala, as far as anyone with eyes can see, you have been the only one that has spread POV through crafty wording in the country description boxes. Brazil, India, China, Cuba etc etc... And I don't think people from either Serbia or Kosovo are any different than people from any other country in the world when it comes to POV. There could be people from Greece or Slovakia who come and spread POV. Why would they be any different from Serbia or Kosovo? Obviously when Greece recognizes passports and allows a diplomatic mission from The Republic of Kosovo to be opened in it's own country, that is relevant. Because this diplomatic mission will not be from UNMIK Kosovo, it will be from The Rep of Kosovo. Obviously that is to be noted and very relevant when describing Greece's attitude towards Kosovo and it's independence. It does not recognize the independence, but it does recognize it's passports and it allows Kosovo to have a diplomatic mission in it's country. Exo ( talk) 18:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not indenting anymore. Yes, basically I agree with Exo. The consent of the host state is required when opening diplomatic offices and that in and of itself constitutes a reaction. -- alchaemia ( talk) 20:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, the passports thing should be added. I read it in Macedonian news, but that shouldn't be used as a source for this if it doesn't need to. Somebody, if they haven't already, should look at Greek news and government sites. Balkan Fever 22:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/Articles/en-US/110908_alp_1619.htm
There's no chance Greece officially recognizing Kosovan passports, at least for the time being, they will be allowed entry as Serbian citizens. My personal opinion is that you should be very carefull analyzing any relative source, the political cost of a significant step towards recognition is enough reason, especially for this government with an electoral base that contains an important number of nationalists. The Greek press can easily portray such a movement as a "betrayal" of Greek-Serbian friendship. Let alone not serving national interests regarding Cyprus for example. Of course all things in life have a price, for this matter it would be very high to consider it probable.-- Zakronian ( talk) 02:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Serbia recognises Macedonia under constitutional name, not in spite to Greece but because Mitsotakis and Milosevic had that insane plan to invade Macedonia and divide it in half after the good cop-bad cop game where Serbia was supposed to lure Macedonia back to FR Yugoslavia.-- Avala ( talk) 14:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes, like in the vague case of Kuwait, we do need to specify who made a statement. In that example, the ambassador to Russia, because it is in the context of discussions between Kuwait and Russia, not Kuwait and the world. However, when the statement is made by a PRIME MINISTER or a PRESIDENT or a MOFA personel, why do we have to specify every single time who it was? I propose we use the name of the country as a default in order to save the boxes from overcrowding and TMI. Like for example:
If people wanna look up the names, they should click the reference link or use the search box in the left. We don't have to overcrowd the country description boxes with so much information that sometimes it's so stuffy, it diverts the reader from what the actual stance of the country is! I used Greece as an example because with all the names and cluttered quotes, you can't even make out a clear position. It's just a bunch of names and titles back and forthing extra-long quotes. Exo ( talk) 11:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as the crowded descriptions, I wanna know what editors think about it. I've noticed there's alot of presumed, useless or repetitive information that clutters up the boxes and the actual position of a country becomes very confusing. Like of example, in the case of high leveled officials: "Greek foreign minister Dora Bokoyannis said during a visit in Tirana that..." That's pretty much summed up with: "Greece said that..." Exo ( talk) 13:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree - It should be noted who said what and when. WP is not a paper encyclopedia so we would have to cut it. -- Avala ( talk) 14:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Let's have CONSENSUS VOTE on whether we should include the following information in Greece's description box after the following announcement:
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/13285/
A) Greece to recognize Kosovo passports
B) Kosovo to open diplomatic mission in Athens
A) Agree - Recognition of passports is a reaction from Greece towards the travel documents which were issued as a result of the declaration of independence
B) Agree - Kosovo will represent it's interests as an independent country through a diplomatic office in Athens, and Greece has given it permission to do so.
Exo (
talk)
A) Agree
B) Agree --
alchaemia (
talk)
19:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A) Agree
B) Agree Just calmly identify the sources in the text, analogously to Avala having kept
Tanjung (
http://www.B92.net ) report in the Greece section, as well as his attributing expresly the
The Kosova Report one, both rather unoffically quoting the *ceremonial powers only* President of Greece and his assessments concerning independent Kosovo. It was not strictly correct for us to have written (my fault for letting it creep in) that Greece announced these things. But they were announced as sourced to a named Greek government official in Pristina, and that is far more substantive sourcing than some anonymous sources in Uruguay reported on one minor Spanish-language website, based on which Avala colored Uruguay as having already officially rejected Kosovo's independence. :) IMHO this content can be returned to the article in a properly modified form even right now, and will not constitue edit warring, only a further refinement of objected to attribution. --
Mareklug
talk
20:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your comments. Please note that on Wikipedia,
consensus is determined by
discussion, not voting, and it is the quality of arguments that counts, not the number of people supporting a position. Consider reading about the
deletion policy for a brief overview for the deletion process, and how we decide what to keep and what to delete. We hope you decide to stay and contribute even more. Thank you! --
Avala (
talk)
19:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Wait, are you telling me that the policy now is to "wait for official source" ? You gotta be kidding, right? How many pro-Serbia sources have you personally added that are not official, but based on newspaper reports? You want me to go ahead and post them here for you? The official website of the Prime Minister of Kosovo (you can find the link in the discussion above) posted an article confirming the recognition of passports and the opening of a diplomatic office. If that's not official, I don't know what is. Regarding that little thing you posted at the bottom, I've told you once and I'll tell you again: maybe you yourself should read those first before you start waving them around randomly. Your behavior here has been nothing but obstructive and you have been called on it several times. Again, STRONG AGREE -- alchaemia ( talk) 19:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
How do we make an edit on this matter, when Avala keeps reverting edits under the pretext that a consensus hasn't been reached because he keeps twisting words around? Who is Avala to deem the quality of his arguments stronger than ours? Exo ( talk) 20:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree with both, at least we can agree to wait for the Greek press reaction, even a delayed one, if the position of the MFA has changed (before it was actually implemented, even for a week) from "visas to another piece of paper" to an act of recognition by putting visas on Kosovan passports there is going to be a political crucifixion orgy by the opposition and media. If we accept it as a fact then the "silence" so far in Greece, even by the communist party, is scandalous, do you understand that ? -- Zakronian ( talk) 21:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A) Agree
B) Agree----
Supersexyspacemonkey (
talk)
03:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
agree to them both but it doesn't mean Greece will recognise soon, so we shouldn't imply this. Include it neutrally. Ijanderson ( talk) 09:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
On 19 September 2008 Greece announced through its liason office in Pristina, Kosovo, that it would recognize the new Kosovo passports and issue visas for their holders. It was also announced then and there that Kosovo would open a diplomatic office in Athens. [58] Exo ( talk) 10:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Untill a reasonable explanation is given as to why since the Greek goevernment has announced something like that there is no reaction whatsoever from inside Greece i will remove it again. As simple as that.-- Zakronian ( talk) 10:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
...sigh. Exo, relent already with this metonymic use of "Greece". It only obfuscates and gets the hackles up of people who oppose this edit, with some reasonable cause, I'd say. Let's try this version:
On 19 September 2008, after a meeting between Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci and Dimitris Moschopoulos, Head of the Greek Liaison Office in Pristina, the two announced that Kosovo will open a diplomatic office in Athens, and that Greece will recognize the new Kosovo passports, and issue visas for their holders in Pristina. [59]
If this is ok with everyone, I suggest it be added to the article at the end of the Greece writeup. Zakronian, why don't you ask Mr. Moschopoulos, why. Ours is not to reason why, but to report verified information from trustworthy sources. This one fits the definition. -- Mareklug talk 10:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
And here is a dispatch from a .yu (Yugoslavia :)) domain, on this subject. It includies a picture of the two named gentlemen:
Greece recognizes Kosovo passport
20. September 2008. | 09:22
Source: EMportal
Greece will recognise Kosovo’s passports even though it has not yet recognised Kosovo’s independence.
The Greek government decided to recognize the passports of citizens from Kosovo and to start issuing visas in the Greek office in Pristina.
This was said by the Head of the office Dimitris Moskopoulos, cited by the Serbian Tanjug news agency.
After a meeting with the Kosovo PM Hasim Thaci, Moskopoulos noted that Thaci introduced him to the decision of the Greek Government to recognize Kosovo passports even though it hasn't recognized the independence of Kosovo.
Starting from next week, Kosovars will be able travel to Greece on new passports issued by the Republic of Kosovo.
After a meeting between Kosovo’s Prime Minister Hashim Thaci and Dimitris Moschopoulos, Head of the Greek Liaison Office in Pristina, the two announced that Kosovo will open a diplomatic office in Athens.
Until now Kosovar citizens could travel to Greece on former Yugoslavian passports and travel documents issued by the UN mission in Kosovo, UNMIK.
Since travelers going to Greece start using Kosovan passports next week, we can't delay, waiting for the Greek media and the Greek MFA who may well remain silent, a kind of tabu. The Serbian FM was told of this development ahead of time. Let us serve the Wikipedia readers. Somebody, please put this in the article already. Let's not have any pointless edit wars over this. Clearly these offices -- the Greek one in Prishtina, and the Kosovan one in Athens, are de facto consular offices dispensing visas. -- Mareklug talk 19:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
And here is the complete dispatch from http://B92.net/ dated 19 September 2008. I wikified some names for emphasis:
Greece to recognize Kosovo passports
19 September 2008 | 14:47 | Source: Tanjug
PRIŠTINA -- The Greek govt. has decided to recognize Kosovo passports, says head of the Greek office in Priština Dimitris Mokopoulos.
After a meeting with Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, Mokopoulos said that he had informed Thaci of the Greek government’s decision to accept the new Kosovo passports, even though Greece has not recognized the province’s independence.This will allow Kosovo citizens to obtain visas at the Greek office in Priština.
Montenegro and Macedonia have also recognized the Kosovo passports, even though they have not recognized Kosovo independence.
In principle I don't disagree with adding it but I find it extremely odd that no Greek media made a report on this. Also as far as I can see it is all copies of the same news article, though I am not sure who was the original publisher.-- Avala ( talk) 20:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Your article dates to September 10th. The news of passport recognition and diplomatic office from credible valid sources came out after an announcement on September 19th. Your source is outdated. Exo ( talk) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Aha sorry I didn't read it indeed. This is the only official thing that we have. Apparently they don't recognise passports but have some process (to my knowning it could be the same as with Macedonian passports where at the border they don't look at passports because they don't recognise them, they look at a special document including visa that is issued in the embassy):
Ms. Antoniou: With regard to the new passports issued by Kosovo, does Greece recognise them or not?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Kosovo passports are not recognised. There is, however, a specific process where the visa is on a separate piece of paper.
And obviously it can't be outdated in the same week. Greek MFA if they talked about passports before would certainly talk about them again if the situation changes. My guess is that the officer in Pristina talked about this specific process. -- Avala ( talk) 23:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
FAQs from the Greek MFA site, look a the answer in the question No5 "How and how often is the site updated ?".-- Zakronian ( talk) 07:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Now it's clear
-- Avala ( talk) 13:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok, let's establish what we believe. @Avala, @Zakronian, as of today, 22 September 2008, based on what we know:
-- Mareklug talk 16:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
http://www.mfa.gr/www.mfa.gr/Articles/en-US/110908_alp_1619.htm
Oh, and a reaction not to the independence but the declaration of independence might even be that a Greek official visited and had a talk about the weather with Thaci.-- Zakronian ( talk) 23:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
From 22 September 2008 Kosovan passport holders can be issued visas in Pristina and there seems to be an agreement about the opening of a Kosovan liaison office in Athens. [61]
I updated Montenegro with their announcement that the position will be revealed by President Vujanovic at UNGA. And I am waiting for BalkanFever to update the article on Macedonia. Their PM spoke about recognition rumors today. [76] -- Avala ( talk) 18:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Added Gruevski's comments to Macedonia. I'll work on shortening some of the section later. Balkan Fever 23:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
84.134.117.252 ( talk) 19:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Nobody could have produced a more Serbian propaganda peace than this Times of India dispatch does. Everything in it is Jeremic this, Jeremic that. No Indian official is ever quoted. All we have is the the words of dear old Mr. Jeremic (Foreign Minister of Serbia) who came ot India.
Mr. Jeremic: back to Harvard for you. You're shaming the Old Maroon with this shameless nonsense. You obviously need to retake basic international law and human rights. Self-determination of peoples is enshrined in it. It is a basic human right. Nothing trumps it.
Deear 84.134.117.252: This talk page is for article improvement. A little bit of critical reading and judicious selection is expected. -- Mareklug talk 20:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I invite editors to read the Castro editorial [62] that is the basis of our original Cuba entry. Then tell me, if my rewrite is accurate or not. See the articles Radio Rebelde and Granma (newspaper). Note how Granma's content is characterized:
Granma regularly features:
Entity | Evidence | Notes |
---|---|---|
![]() |
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo.
[63]
[64]
[65]
On 29 February 2008, writing in his personal "Reflections of Fidel" column, which is published in the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Cuba, Granma Internacional (and since translated into English and archived on the Radio Rebelde website), Fidel Castro, the ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to Raúl Castro, attacked Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's "independence", and by doing so, putting at risk the ethnic cohesion and the very state integrity of Spain or The United Kingdom, both of which experience separatist movements of their own. Referring to Kosovo "independence" (in quotes), Catro made no identifiable statement concerning Cuba possibly witholding its recognition of Kosovo, or granting it. [62] |
Thoughts? I put it in the article. If it is not there, it was reverted, instead of objected to here. -- Mareklug talk 05:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Agree to this:
Entity | Evidence | Notes |
---|---|---|
![]() |
On
29 February
2008, writing in his personal "Reflections of Fidel" column, which is published in the official newspaper of the Communist Party of Cuba,
Granma Internacional,
Fidel Castro, the ex-President and the current foreign policy advisor to President
Raúl Castro, attacked
Javier Solana, accusing him of being the ideological father of Kosovo's "independence", and by doing so, putting at risk the ethnic cohesion and the very state integrity of
Spain or
The United Kingdom, both of which experience separatist movements of their own..
[66]
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba has not issued an official statement regarding the independence of Kosovo. [67] [68] [69] |
-- Avala ( talk) 13:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
The Castro editorial is now referenced in English, and at the time the Cuba entry created, it was referenced in Spanish, and later, to a summary in Catalan. For the first time, dare I say, we can revise our (misleading) entry for Cuba while all editors who read English can verify that we are truthful. If editors think we are saying too much, let's really say even less, without creating an impression, that Cuba officially rejected Kosovo, which is what is at issue both here and elsewhere, where this entry is used as basis: Image:Kosovo_relations.svg/ Image:Kosovo_relations.png -- Mareklug talk 00:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
After removing the whole reference to his election to a post of a foreign policy advisor in Cuban parliament a few months ago now you are claiming it must be some OR and POV effort by Avala to claim that he is holding such a position. Remarkable spin!-- Avala ( talk) 10:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
84.134.94.141 ( talk) 19:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not spaming. Please no personal attacks! 84.134.94.141 ( talk) 20:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't tell me what I should do. Better tell me why do you hate me! 84.134.123.39 ( talk) 13:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Say that to Jakezing. For days now I'm trying to solve the problem but I does not even tell me why he is angry with me. 84.134.123.39 ( talk) 15:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
There is no need to tread a colleague that way.EOD on this page! 84.134.63.1 ( talk) 07:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
gee, I don't know. Maybe some editors should apologize to Max Mux a.k.a IP.84.134.*.*... Do you think that our Armenia write-up, even though it was using the same quote, was really saying the same thing? IMHO MM could have genuinely thought he was reporting a change in position by Armenia, after he read what was there.
![]() |
On 3 September 2008 President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan stated: "Today one is wondering from time to time why Armenia is not recognizing the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The answer is simple: for the same reason that it did not recognize Kosovo’s independence. Having the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenia can not recognize another entity in the same situation as long as it has not recognized the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic." A nation’s right to self-determination "takes times", requiring the understanding of "all interested parties". Accordingly, Armenia is trying to "convince" Azerbaijan to accept the loss of Karabakh, stated the president. [70] [71] |
![]() |
Despite expressing his support for the right to self-determination and that any "possible recognition of Kosovo's independence will not strain the Armenian-Russian relations" [72], President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan has stated that Armenia will not recognise either Kosovo or Abkhazia and South Ossetia. He said that Armenia cannot recognise another entity in the same situation as long as it has not recognised the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. [73] |
When we put in those 2 refs, we did not use {{
cite news}}
or {{
cite web}}
, which admins asked for on this page. Should anyone feel inclined to make further improvements here, I now myself use full citations all the time. I also consistently use (accurate, truthful) edit summaries, too. When I am forced to revert, I reveal this unambiguously. --
Mareklug
talk
10:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help) Cite error: The named reference "cuba" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
help page).
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (
link)
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (
link)