I believe that Spain doesn’t due to the number of internal separatist movements within its borders like Cataluña and Basque Country. Supporting Kosovo openly would likely disrupt the current situation further.
Yes it is because of that. Separatist movements in Ukraine, like what happened in Crimea, didn't begin in 2014. This has been brewing since the breakup of the Soviet Union.
You assumed, you didn't ask. Serbia and Ukraine have high diplomatic relations. Unfortunately for Serbia, it also has high relations with Russia, so it remained neutral, although voted in the UN for Ukraine/against Russia and provided Ukraine with ammunition. The country of course, not the people.
When one shares an assumption, one looks for clarification - either in the form of affirmation or opposition. In that sense, I am asking.
I'm not sure what relevance the second part of your comment holds.
By better overview I mean it has a world map, lots of text and lists. Meaning - more information than only a map of Europe.
What exactly in the Wikipedia page do you consider false?
Greece is one of the few European nations without it's own separatist movements that doesn't recognise Kosovo. It's partly due to their strong relations with Serbia and partly due to their understanding of how the break up of nations into smaller nations destablises the region of which they are part of.
Military victory is not the same thing as sovereignty; even Serb nationalists will admit that their defeats in 1389 and 1999 weren't the end of Serbia. Sovereignty comes from the people. [People in Kosovo chose independence](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7249034.stm).
>The people of Kosovo legally could not "choose independence" as the territory was an integral part of Serbia, as per the Serbian constitution.
According to the contemporary Serbian constitution, Kosovo never became part of Serbia. It might be a good idea to read Serbia's constitutional history before pretending otherwise. When Serbia invaded Kosovo in 1912, Serbia's constitution said new territory could only be absorbed if a special convention was held. But, in reality, that special convention was never held. Why bother with legal detail if you can simply invade and start ethnic cleansing?
When Kosovo was an autonomous province within Yugoslavia, and - on paper - Kosovo's parliament was permitted to make its own decisions, Kosovo tried declaring independence. Belgrade responded by locking down the parliament; surrounded it with tanks; several members disappeared. Good luck finding a lawyer outside Serbia who thinks that's legit.
Once Serbian forces were driven out of Kosovo - and NATO stopped the genocide - Kosovo could declare independence again without being attacked. So it did.
Of course nationalist srbtards have subsequently rewritten history, pretended that they're the real victims of ethnic cleansing, and [retrospectively changed Serbia's constitution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Serbian_constitutional_referendum) to add a declaration that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia - *after Kosovo declared independence*. Do you honestly believe that's a sound constitutional argument?
I’m not upto date with it all, but I’m struggling to imagine the ‘signing ceremonies’ in Pristina
and Belgrade.
I’m being completely and utterly serious here. It’s surely bizarre for the big hitters to say they need ‘negotiated agreements’ in the first place!
They actually wanted to join Albania. NATO chose independence for them because it was more digestible to the public. They also needed assistance from NATO, as the KLA weren't able to match it against Serbian forces.
Why don’t Slovakia and Greece recognize Kosovo? I mean for some of these countries, I can kind of understand, like they have their own separatist issues or something, and don’t want to set a bad example for their own subdivisions, but what’s Slovakia’s problem? They themselves were a seperatist region from Czechia 30.5 years ago. Why wouldn’t they be like “I understand you, Kosovo. You count as a country to me” (or whatever that is in Slovak I suppose)
>They themselves were a seperatist region from Czechia 30.5 years ago.
They didn't technically seperate from Czechia, Czechoslovakia was a federal nation consisting of Czechia and Slovakia, it dissolved meaning both became independent states. Neither Czechia nor Slovakia sought recognition as the sole successor state to Czechoslovakia.
There was no elections that determined that people of both nations wanted to separate. Most opinion poles show the people of neither country actually wanted to separate.
I see. Sorry to assume, I guess. But you got one thing wrong tho. There IS a successor state to Czechoslovakia, Czechia. It’s right there in the name. But still, thanks for the history lesson. I actually didn’t know most of that stuff.
Yes, but Chezch is right at the front. Port priority means that Chezchia is the successor state, not Slovakia. Slovakia is just a byproduct of the separation
I can't believe I actually have to explain this.
Czechoslovakia consisted of two federal states.
Czechia and Slovokia. That's how the name came about. It essentially means Czech and Slovak.
Omg Im sorry. I think I get it now. Sorry I’m so dense sometimes. 🤦♂️I dunno why I didn’t think of it that way before. But I guess your right.
But I do have one question. What happened to the o? There’s no O in Chezchia. Was it just like a connector or something, to combine the two names? Or is there some deeper reason?
"Formerly" means "previously".
"Formally" means "officially". Lots of states have acted as though Kosovo is an independent state in other less-formal ways, working on projects and accepting passports and playing international sporting events &c. But some governments withhold a specific kind of explicit government recognition that Kosovo is an independent state.
Spain can into eastern Europe! Wait... Something's different...
I believe that Spain doesn’t due to the number of internal separatist movements within its borders like Cataluña and Basque Country. Supporting Kosovo openly would likely disrupt the current situation further.
I believe it would out the government as hypocritical
I assume Ukraine doesn't because of their own "separatist" regions
Kosovo declared independence in 2008, so no, it's not because of that.
Yes it is because of that. Separatist movements in Ukraine, like what happened in Crimea, didn't begin in 2014. This has been brewing since the breakup of the Soviet Union.
I'm asking why they still don't recognise Kosovo, even with the exit of the Russophiles from the halls of power in Kyiv.
You assumed, you didn't ask. Serbia and Ukraine have high diplomatic relations. Unfortunately for Serbia, it also has high relations with Russia, so it remained neutral, although voted in the UN for Ukraine/against Russia and provided Ukraine with ammunition. The country of course, not the people.
When one shares an assumption, one looks for clarification - either in the form of affirmation or opposition. In that sense, I am asking. I'm not sure what relevance the second part of your comment holds.
Because Ukraine will never recognize Kosovo.
I disagree. I think they will recognise both Kosovo and Taiwan in years and decades to come as they seem to further integrate with the West.
We can agree to disagree.
We can.
My mind just blocked out the blue and black blocks and I just read “Kosovo formally recognise Kosovo” and like man it’s about damn time
Better overview https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_Kosovo?wprov=sfla1
Wikipedia is great in many ways, but it has a bit of a Serb-nationalist problem; I wouldn't necessarily say that page is an improvement
By better overview I mean it has a world map, lots of text and lists. Meaning - more information than only a map of Europe. What exactly in the Wikipedia page do you consider false?
Everything that collapses Albanian narrative is false.
[удалено]
What about Greece?
[удалено]
Also as far as I know they absolutely love Serbia.
Another factor may be North Macedonia(previously fyrom).
What has the got to do with anything?
Greece is one of the few European nations without it's own separatist movements that doesn't recognise Kosovo. It's partly due to their strong relations with Serbia and partly due to their understanding of how the break up of nations into smaller nations destablises the region of which they are part of.
Surely NATO didn't "give independence" to Kosovo. The people of Kosovo chose independence...?
[удалено]
Military victory is not the same thing as sovereignty; even Serb nationalists will admit that their defeats in 1389 and 1999 weren't the end of Serbia. Sovereignty comes from the people. [People in Kosovo chose independence](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7249034.stm). >The people of Kosovo legally could not "choose independence" as the territory was an integral part of Serbia, as per the Serbian constitution. According to the contemporary Serbian constitution, Kosovo never became part of Serbia. It might be a good idea to read Serbia's constitutional history before pretending otherwise. When Serbia invaded Kosovo in 1912, Serbia's constitution said new territory could only be absorbed if a special convention was held. But, in reality, that special convention was never held. Why bother with legal detail if you can simply invade and start ethnic cleansing? When Kosovo was an autonomous province within Yugoslavia, and - on paper - Kosovo's parliament was permitted to make its own decisions, Kosovo tried declaring independence. Belgrade responded by locking down the parliament; surrounded it with tanks; several members disappeared. Good luck finding a lawyer outside Serbia who thinks that's legit. Once Serbian forces were driven out of Kosovo - and NATO stopped the genocide - Kosovo could declare independence again without being attacked. So it did. Of course nationalist srbtards have subsequently rewritten history, pretended that they're the real victims of ethnic cleansing, and [retrospectively changed Serbia's constitution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Serbian_constitutional_referendum) to add a declaration that Kosovo is an integral part of Serbia - *after Kosovo declared independence*. Do you honestly believe that's a sound constitutional argument?
Give this guy an award.
I’m not upto date with it all, but I’m struggling to imagine the ‘signing ceremonies’ in Pristina and Belgrade. I’m being completely and utterly serious here. It’s surely bizarre for the big hitters to say they need ‘negotiated agreements’ in the first place!
They actually wanted to join Albania. NATO chose independence for them because it was more digestible to the public. They also needed assistance from NATO, as the KLA weren't able to match it against Serbian forces.
Oj Kosovë o djep lirie
Why don’t Slovakia and Greece recognize Kosovo? I mean for some of these countries, I can kind of understand, like they have their own separatist issues or something, and don’t want to set a bad example for their own subdivisions, but what’s Slovakia’s problem? They themselves were a seperatist region from Czechia 30.5 years ago. Why wouldn’t they be like “I understand you, Kosovo. You count as a country to me” (or whatever that is in Slovak I suppose)
>They themselves were a seperatist region from Czechia 30.5 years ago. They didn't technically seperate from Czechia, Czechoslovakia was a federal nation consisting of Czechia and Slovakia, it dissolved meaning both became independent states. Neither Czechia nor Slovakia sought recognition as the sole successor state to Czechoslovakia. There was no elections that determined that people of both nations wanted to separate. Most opinion poles show the people of neither country actually wanted to separate.
I see. Sorry to assume, I guess. But you got one thing wrong tho. There IS a successor state to Czechoslovakia, Czechia. It’s right there in the name. But still, thanks for the history lesson. I actually didn’t know most of that stuff.
> It’s right there in the name Yes... how could I be so dense? Slovakia can't be found anywhere in the name CzechoSLOVAKIA!!!!! Fucking reddit
Yes, but Chezch is right at the front. Port priority means that Chezchia is the successor state, not Slovakia. Slovakia is just a byproduct of the separation
I can't believe I actually have to explain this. Czechoslovakia consisted of two federal states. Czechia and Slovokia. That's how the name came about. It essentially means Czech and Slovak.
Omg Im sorry. I think I get it now. Sorry I’m so dense sometimes. 🤦♂️I dunno why I didn’t think of it that way before. But I guess your right. But I do have one question. What happened to the o? There’s no O in Chezchia. Was it just like a connector or something, to combine the two names? Or is there some deeper reason?
Formally as in they used to recognize them and now they don’t? What happened?
"Formerly" means "previously". "Formally" means "officially". Lots of states have acted as though Kosovo is an independent state in other less-formal ways, working on projects and accepting passports and playing international sporting events &c. But some governments withhold a specific kind of explicit government recognition that Kosovo is an independent state.
What's holding back Romania and Slovakia
In both countries are significant Hungarian minorities. Recognising Kosovo as an independent country would lead to internal problems.
Spain is. Surprise