Kosovo And Nk Options

[Glock21]

Many in the realm of international politics are closely watching the events as they pan out between Serbia and the international community over the status of Kosovo. It now appears almost a foregone conclusion that it will become fully separated as an independent entity from Serbia, recognized by the World.

The parallels with Nagorno-Karabakh are obvious, and this will undoubtedly bring about a certain expectation on the part of any and all disputed territories around the globle. If Kosovo, based on democratic principles, with its Albanian majority, is allowed to secede, why not Karabakh, with its Armenian majority?

And yet, Western nongovernmentals and goverments are still recognizing the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and more to the point, do not see NK as a legitimate "state." It remains to be seen, and we will know soon, whether or not this model for democratic secession in a post-Soviet ethno-nationalist-driven conflict is going to remain consistent.

[intergalacticman]

a huge conflict will ensue, if kososvo secedes from serbia, i was reading in the newspaper (Los Angeles Times) that thousands of serbians from a former paramilitary force will attack kosovo if they part from serbia.

[Glock21]

However, at the moment the Serbian government will actively try to stop any incursion. One only need look at the recent arrests at Krusevac of those calling for doing just that.

In addition, the NATO presence is still quite active and would not sit by idly for any incursion, be-it formal or paramilitary.

[Hosank]

people keep seeing links between kosovo and NKR.

you must understand that artsakh was an integral part of the armenian state of 1917 till the 20's and even as the armenian soviet republic. the land was simply given over to the azeris, with the armenian land of naxichevan by the soviet, sin order to appease turkey. this was pure communist imperialism.

artsakh has been part of armenia for as long as the concept of armenia existed. it has always been populated by armenians. and above all, artsakh HAS NEVER BEEN PART OF THE REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN (1991).

artsakh declared itself independent from the soviet union and the SOVIET republic of azerbaijan. in september 1991, azerbaijan didn't get independence till december 25th.

artsakh, has no azerbaijani nationals living in it.

the only reason why artsakh is a 'republic' is because formal integration into armenia would be seen by the world community as annexation.

kosovo is an entirely different matter. kosovo had a huge serbian majority till 25 years ago, when the albanian immigrants surpassed the serbs. kosovo was part of independent serbia, and there are still many serbs living in it.

kosovo was a traditional serb land, and artsakh IS ARMENIA.

[Mordoth]

Kosovo has nothing to do with Serbs .

Its name is even " KOSOVA " comes from the combined Turkish words " Koz " , "Ova " .
"Koz" means , "Creek" And "Ova" Means " Plain" .

LoL .
Lands of Greater Albania include Kosovo and Turks in the region permit and confirm the independance .

[Hosank]

lol mordoth, i find it funny that with you everything has to do with turks, and every regional name has a 'turkish' story to it, with turkish worlds which make absolutely no sense..

lol..creekplains ah yes..you turks were always good at coming up with names.

mordoth, just because you invaded a region, and gave it a name, does not make it your land, and what do you mean it has nothing to do with serbs? serbs have been living in kosovo for a thousand years at least,

[Glock21]

In today's world it is dangerous and counterproductive to say the least to rely on the physical, territorial past, mythical or not, to form the idea and reality of one's nation state. There are scarely any if any at all nations whose current territories encompass the greatest amount of land that has been held at any one time in history. The nature of conflict and colonization is that borders are constantly redrawn... it is a natural historical prerogative.

This idea of "we live there for a while - so it will always be mine" is a plague. These matters only go forward or backward via the business side of a sword or the muzzle of a rifle, and nationalists will always bicker and complain about losing. In short, if you don't have military muscle, your borders don't change in your favor.

If any nation wants to be a part of today's prosperous world order, it has to see these ideas as juvenile, as nearly all prosperous nations do.

[Glock21]

Kosovo has nothing to do with Serbs .

Its name is even " KOSOVA " comes from the combined Turkish words " Koz " , "Ova " .
"Koz" means , "Creek" And "Ova" Means " Plain" .

LoL .
Lands of Greater Albania include Kosovo and Turks in the region permit and confirm the independance .

Some things to point out here:
"Kos" in old Serbian means blackbird. In 1389 the Serbs lost to the Ottomans at the battle of Kosovo Polje, which means "The field of the Blackbirds."

And Kosovo has very much to do with the Serbs, as evidenced by the centuries old Orthodox monasteries all over Kosovo. In fact, it can be argued that Kosovo is historically a more "purely" populated region by Serbs than Karabakh is by Armenians, since Karabakh being ruled and administered by so many empires had a large influx of various populations.

[Hosank]

lol, the world seems so simple to you glock.

If any nation wants to be a part of today's prosperous world order, it has to see these ideas as juvenile, as nearly all prosperous nations do.

that's easy for you to say, when you are, as you say "with military muscle"

The nature of conflict and colonization is that borders are constantly redrawn... it is a natural historical prerogative.

and that is right for turkey, ..for obvious reasons.

"we live there for a while - so it will always be mine"

as is this.

but artsakh has ALWAYS been armenian, an the azeris have had it under their rule for 'a while' and now they lost it, yet they still complain.

. These matters only go forward or backward via the business side of a sword or the muzzle of a rifle,

unfortunately this is true.

[Glock21]

Karabakh/Arstakh was been Armenian, Mongol, Persian, Azerbaijani and Russian. Any and all can claim whole or part ownership if so inclined, since it was in the possession of each. Of course, originally it was Albanian.

[Hosank]

no.
artsakh was armenian.
once dominated by armenians, turks, russians, persians, arabs, azeris and so on..
but always ethnically armenian.

infact...all of armenia was dominated by turks, russians, persians, arabs, and so on as well..so why don't you give them the right to make armenia theirs?
and while we are at it..northern lebanon, syria, irak, persia, georgia, azerbaijan were once part of the great armenian empire of dikran takavor in the year 90 bc. so why don't we just go ahead and claim that?


no matter who the overlord, the land is armenian.

[Glock21]

Herein we enter national mythology... the myth that nations create in order to form some sort of identity. The world wasn't created with any stretch of land belonging to anybody. It's all relative, only having to do with who has their hands on it at the moment.

[Hosank]

i don't know how else to explain this to you, unless you are a conspiracy theorist, and then it would not matter, for you would believe in nothing.

there is no myth. the armenian alphabet was invented in a monastary in the mountains of artsakh, (which still stands btw), the ancient capital of armenia, dikranakert was discovered in artsakh.

artsakh has been ethnic armenian for a good 3ooo years. just because the seljuk turks invaded us gives no right to the azeris to control this territory.

the ONLY reason that there is a debate over this land is because azerbaijan was given that land by the soviet supreme council, in order to make peace with turkey.

[Mordoth]

Some things to point out here:
"Kos" in old Serbian means blackbird. In 1389 the Serbs lost to the Ottomans at the battle of Kosovo Polje, which means "The field of the Blackbirds."

And Kosovo has very much to do with the Serbs, as evidenced by the centuries old Orthodox monasteries all over Kosovo. In fact, it can be argued that Kosovo is historically a more "purely" populated region by Serbs than Karabakh is by Armenians, since Karabakh being ruled and administered by so many empires had a large influx of various populations.

I know how to speak serbian , and one of my Serbian friend even say , the terrains " Balcans , Kosova " and many cities of the region are named by Turks . Indeed , Turks live in Greek-named towns today ,but that does not mean that the folk living in Greek-named towns should be GREEK .

There were Serbian feudal kings ( Kralj ) when Ottomans ride through Balcans . But there had been no problem between Western Slavs and Turks since Pan-Slavic policies of Russians influenced these publics .
Also , Western Slavs did not disintegrated from Turks after the battle of Ankara. ( Conflict of Timur and Baezit , 1402 ) Anatolian Turkish union was destroyed but in such a bad time ; Serbs did not fall back .

Many of my friends' families are from Kosovo . Probably , the Locativity policies of Ottoman ( migrations from motherland to newly liberated territories ) kept the Albanians-Bosnians - Turks with together .

[Hosank]

urks live in Greek-named towns today ,but that does not mean that the folk living in Greek-named towns should be GREEK .

euhhhhh..yes it does.massacring the inhabitants does not give you a right to live in it.

But there had been no problem between Western Slavs and Turks since Pan-Slavic policies of Russians influenced these publics .

do you really think like this?
does it not occur to you that some people do not like being oppressed?
that turkish oppression does not mean "no problem"?
lol..and then you see it as betrayal when your subject people decide to get their national pride back

[Hosank]

urks live in Greek-named towns today ,but that does not mean that the folk living in Greek-named towns should be GREEK .

euhhhhh..yes it does.massacring the inhabitants does not give you a right to live in it.

But there had been no problem between Western Slavs and Turks since Pan-Slavic policies of Russians influenced these publics .

do you really think like this?
does it not occur to you that some people do not like being oppressed?
that turkish oppression does not mean "no problem"?
lol..and then you see it as betrayal when your subject people decide to get their national pride back