International Crisis Group reports on Serbian constitution and Kosovo status
International Crisis GroupSource:
Close the entire text of the article here
The International Crisis Group has published two reports dealing with the two most relevant subject of the moment: adoption of Serbia’s new constitution and the process of determining Kosovo’s future status.
The report on the adoption of the new constitution is highly critical of the Serbian authorities, describing the referendum process as “neither free nor fair”, the constitution itself as “stepping away from the European values”, and the ultimate goal of its adoption at this time as intended to undermine the international community’s plans for Kosovo.
In its Kosovo report, International Crisis Group advocates swift solution to the Kosovo status problem, advising against postponement, which it sees as possible source of instability in the region, notably that on the one hand “further delay would be taken in Belgrade not as a cue to cooperate with an orderly Kosovo process but as a further opportunity to wreck it”, and on the other that “the longer the Kosovo Albanians are forced to wait, the greater the chance they will discredit themselves with unilateral independence moves or riots.”
Please click on the links below to download the full reports as PDF files.
One small thing I need to point out folks: Did you all read the new Kosovo report the International Crisis Group published this morning? I would pay VERY special attention to it and what it has to say. Scroll down to its last page and look at its Senior Advisers: Who do you see listed as number one there? Marti Ahtisaari (emmeritus too) :) Now do you get it?
(Sidi, 13 November 2006 16:48)
“...the longer the Kosovo Albanians are forced to wait, the greater the chance they will DISCREDIT themselves... with riots.”
"Discredit" is a very interesting choice of wording.
It is soft in connotation. It nudges the reader to "understand" the actions --rather than condemn the actions (the appropriate response to violence in all civilized societies and media sources).
Should it not be the responsibility of this proposed state to act in civility rather than violence? Should this not be a pre-condition of discussion... let alone statehood?
Should ICG not cease from defending or understanding violence -- for whatever reason it may happen? Is this not the duty of any public organization that operates from the United States or that receives American taxpayer dollars to fund its opeartions?
It seems to me that the ICG is suddenly very concerned. That which was a foregone fact, now seems to be drawan into question.
(Blag/ NYC, 15 November 2006 22:09)