Mollyqa: Emergencyly final agreement, allowing or stopping referendum does not bring solution

Social Democratic Party Chairman Dardan Moliqaj has said neither the permission nor the ban on holding Serbia's referendum in Kosovo produces solutions. According to him, allowing the holding of this referendum violates sovereignty, but that even the ban, Moliqaj stressed, does not represent anything more than a political gesture for consumption.

Molliqaj via post in “Facebook” said holding Serbia's referendum in Kosovo is neither newness nor the possibility of testifying to sovereignty.

“to be frank, without making instructions, nor allowing, nor prohibiting holding the referendum produces no solution. Such an approach only guarantees repetition. The permission of the reference affects sovereignty, but in the stratified situation, especially in the north, neither does the ban represent anything more than a political gesture for consumption. These actions would be read quite differently in the light of a political project that puts the political solution at the center of engagement. Bringing up opportunities for new and just relations between Kosovo and Serbia”, he said.

Chairman The PSD stressed that a final agreement between states is urgent.

“A final deal is urgent. The final agreement would also produce an effect that unable to strengthen political leaders through projecting external risks. The delay of the solution is keeping the seats occupied”, he wrote.

Full Posting:

The Final Solution No Alternative

Recent events related to whether or not to holding Serbia's referendum on the territory of the Republic of Kosovo present no innovation, no chance of testifying to sovereignty. Serb-populated countries, especially the northern part of Mitrovica, are the most instrumental in such periods. And oddly enough, from Vuchy and Kurt.

In order to put it frankly, without making instructions, not allowing, nor prohibiting holding the referendum produces no solution. Such an approach only guarantees repetition. The permission of the reference affects sovereignty, but in the stratified situation, especially in the north, neither does the ban represent anything more than a political gesture for consumption. These actions would be read quite differently in the light of a political project that puts the political solution at the center of engagement. Bringing up opportunities for new and just relations between Kosovo and Serbia. A final deal is urgent. The final agreement would also produce an effect that unable to strengthen political leaders through projecting external risks. The delay in the solution is keeping the seats occupied.

On the other hand, the prime minister's insistence on concession is need to share responsibility. If this were the general approach of government, we would have seen it in segments and other moments, not just dialogue. As it became that in relation to internal power, there is bunkerisation and power concentration, while in relation to national topics international, distribution of decision-making. Self - power, responsibility (read: guilt) with others. The opposition's response, as in the choir, normalises the method.

Citizens, from far and wide, need results that affect everyday life in the sense of well - being and relations between peoples. Equality must be the one corresponding to the final agreement. The barrier is not a solution. On the contrary. In the current political context, in the two countries, it only feeds images of authoritarian leaders. The effects and tensions created are material for misuse.