SARAJEVO, BANJA LUKA -- Bosnian officials have reacted to the latest Kosovo status developments today.
Source: B92, Beta
Close the entire text of the article here
"Meetings were held because of the issue of Kosovo and exchange of information with domestic and foreign factors has intensified," Silajdžić told reporters.
In his words, Kosovo is "another country's and international community's problem, but it could also become Bosnia's problem, if official Belgrade reaches for Bosnia-Herzegovina's integrity and sovereignty."
The post-war Bosnia is internationally managed and divided into the Bosniak-Croat Federation and the Bosnian Serb entity, known as the Republic of Srpska, RS.
Although there were no official announcements that the Serbs will seek independence for their entity following the example of Kosovo, the subject is often speculated about in the domestic and international media.
"There are circles and organizations that are ready to transfer the atmosphere of tension and possible repercussions of the Kosovo status settlement to Bosnia-Herzegovina," Silajdžić was quoted Sunday.
Meanwhile the man who has the highest authority in Bosnia, High Representative Miroslav Lajčak, says "Kosovo's independence will not cause instability in Bosnia-Herzegovina."
"There is no potential for this, although I do not rule out that some individuals will seek to abuse this act. I expect politicians to demonstrate responsible behavior, while the international community will not allow for any instability here. Bosnia-Herzegovina does not depend on Kosovo in any element," the Slovakian diplomat said.
Lajčak added that the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
Meanwhile, the British ambassador in Sarajevo, Matthew Rycroft, said that his country "has soldiers ready to intervene if necessary, not only in Bosnia-Herzegovina, but also in Kosovo."
The diplomat went on to add he did not expect a "situation where our soldiers will be needed here."
But the Bosnian Croat official, Dragan Čović, believes the Kosovo status crisis does influence the Bosnian political scene.
"Bosnia could reach a stage where, in the wake of a declaration of Kosovo's independence, it faces terrible difficulties in the functioning of its governing bodies," Čović warned.
As for Bosnia's Serbs, they were today outraged by a decision taken by the public television station to broadcast live today's unilateral declaration of Kosovo's independence from the assembly in Priština.
They see this as a provocation on the part of the Sarajevo-based outlet, meant to offend the Serbs, and also announced that the RS TV will counter it by a live broadcast of Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica's Kosovo speech an hour later.
“Lajčak added that the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
Yikes! What a slip of the tongue?
I bet Mr. Lajčak regrets he made this statement.
Serbia should repeat Mr. Lajčak’s comment again and again and again….
“Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
“Serbia is a sovereign, internationally recognized country.”
Did the High Representative think before he made this statement?
If the EU member states are paying Mr. Lajčak’s salary in his role as High Representative then, the people of Europe are being poorly served.
(Roger7, 18 February 2008 14:52)
... the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country...
What use is an argument about sovereignty?
Yugoslavia was a sovereign country - but that didn't seem to matter.
Serbia is a sovereign country - but that doesn't seem to matter.
Some say Kosovo is a sovereign country, but some say it isn't.
Bosnia was majority christian until the 1960s, but now is a 'sovereign' muslim country.
Croatia drove civilians from Krajina yet has not given up the land for a separate sovereign state, yet Kosovo has to be taken from Serbia with no better justification.
The UN had agreements about sovereignty, but they seem to be worth less than the paper on which they were written.
I suppose that the only really sovereign country is one that has a king or a queen!
(Bob, 18 February 2008 05:53)
Focus on arresting Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, indicted for genocide in Bosnia instead of debating international law. RS won't secede, this is the wishful thinking.
(Stuart, 18 February 2008 01:01)
Serbia is an internationally recognized sovereign state. As heir to Yugoslavia, it is also one of the founding members of the United Nations. It was also the first state in the Balkans to rise up against the Ottomans. With this said, there can be no doubt as to Serbia's legitimate sovereingty, nor its historical presence. Today, a region of said country seceded without any legal merit, and with limited approval from the very international body that was spearheading such secession.
Proponents of Kosovo's independence frequently cite the following criteria: an ethnic group marginalized in a country it doesn't want to live in; an ethnic group historically targeted by the dominant ethnic majority; a region that has been historically contested by more than one ethnic group and as such deserves historical reexamination.
Now let's take a look at Bosnia. Like Kosovo, Bosnia is populated by at least two ethnic groups that don't want to live in said state. Like Kosovo Albanians, Bosnian Serbs have also been victims to ethnic cleansing and genocide. Bosnia was the NDH's main stomping groud during WWII where up to 250,000 Serbs were killed. And, like Kosovo, Bosnia has been historically claimed by Serbia as part of their territory - a claim that was important enough for Austria-Hungary to immediately annex it from a crumbling Ottoman Empire in 1908 out of fear of Serb expansion and visible Serb activity in the region working to join it to Serbia Proper.
If RS doesn't deserve it's own state, given the above criteria and parallels to Kosovo, then neither does Kosovo, and it is an absolute double standard to say it's perfectly OK for one group to break away from one state, but deny the same right to another.
(Mike, 17 February 2008 22:47)
The US and Eu can now NOT be seen as hypocrits and not allow the Serbs in Bosnia and the Croats in Bosnia to seperate from BIH - which is what they want to do.
Bush is just repaying a favour to the Saudis in pushing for Kosovo independence. Its no coincidence that the Saudi's happen to be one of the first to recognise independence...
Freedom for RS and Herceg Bosna NOW!
(PM, 17 February 2008 20:00)
The dye has been cast, the precedent set. RS can do as it pleases, by recognising the Independence of Kosvo the international community has accepted 'ethnic cleansing' of Serbs from kosovo.
(Pera, 17 February 2008 19:50)
Recognizing and independent Kosovo is recognizing the ethnic cleansing of Serbs and Roma and the cultural cleansing of Serbs (destroyed monasteries, churches, cemeteries, monuments).
The RS was a land swap and population swap with the Bosnian Muslims and Croats.
The RS has hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Croat and Muslim controlled parts of Bosnia and Croatia.
Croatia as well has been recognized in spite of its genocides and ethnic cleansing of Serbs which caused far more deaths in WWII than '90s Bosnia.
Most killed in Bosnia in the last war were soldiers.
(ida, 17 February 2008 19:03)
Been in Kosovo,Sarajevo and Belgrade for assignment.This declaration is a tricky one,and since somebody is viewing a possible declaration of indip of RS a recogniz of cleansing,well I do suppose if status quo has to be accepted for albanians now,why not for serbian in RS??
(mazinga, 17 February 2008 19:02)
Nermin your comment is naive. I'm personally ok with kosovo independence, but to claim it isn't an analogous situation to Bosnia is ridiculous.
Ethnic cleansing occurred in kosovo (on both sides) just like Bosnia. Also, if an entity of Yugoslavia, was able to separate (i.e. croatia, slovenia etc) why can an entity of Bosnia not separate. If it is the will of the RS populace, that in my opinion carries the greatest democratic mandate.
(Bruce, 17 February 2008 18:43)
Kosovo has declared its independence from Serbia. As the international community recognizes the independence, it's a done deal.
However, this move towards independence has no relationship with Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Republic of Srpska within BiH was established as a result of "ethnic cleansing" (genocide) of Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Therefore, if the RS were to be recognized, the international community would be legally recognizing "ethnic cleansing" in an effort to obtain independence. Also, the Dayton Agreement assures that Bosnia-Herzegovina is comprised of two entities: RS and the Federation of BiH. Legally, the RS is not allowed to call for independence--despite the political situation in Kosovo.
(Nermin, 17 February 2008 17:40)
I am watching on BBC live how Albanian leaders in Pristina are signing the official UDI paper. This is a dramatic moment, for many people in the Balkans and Europe.
What will do the Serbs in Bosnia? Now, I cannot see any reason for Intl. community to deny their right to separate from Bosnia.
I am watching on BBC live how Albanian leaders in Pristina are signing the official UDI paper. This is a dramatic moment, for many people in the Balkans and Europe.
What will do the Serbs in Bosnia? Now, I cannot see any reason for Intl. community to deny their right to separate from Bosnia.
Serbia is an internationally recognized sovereign state. As heir to Yugoslavia, it is also one of the founding members of the United Nations. It was also the first state in the Balkans to rise up against the Ottomans. With this said, there can be no doubt as to Serbia's legitimate sovereingty, nor its historical presence. Today, a region of said country seceded without any legal merit, and with limited approval from the very international body that was spearheading such secession.
Proponents of Kosovo's independence frequently cite the following criteria: an ethnic group marginalized in a country it doesn't want to live in; an ethnic group historically targeted by the dominant ethnic majority; a region that has been historically contested by more than one ethnic group and as such deserves historical reexamination.
Now let's take a look at Bosnia. Like Kosovo, Bosnia is populated by at least two ethnic groups that don't want to live in said state. Like Kosovo Albanians, Bosnian Serbs have also been victims to ethnic cleansing and genocide. Bosnia was the NDH's main stomping groud during WWII where up to 250,000 Serbs were killed. And, like Kosovo, Bosnia has been historically claimed by Serbia as part of their territory - a claim that was important enough for Austria-Hungary to immediately annex it from a crumbling Ottoman Empire in 1908 out of fear of Serb expansion and visible Serb activity in the region working to join it to Serbia Proper.
If RS doesn't deserve it's own state, given the above criteria and parallels to Kosovo, then neither does Kosovo, and it is an absolute double standard to say it's perfectly OK for one group to break away from one state, but deny the same right to another.
(Mike, 17 February 2008 22:47)
Recognizing and independent Kosovo is recognizing the ethnic cleansing of Serbs and Roma and the cultural cleansing of Serbs (destroyed monasteries, churches, cemeteries, monuments).
The RS was a land swap and population swap with the Bosnian Muslims and Croats.
The RS has hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Croat and Muslim controlled parts of Bosnia and Croatia.
Croatia as well has been recognized in spite of its genocides and ethnic cleansing of Serbs which caused far more deaths in WWII than '90s Bosnia.
Most killed in Bosnia in the last war were soldiers.
(ida, 17 February 2008 19:03)
Nermin your comment is naive. I'm personally ok with kosovo independence, but to claim it isn't an analogous situation to Bosnia is ridiculous.
Ethnic cleansing occurred in kosovo (on both sides) just like Bosnia. Also, if an entity of Yugoslavia, was able to separate (i.e. croatia, slovenia etc) why can an entity of Bosnia not separate. If it is the will of the RS populace, that in my opinion carries the greatest democratic mandate.
(Bruce, 17 February 2008 18:43)
The dye has been cast, the precedent set. RS can do as it pleases, by recognising the Independence of Kosvo the international community has accepted 'ethnic cleansing' of Serbs from kosovo.
(Pera, 17 February 2008 19:50)
The US and Eu can now NOT be seen as hypocrits and not allow the Serbs in Bosnia and the Croats in Bosnia to seperate from BIH - which is what they want to do.
Bush is just repaying a favour to the Saudis in pushing for Kosovo independence. Its no coincidence that the Saudi's happen to be one of the first to recognise independence...
Freedom for RS and Herceg Bosna NOW!
(PM, 17 February 2008 20:00)
Been in Kosovo,Sarajevo and Belgrade for assignment.This declaration is a tricky one,and since somebody is viewing a possible declaration of indip of RS a recogniz of cleansing,well I do suppose if status quo has to be accepted for albanians now,why not for serbian in RS??
(mazinga, 17 February 2008 19:02)
... the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country...
What use is an argument about sovereignty?
Yugoslavia was a sovereign country - but that didn't seem to matter.
Serbia is a sovereign country - but that doesn't seem to matter.
Some say Kosovo is a sovereign country, but some say it isn't.
Bosnia was majority christian until the 1960s, but now is a 'sovereign' muslim country.
Croatia drove civilians from Krajina yet has not given up the land for a separate sovereign state, yet Kosovo has to be taken from Serbia with no better justification.
The UN had agreements about sovereignty, but they seem to be worth less than the paper on which they were written.
I suppose that the only really sovereign country is one that has a king or a queen!
(Bob, 18 February 2008 05:53)
Kosovo has declared its independence from Serbia. As the international community recognizes the independence, it's a done deal.
However, this move towards independence has no relationship with Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Republic of Srpska within BiH was established as a result of "ethnic cleansing" (genocide) of Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Therefore, if the RS were to be recognized, the international community would be legally recognizing "ethnic cleansing" in an effort to obtain independence. Also, the Dayton Agreement assures that Bosnia-Herzegovina is comprised of two entities: RS and the Federation of BiH. Legally, the RS is not allowed to call for independence--despite the political situation in Kosovo.
(Nermin, 17 February 2008 17:40)
“Lajčak added that the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
Yikes! What a slip of the tongue?
I bet Mr. Lajčak regrets he made this statement.
Serbia should repeat Mr. Lajčak’s comment again and again and again….
“Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
“Serbia is a sovereign, internationally recognized country.”
Did the High Representative think before he made this statement?
If the EU member states are paying Mr. Lajčak’s salary in his role as High Representative then, the people of Europe are being poorly served.
(Roger7, 18 February 2008 14:52)
Focus on arresting Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, indicted for genocide in Bosnia instead of debating international law. RS won't secede, this is the wishful thinking.
(Stuart, 18 February 2008 01:01)
Kosovo has declared its independence from Serbia. As the international community recognizes the independence, it's a done deal.
However, this move towards independence has no relationship with Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Republic of Srpska within BiH was established as a result of "ethnic cleansing" (genocide) of Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Therefore, if the RS were to be recognized, the international community would be legally recognizing "ethnic cleansing" in an effort to obtain independence. Also, the Dayton Agreement assures that Bosnia-Herzegovina is comprised of two entities: RS and the Federation of BiH. Legally, the RS is not allowed to call for independence--despite the political situation in Kosovo.
(Nermin, 17 February 2008 17:40)
I am watching on BBC live how Albanian leaders in Pristina are signing the official UDI paper. This is a dramatic moment, for many people in the Balkans and Europe.
What will do the Serbs in Bosnia? Now, I cannot see any reason for Intl. community to deny their right to separate from Bosnia.
Focus on arresting Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, indicted for genocide in Bosnia instead of debating international law. RS won't secede, this is the wishful thinking.
(Stuart, 18 February 2008 01:01)
Recognizing and independent Kosovo is recognizing the ethnic cleansing of Serbs and Roma and the cultural cleansing of Serbs (destroyed monasteries, churches, cemeteries, monuments).
The RS was a land swap and population swap with the Bosnian Muslims and Croats.
The RS has hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Croat and Muslim controlled parts of Bosnia and Croatia.
Croatia as well has been recognized in spite of its genocides and ethnic cleansing of Serbs which caused far more deaths in WWII than '90s Bosnia.
Most killed in Bosnia in the last war were soldiers.
(ida, 17 February 2008 19:03)
Serbia is an internationally recognized sovereign state. As heir to Yugoslavia, it is also one of the founding members of the United Nations. It was also the first state in the Balkans to rise up against the Ottomans. With this said, there can be no doubt as to Serbia's legitimate sovereingty, nor its historical presence. Today, a region of said country seceded without any legal merit, and with limited approval from the very international body that was spearheading such secession.
Proponents of Kosovo's independence frequently cite the following criteria: an ethnic group marginalized in a country it doesn't want to live in; an ethnic group historically targeted by the dominant ethnic majority; a region that has been historically contested by more than one ethnic group and as such deserves historical reexamination.
Now let's take a look at Bosnia. Like Kosovo, Bosnia is populated by at least two ethnic groups that don't want to live in said state. Like Kosovo Albanians, Bosnian Serbs have also been victims to ethnic cleansing and genocide. Bosnia was the NDH's main stomping groud during WWII where up to 250,000 Serbs were killed. And, like Kosovo, Bosnia has been historically claimed by Serbia as part of their territory - a claim that was important enough for Austria-Hungary to immediately annex it from a crumbling Ottoman Empire in 1908 out of fear of Serb expansion and visible Serb activity in the region working to join it to Serbia Proper.
If RS doesn't deserve it's own state, given the above criteria and parallels to Kosovo, then neither does Kosovo, and it is an absolute double standard to say it's perfectly OK for one group to break away from one state, but deny the same right to another.
(Mike, 17 February 2008 22:47)
... the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country...
What use is an argument about sovereignty?
Yugoslavia was a sovereign country - but that didn't seem to matter.
Serbia is a sovereign country - but that doesn't seem to matter.
Some say Kosovo is a sovereign country, but some say it isn't.
Bosnia was majority christian until the 1960s, but now is a 'sovereign' muslim country.
Croatia drove civilians from Krajina yet has not given up the land for a separate sovereign state, yet Kosovo has to be taken from Serbia with no better justification.
The UN had agreements about sovereignty, but they seem to be worth less than the paper on which they were written.
I suppose that the only really sovereign country is one that has a king or a queen!
(Bob, 18 February 2008 05:53)
“Lajčak added that the Kosovo crisis had no influence on Bosnia "because Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
Yikes! What a slip of the tongue?
I bet Mr. Lajčak regrets he made this statement.
Serbia should repeat Mr. Lajčak’s comment again and again and again….
“Bosnia-Herzegovina is a sovereign, internationally recognized country."
“Serbia is a sovereign, internationally recognized country.”
Did the High Representative think before he made this statement?
If the EU member states are paying Mr. Lajčak’s salary in his role as High Representative then, the people of Europe are being poorly served.
(Roger7, 18 February 2008 14:52)
Been in Kosovo,Sarajevo and Belgrade for assignment.This declaration is a tricky one,and since somebody is viewing a possible declaration of indip of RS a recogniz of cleansing,well I do suppose if status quo has to be accepted for albanians now,why not for serbian in RS??
(mazinga, 17 February 2008 19:02)
The dye has been cast, the precedent set. RS can do as it pleases, by recognising the Independence of Kosvo the international community has accepted 'ethnic cleansing' of Serbs from kosovo.
(Pera, 17 February 2008 19:50)
Nermin your comment is naive. I'm personally ok with kosovo independence, but to claim it isn't an analogous situation to Bosnia is ridiculous.
Ethnic cleansing occurred in kosovo (on both sides) just like Bosnia. Also, if an entity of Yugoslavia, was able to separate (i.e. croatia, slovenia etc) why can an entity of Bosnia not separate. If it is the will of the RS populace, that in my opinion carries the greatest democratic mandate.
(Bruce, 17 February 2008 18:43)
The US and Eu can now NOT be seen as hypocrits and not allow the Serbs in Bosnia and the Croats in Bosnia to seperate from BIH - which is what they want to do.
Bush is just repaying a favour to the Saudis in pushing for Kosovo independence. Its no coincidence that the Saudi's happen to be one of the first to recognise independence...
Freedom for RS and Herceg Bosna NOW!
(PM, 17 February 2008 20:00)