Bilall Sheriff reacts to Thaci with a long-standingual contradiction: Too Long

In a long text published in his account at é Facebook, the Sheriff has mentioned several arguments opposing President Thaci. At the beginning of this scripture, he says that being one of his critics when Kosovo's entity's sovereignty and integrity are violated, he has seen it necessary to react.

That reaction, he says, is not because of stinging stings that lead to those who disagree with him, but to enable citizens to see who brings rational arguments and who through their noise produces hatred that divides our society.

Kosovo Vice President Hashim Thaci claims he has “proposed the border correction option with Serbia”! Could it be called “racial” such a statement by the president of Kosovo? Anyone who has minimal knowledge of Serbia's reports with Kosovo knows very well that over the past four decades, the partition of Kosovo has been extended tens of times. Without exception, in all cases this proposal has come from the Serb side. So the claim that he has us “proposed the border correction option with Serbia” is actually a <x7). Kosovo's president tries to reassure skeptics that there will be no correction of the border along ethnic lines” and accuse others that if “creates panic and fog”, he has written among other things in his account at Facebook.
His long reaction to the Sheriff concluded with a request to opposition parties.

The only solution that can avoid the risks we face in this period is for every institution in the country to take office in accordance with its competencies. In this context, the talks are the government's exclusive competence, while Kosovo's president has only ceremonial role (in the beginning and at the end of talks). For this reason I see it right to address opposition forces in the Kosovo Assembly at the request to join the team for dialogue proposed by the Government of Kosovo so that this team can become a state team. This team would urgently need to draft the platform for dialogue, which should be approved in the Assembly. Only in this way could we get out of the negotiating table the theme of partitioning Kosovo”, the Sheriff's long writing concludes.

Full response by Secretary General of the Social Democrat Initiative:

Reaction to “Kosovo President Hashim Thaci's XITORIALIT”.

After withdrawing from the initial stance in the final phase of talks with Serbia, Kosovo's territory will be put on the table of partition bargains, Hashim Thaci returns to that theme. In writing sent to the media on September 16th, he exposed the core of the platform he has embraced for this phase of talks. In this script, “EdiTOR” Hashim Thaci also pauses in criticism of his own dangerous game with Kosovo's territorial integrity. Regarding his critics, he puts it this way: “I've been waiting against rational arguments, but until today I've heard more noise and in the worst case even hatred. Kosovo is a very small place to produce so much hatred, which divides our society”.

Being one of his critics when the sovereignty and integrity of the state of Kosovo are violated, I see it as necessary to react. I do my reaction not because of the stings it issued in the direction of those who disagree with it, but the arguments that will be cited below will enable readers to see who brings in the rational “ ” and “who is the one who through its noise produces the hatred that divides our society”.

You see “arguments” one at a time.

1. Kosovo President Hashim Thaci claims he has “proposed the border correction option with Serbia”!

Could it be called <x0-raditional” such a statement by the president of Kosovo?

Anyone who has minimal knowledge of Serbia's reports with Kosovo knows very well that over the past four decades, the partition of Kosovo has been extended tens of times. Without exception, in all cases this proposal has come from the Serb side. So the claim that he has us “proposed the border correction option with Serbia” is actually a <x2).

Kosovo's president tries to reassure skeptics that there will be no restructuring of the border along ethnic lines” and accuse others that if “creates panic and fog”!

Even in this case he brings nothing original, but he has adopted the Serbian option and tries to create the “mist to lose Serbian traces in the partition proposal. In no Serbian strategy can you find proposals that partition would support only on ethnic lines. The Serbian strategy has been and remains the same: partitioning Kosovo to do it above all in “viance of its property resources”.

No <x0m>mule” that tries to spread it on public opinion and no <x2ranical background” that the president of Kosovo is making cannot hide the threat threatened by Lake Weyman and Mining in northern Kosovo from Serbian projects for partition of Kosovo.

When it comes to <x0 mined ethnic”, we all know that the reality of ethnic cleansing in the northern part of Kosovo is the result of Serbian genocide. To raise its voice against Serbia's claims to annex the northern part of Kosovo is no “irrational panic”. On the contrary, this danger has become real after embracing this Serbian idea on the part of the Kosovo president. For a Kosovo MP and every citizen of our country there can be no more rational duty than raising a voice to alert all democratic forces in the world and all international institutions that under the mask of “Territorial Exchanges” or “Border corrections” between Kosovo and Serbia is preparing the ground to legitimise the Serbian genocide policy in Kosovo.

2. Can the statement of Hashim Thaci, from the position of president of the Republic of Kosovo, be called “Regional and international reality imposing the reach of the agreement for normalisation for both states as the necessary condition for membership in the European Union”?
Whoever has followed political developments about the integration of the Western Balkans into the European Union knows very well that hundreds of political personalities and representatives of EU institutions have repeatedly repeated that Serbia's “membership in the European Union is not possible without normalisation of relations with Kosovo”.

There can be no more <x0rative stance” than this case when Kosovo's president, without a single argument, overturned the reality and conditions which have been imposed on Serbia, attributes to Kosovo.

What the president of Kosovo does is not “urme”, the term he uses to name the positions of his opponents. Such stance is the largest service anyone can do to Serbia, because so far no EU leader has charged Kosovo as responsible for failing to normalise relations with Serbia.

That from opponents of the idea for partitioning Kosovo requires “against rational arguments”, let it bring us a single argument where any EU political representative has conditioned Kosovo's journey with recognition from Serbia.

Besides Serbian politicians, only Hashim Thaci has ventured to say publicly that if “recognition from Serbia has become the primary obstacle to our Euro-Atlantic journey”. So far, no one else has claimed that.

If Hashim Thaci wants “against rational arguments”, he could list a beautiful long list of international personalities who have stated the opposite of what the president of Kosovo states: the “recognition of Kosovo's independence has become the primary obstacle to Serbia's Euro-Atlantic path”. This is an untenable argument that neither its “urma” nor its “mule” can hide.

3. Kosovo's president accuses opponents of the idea of partitioning Kosovo as the <x0ndy> that spread fear, panic and fog”!
It is quite true that in this context someone spread “fear, panic, and fog”.
The coming months are crucial in Serbia's journey towards the EU. After many years of talks and the use of logic “ -- and don't cut it off” -- recognition of Kosovo's independence will prove necessary for further advancement of this state's negotiations with the EU.

This situation has caused fear and panic among Serb government officials and their supporters. This is fully understandable and <x0racial”, because we are dealing with politicians educated in the spirit of hatred against Albanians. But, there can be no more “irrational” rather than the case when Kosovo's president claims that “cannot achieve our goals if WRITER IN MUST WHICH we will not legally make a binding agreement with Serbia”!

Such a statement could be <x0racial” only for a Serbian politician in any way for the president of Kosovo. Meeting often with Aleksnar Vucinqi, Hashim Thaci is confused with his stance and declares the Serbian president's idea himself!

4. In complete panic because the coming months Serbia will face pressure to recognise Kosovo's independence, Hashim Thac appears as the savior of Serbian politics. All attempts thus far to convince Serbia to recognise Kosovo's independence, Hashim Thaci declares them failed. Kosovo's president does not stop at this conclusion, but continues with arguments from “veta” saying: “The EU and our powerful allies: The US, Germany, England, France, Italy and many others have been unable to convince Serbia to recognise Kosovo so far and cannot guarantee that they will do it tomorrow or in the near future. HOW THE RELIGION, DEPENGES T EK NE”!

Pleading Serbia for refusing to recognise Kosovo's independence and to make accusations allegedly for this failure “RELIGION T EK NE”, is unforgivable, especially when such a claim comes from the person who has the post of president of Kosovo.

Kosovo has no responsibility for Serbia's <x0 irrational behavior”. If one can be placed with responsibility in trying to blame Kosovo, then it is Hashim Thaci and Serbian politicians. In this context, Hashim Thaci does not represent the interests of Kosovo, but has become a spokesman for Serbian propaganda.

5. In order to convince readers that there is no way but to satisfy Serbian aspirations, Hashim Thaci describes the historical courses of political developments for Kosovo's status. According to the Kosovo president, Kosovo's “process of independence has been accompanied by concerns and local and international dilemma”!

In order to hide traces, Hashim Thaci did not mention those who were “concerned” or who had “dilemma”. Everyone knows that in addition to Serbia's collaborators, none of the “substitutes” has been “exacerbated” due to Kosovo's independence, nor has he expressed “dilemma” for such a thing. Everyone knows that apart from Serbia and Russia all the powerful states of democracies in the world not only did they have no dilemma for Kosovo's independence, they were convinced there was no other way.

Therefore, Hashim Thaci must cease that through “editorial writings” will generalise “concern and dilemmas<x3 Serbian-rus> as if there were “threats and international dilemmas”.

6. Strong countries of Western democracies and friends of Kosovo have let us know their concerns and dilemmas that could be created with the opening of negotiations on Kosovo's border changes. They are aware that the <x0 ftt is continuing politics by other means”. Accepting talks on the territorial division of Kosovo means nothing but favouring circumstances that will prepare the war for territories.

Hashim Thaci's efforts to ensure international friends that partitioning Kosovo's territory “will have no domino effect for the stability of the region and Europe”, not “rational argument”, but Serbian propaganda stated by the president of Kosovo.

7. Hashim Thaci's devotion peaks when he states that the peaceful <x1-communication based on the correction of the border between Kosovo and Serbia will be completely in line with international law” That position of Hashim Thaci is in stark opposition to the historical reality. The United Nations Charter, as a basic source of international law, assigned the United Nations Security Council the peacekeeping and security mission in Kosovo. In line with this mission, the agreement was reached on ending the war in Kosovo (known as “Peace Plan” that was compiled by the G8 and supported by the UN Security Council) and the deployment of forces mandated by the UN Security Council in Kosovo (KFOR).

The signing of “Plan of peace” and “Military-Technic Agreement” was approved at the UN Security Council on June 10th 1999 and gave the stamp of international law to these agreements.

Through its decisions, the UN Security Council, as the most important institution of international law, defined the presence of the international security force and international civil presence until the final resolution of Kosovo's political status.

For more than five years, the international civil presence prepared Kosovo's political institutions that could lead talks on its final status. At the 24 October 2005 session, the Security Council backed the report compiled by special envoy Kai Eide and agreed that determining Kosovo's final status was necessary. In line with that decision, Martti Ahtisaari and Albert Rohan were the official taskees to lead the talks between Serbia and Kosovo, also determining the principles on which the talks should be based.
I find it important to repeat that the Contact Group's “Orientation perceives” points out that the Kosovo status disorder must consolidate regional security and stability, ensuring that Kosovo does not return to the pre-March 1999 situation. Any unilateral solution resulting from the use of force will not be acceptable. There will be no changes to Kosovo's current territory, which means there will be no partition of Kosovo and there will be no union of Kosovo with any other state or any part of any other state. The territorial integrity and internal stability of regional neighbours will be fully respected”.

The outcome of these talks is known. I'm just mentioning their epilogue. At the Security Council meeting of March 26th 2007, Ban Ki-moon put together a review of “comprehensive proposal for the resolution of Kosovo status”, which was prepared by Marti Ahtisaari and his team.

In concluding this report, Martti Ahtisaari stressed that “by reviewing Kosovo's new history and current reality and by conducting negotiations with both sides, I have concluded that the only stable option for Kosovo is its independence. Initially this independence should be supervised by the international community”.
Kosovo's declaration of independence prompted Serbia and its supporters to lay the issue down under the highest institutions of international justice. October 8, 2008 The UN General Assembly adopted the resolution through which it demanded that the International Court of Justice give an opinion regarding Kosovo's declaration of independence. In all, this court was asked to answer the question: “is Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo's provisional institutions of self-government in accordance with international law?”.

On July 22, 2010, the International Court of Justice announced its ruling that the “act adopted the adoption of Kosovo's declaration of independence on February 17, 2008, has violated neither general international law nor Security Council Resolution 1244 nor Kosovo Constitutional Framework. Hence, the adoption of this declaration has not violated any applicable rule of international law”.
All acts of international law related to Kosovo, starting with “Peace Plan”, “Military-Technic Agreement” and Resolution 1244, are decisions making up the international Peace Treaty in Kosovo. The decision of the highest institution of international justice, the International Court of Justice, sealed our right to independent and sovereign states.

Therefore, the eventual opening of new negotiations, dubbed as “Finalza of the” talks to “Commander Borders” with Serbia, would undo the long, laboring and full sacrifice of Kosovo independence.
The aforementioned arguments are rational arguments that only irrational or blinded by Serbian propaganda cannot see.

International law is on the side of Kosovo. Proposals for “border correction” are in full opposition to international law and in compliance with the Serbian interpretation of justice.

8. Hashim Thaci's continued and aggressive insistence to impose the idea of “Kosovo's” border correction with Serbia has created a highly unfavourable situation for Kosovo. In the internal plan, this idea has created divisions as never before, while on the international level it has brought us to Kosovo's allies extremely inconsistently.

The only solution that can avoid the dangers we face in this period is for every institution in the country to take office in accordance with its competencies. In this context, the talks are the government's exclusive competence, while Kosovo's president has only ceremonial role (in the beginning and at the end of talks). For this reason I see it right to address opposition forces in the Kosovo Assembly at the request to join the team for dialogue proposed by the Government of Kosovo so that this team can become a state team. This team would urgently need to draft the platform for dialogue, which should be approved in the Assembly. Only this way could we get out of the negotiating table the topic of partitioning Kosovo!