Serbia Wins Majority Support in United Nations
Oct 8th, 2008 | By De-Construct.net | In Current, Earlier, Kosovo-Metohija Crisis
US and Albania, Part of a Painfully Small World Minority
Serbian resolution requesting an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on “whether the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo is in accordance with international law” was accepted in the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, with 77 countries voting in favor and 6 against (Albania, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau and United States of America).
74 countries abstained but, according to the General Assembly voting regulations, Serbia needed a simple majority, where only the votes ‘for’ and ‘against’ are being counted, while the abstentions are not taken into account.
“We are surprised with the number of states which voted for the resolution. We support the International Court of Justice opinion, but an advisory opinion cannot affect Kosovo independence”, Britain’s UN Ambassador John Sawers said after the vote.
Previously, Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic urged the representatives of the United Nations to support Serbia’s ICJ intiative.
Jeremic: Voting Against Means Secessionists Always Win
Sending the resolution to the court, Jeremic told the UN General Assembly, would reduce tensions in the region and in the rest of the world.
“The Republic of Serbia believes that sending this question to the ICJ would prevent the Kosovo crisis from serving as a deeply problematic precedent in any part of the globe where secessionist ambitions are harbored,” Jeremic said explaining Serbia’s request.
“We also believe that the ICJ advisory opinion would provide politically neutral, yet judicially authoritative guidance, to many countries still deliberating on how to approach UDI in line with international law,” Jeremic added.
He stated that Serbia believes “that recourse to the Court would strengthen the rule of law in international relations, and make the proposed course of action a symbol of the world community’s resolve to take the UN Charter as its guide”.
“Supporting this resolution would also serve to reaffirm a fundamental principle: the right of any member State of the United Nations to pose a simple, basic question — on a matter it considers vitally important — to the international court,” Jeremic set out, noting that to vote against would be in effect a vote to deny the right of any country – now or in the future – to seek judicial recourse through the UN system.
Jeremic underscored that “to vote against would also mean accepting that nothing could be done when secessionists in whichever part of the globe assert the uniqueness of their cause, and claim exception to the universal scope of the international legal order”.
Serbian Foreign Minister said that: “All member States have on numerous occasions confirmed their confidence in the ICJ as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. We must therefore have full confidence that the Court will perform its duty in an exemplary fashion without any special directives.”
“The question posed is amply clear and refrains from taking political positions on the Kosovo issue. The answer to come, in the form of an advisory opinion, will be based on international law, in accordance with the ICJ’s Statute and Rules of Procedure,” Jeremic pointed out.
Jeremic expressed belief that “the draft resolution in its present form is entirely non-controversial. It represents the lowest common denominator of the positions of the member States on this question, and hence there is no need for any changes or additions.”
“Let us adopt it and allow the Court to act freely and impartially within the framework of its competencies. We are confident that the ICJ will know what to do, and that it will take into account the opinions of all interested member States and international organizations,” Jeremic concluded his address, noting also that “the most prudent way to proceed today is to adopt our resolution without opposition, as was the decision on the inclusion of this item in the agenda at the General Committee.”
Severe Blow to the Separatists and their Western Sponsors
After Jeremic’s address, UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto opened the debate.
European Union, which aims for a united foreign policy, once again failed to reach a consensus with the UK and France abstaining, while Slovakia, Greece, Cyprus, Spain and Romania voted in favor. In the discussion that preceded the voting, Serbia was supported by Panama, Cuba, Mexico, Indonesia, Costa Rica, Algeria, Egypt, South Africa… The United States and Albania voiced their opposition to the adoption of the resolution, while Turkey abstained.
Great Britain criticized Serbian initiative, claiming it was “politically motivated”. US representative Rosemary DiCarlo said her country will vote against, since Washington considers Kosovo Albanian separatists’ declaration to have been “in line with international law”.
“United States are fully supporting the International Court of Justice, but in regards to the resolution before us, we believe the advisory opinion is unnecessary and unhelpful, and therefore we shall vote against it”, the US ambassador said, stressing that 48 countries have recognized Pristina separatists’ declaration.
“Perhaps 48 countries did recognize Kosovo independence, but it may be worth mentioning that the other 144 did not,” South Africa’s Ambassador to the UN Dumisani Kumalo said, emphasizing his country supports Serbian initiative.
The plenary session, despite Great Britain’s insistence, was not attended by the Pristina war criminals, butchers, narcodealers and separatists.
Even though mafia state on Serbian territory was recognized only 24 hours ago by one more EU member — Portugal, East River diplomats believe adoption of the Serbian resolution will represent a “severe psychological blow to the further recognitions”, being that the states which have not formed a clear stand on the issue are expected to await the ICJ opinion prior to making any moves.
According to Tanjug, the prevailing view of the UN delegates is that recent events in Georgia have made Western position more precarious, since predictions of opponents of imposed severing of southern Serbian province have proved correct — amputation of Kosovo province did create a precedent, encouraging secessionist movements throughout the world.
Loading ...
Those quislings in Serbia, and in other small, economically poor Balkan and Eastern European countries which are in a hurry to get into Gulag EU, reminds me of the poor street people here in the USA who commit some petty crime just so that they can be sent to jail for a while where they have 3 meals a day, a warm bed, shower and offered some health checkup. It beats being out in the cold. For them the jail is “freedom”.
As the ineresting site, with webmaster’s commentary below indicate, the Gulag EU, USA and the New World Order is all screwed up.
Get away from it or it will drag you down with it!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1072416/CHRISTOPHER-BROOKER-The-financial-crisis-euros-death-knell—end-shambolic-EU.html
The financial crisis could be the euro’s death knell … and even end the shambolic EU
National borders serve the same function for planet Earth that fireproof doors do for buildings and watertight doors do for ships. They contain an accident so that the entire structure is not destroyed.
Fools who find opening fireproof or watertight doors inconvenient and jam them open will marvel at their cleverness at how fast people, cargo, and money can move from place to place. But the first time there is a fire, or the ship hits an ice berg, of the greed to those in control of the money gets out of hand, disaster results. Instead of losing a single room, the entire building burns down. Instead of a flooded hold and damaged cargo, the entire ship sinks. And instead of a bankrupt nation, you have a bankrupted Earth.
One world economy and one world government sounds like a nice idea. But there are two things wrong with it. The first is easy to explain; what happens when (not if) that one world government falls into the hands of the next Stalin or Hitler (or Bush)? The second reason is a bit more abstract. As long as their are multiple nations, there will be continuing experiments in new ways to organize and operate a society. But as soon as there is a single global government, all social evolution will stop, as a one world government will work only to perpetuate and prolong its own reign, secure in its self delusion that it represents the peak of civilization.
Now for the $64,000 question: “What IF the ICJ renders an advisory opinion in favor of the terrorist seperatists?” What are Serbia’s options?
Actually, it is the other possibility that the Yellow Coalition in Belgrade fears. They have all but given up on Kosovo and this is just to give an impression they are doing something. Should the ICJ rule in favour of terrorist separatists the Tadic clan will breathe a sigh of relief and say; well we have done our best! If on the other hand the unthinkable happens and the ICJ rules the independence illegal there will be panic in the Tadic camp and they will be asking the ICJ to reconsider.
And of course the western media censor any reporting of this
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ie=ISO-8859-1&ned=&q=serbia+ICJ
Bud the ICJ are corrupt, as the fact that they decided they did not have authroty to rule on whether NAYS’s bombing of Serbia was illegal on the grounds that Yugoslavia had ben expelled from the UN. That decision could not have been honestly made by a “court” which had earlier ruled that they could hear a Bosniian case against Serbia covering events when neither were in the UN. On the other hand that result shows that the ICJ will twist a bit to avoid making a ruling which is obviously & publicly corrupt. Hence their decision, on Kosovo, while in no sense honest or impartial will almost certainly be considerably less dishonest than that of the MASTO countries.
You forget that the question put to the ICJ is whether the UDI is in accordance with the international law – in general. So should they say yes, my bet is that the Evil Yellow Coalition (which has done more on the Kosovo issue in several months, than previous govt has accomplished in years, if you don’t count torching the embassies and thus painting us as ruthless savages) will move to recognize Republika Srpska very soon.
Never dismiss good politics only cause you hold a grudge against those implementing it. So far, the Yellows have kept their word that they won’t trade Kosovo for EU concessions.
The Yellow Coalition will only do what the Masters in Washington dictate it to, no more, no less. The so called “good politics” are mere acts of unquestioned obedience to its Masters who plan the actions to make it look like the Yellows have spine and fortitude for leadership. Not many are fooled by that worn out trick.
So, this is all a… trick? They tricked themselves into 1) humiliating their masters and 2) fearing the possible positive outcome? Come on. US are nowhere nearly as subtle when it comes to micromanaging their minions. For the latest example, see Montenegro and Macedonia.
Not much to see in Montenegro and “Macedonia”, neither are assured of anything save for the uncertainty for their future. Both are following the Master’s dictum, just like the Yellows in Serbia, in the hope that it will earn them the status of an ally. You can read the meaning of the term “trick” any way you like it still turns out to be the same tool of deception it was from the very start. You are right that the US are not subtle in managing their minions, that is obvious, they cannot be bothered with subtleties, plain downright deception plan is at work here and it no longer has its desired appeal but the fear element is still holding.
As for; “They tricked themselves into 1) humiliating their masters and 2) fearing the possible positive outcome? ”
I wish that they succeeded in humiliating their masters, nothing could be farther from the truth, the Yellows were faced with a need to show the Serbian public that something is being done and the options included taking the legal action against the assailants. That was deemed to be much too severe for their achy-breaky hearts so they opted for the meekest option of asking the ICJ for the opinion of legality. They, (the Yellows) chose the Claytons option, an option you have when you don’t have an option, because it offered an exit if the going gets tough, read – if the masters become angry.
Hopefully USA will soon have same importance in international relations as countries that together with USA voted against rule of law ( Albania, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau ).
That will be well deserved result of of American abuse of power and drunken cowboy behaviour in international politics last 25 years.