Qos: Opposers of territorial exchange are donating Serbia both Valley and North

The debate has also entered this debate by academic Rexhep Qosja, who, in a reply to Koha.net, has said that this issue prompted many individual and party presentations in Kosovo, but also in Albania, and, as he says, these presentations brought some concepts, notions and political words.

The main concept of these discussions became the Kosovo Assembly. From discussions about these concepts, notions, and triwords, it is seen that some authors do not understand them, while others misunderstand them may deliberately be. I can say that those who have used the concept of exchange of territories and those who have used the concept of mending the border between Kosovo and Serbia have never thought in any way, and never for partitioning Kosovo. The exchange of territories and the correction of the border do not imply division of Kosovo. The exchange of territories and the correction of the border mean movement, in fact changing borders at the ends of Kosovo at the northern end of Kosovo”, Qosja says.

On the other hand, he says that anyone who thinks rationally, with data, arguments, with truths and rights in mind, the thg word “partition of Kosovo “means Kosovo's “ndering”, which would be done with a limit that would extend through Kosovo and its borders today.

I repeat: the exchange of territories and the correction of the border mean only the change of the northern border of Kosovo, not the partition of Kosovo”, the Qosja academic emphasis.

Qosja asks why, then, those who were dependent on non-active, those accusers of partitioning Kosovo, are accusing them of dividing those who in no way did this request?

There may be several reasons for this. First, ignorance. Second, resentments, which often define the content of the opinions of some of those accusers, and, third, perhaps the main, attempt to clear up its political life story in their ovable past. I say so because of those accusers who accused several former KLA political and military leaders, who eventually brought freedom and independence to Kosovo, of course because of the US and the European Union; among those accusers who accused Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama, who is the only politician in the history of relations between Albania and Serbia and Greece that Serbia and Greece told the most serious truths that no Albanian politician had told them in Tirana or in Pristina to this day, it is not surprising that these accusers, who based on Kosovo's partition, so there was Kosovo's territory called bin bin bint, which means that it belongs to any Albanian politician in Tirana or to Kosovo, and therefore half of any other independence. For that reason, Albanians in Europe staged protests, calling it a national traitor”, Qosja has said, among other things.

The academy further says that “nders such accusers had such as participants in Kosovo's power at the time of the Milosevic regime's violence and terror in Kosovo participated in orders to end Kosovo's Albanian youth demonstrations with whom dozens of young people were killed”.

There were also accusers, according to him, who in Milosevic's time served State Security by offering hostile information about the KLA.

“Among these accusers were those who at the time of the Milosevic regime's violence and terror served the regime's State Security with the most charged information, actually hostile to the KLA and liberation war in Kosovo in general. Among these accusers were those who, as party leaders in the years of '90s and as journalists and publicists at the time, denied any opportunity not only for independence, but also for establishing Kosovo's status in the Republic under the Federation or the Yugoslav Confederacy. Among these accusers were those who participated in the drafting of their parties' programmes, which were registered at the Belgrade relevant ministry, and who denied any active resistance and that Kosovo's future saw in relation to the remaining Yugoslavia, which is finally with Serbia. Among these accusers who stood up against the idea of partitioning Kosovo, which the accused did not ask for, was an intellectual and intellectual in Tirana, but stood up with a soft, confused language that, however, they said what they are, because they are extraordinary connoisseurs of Shiptaro-Serbe's relations, did not have the right to say”, he said about Koha.net.

For all these reasons, the participation of these accusers in the discussions being made for future talks called final between Kosovo and Serbia, “in my opinion, will not take” seriously.

In no way do I deny these accusers the right to change their former opinions, which, in fact, have changed after the liberation of Kosovo from the conquest of Serbia, but deny them the right to accuse others instead of former self-x1>, Qosja points out.

Meanwhile, it says that it seriously takes the “of Kosovo's two top officials today with some illiterates, in particular consultations with the first illiterate, over-corrupted Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts, which with their index finger made president of that private party academy in order to use it as they finally used it in talks on an inter-state agreement on Kosovo already approved in the Parliament of Kosovo”.

“Seriously will take on this issue: the issue of the Albanian delegation participating and participating in talks between Pristina and Belgrade. Kosovo has historians, has lawyers, has geographers, has anthropologists, has politicians, has intellectuals, with different historical and appropriate preparations for all problems and issues that can be raised in those talks. But, in groups that so far talked in Vienna and Brussels, which are even now talking in Brussels about the agreement between Kosovo and Serbia, the dilemmas almost dominate. Of them, not why they would not, but why they do not know, no good can be expected for Kosovo. Those who are programming talks with Serbia and those who participated in discussions on exchange of territories and border corrections would have to know one thing: international factors usually in talks between the two sides do not allow one side to give anything of the other nothing. Those who are programming talks with Serbia and those who participated in the discussions on the exchange of territories would have to try and learn that exchanges of territories, even parts of the population between the two states, have taken place throughout history. And they're even done not too far in time even in the Southern Balkans”, Qos declares the response to the Koha.net portal.

He says that those who are being taken by the “that was said above” should at last have “know that major international factors do not usually object to reconciliation between two states and two peoples even when certain general principles are affected that they politically protect”.

The “those who are getting what was said earlier, particularly those who are preaching the rhetoric of border correction, namely uniting the Presevo Valley with Kosovo, will have to know that international factors will not accept the right of the Presevo Valley's self-determitional shipmen and to) deny the right to self-determination of the northern Kosovo Serbs, estimates academic Rexhep Qyaos.

“Let's say at the end, therefore, that those who oppose the territory exchange between the Presevo Valley, including Presevo, Medvegen and North-North of Kosovo, to Mitrovica, wanted or são, are donating to Serbia one and the other: The Presevo Valley as part of Serbia, while Kosovo's north as subtracial autonomy (as independence) in which the Kosovo powers -- as well as now -- will bow down to the large monument of Knjaz Lazarx1> -- concludes Qosja answers to the Time portal.net about the issue of possible exchange of territory between Kosovo and Serbia.