Jump to content

Talk:Foreign relations of Serbia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Corrections

"...will be inhereted, along with all of its holdings, by the Republic of Serbia." Is this true? Montenegro will not get at least some part of this? How is this possible? What about the share of costs that the montenegrin taxpayers have given to the State Union (previous Federal yugoslav government) for establishing these holdings in the first place?

"Despite this, Montenegro will be represented at Serbian embassies and consulates in countries in which Montenegro has not established a formal diplomatic presence." - sounds reasonable; it is probably true.

"The governments of the two countries expressed an interest in pursuing a common foreign policy." - citation please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.36.8.100 (talk • contribs)

sources and speculation

There is a lack of source markers, and it seems to be opinionated, and it says 'we', the text in general for at least one part isn't in wiki style. Contralya 12:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Serbia's foreign relations with Russia is not referred to. This is tantamount to ignoring the geopolitical elephant in the room! —Preceding unsigned comment added by RashersTierney (talk • contribs) 14:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Jordan?

Why is Jordan on the map as a country where the embassy has been closed? Do they even have a position on Kosovo?--RobNS 19:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It was closed temporarily but long time ago. I am not aware of the reason which could be financial or else.--Avala (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

New Map

Why is Svalbard the islands belonging to Norway coloured in blue? Did they declare independence too and are now refusing to recognise Kosovo? Shocking map tbf ;) Ijanderson977 (talk) 07:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Many countries have also not taken part in the discussion regarding Kosovo, so you can really say that they agree that Kosovo is seriba. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.197.41 (talk) 11:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that map seems to be biased. You can't color in deep blue countries which have not explicitly rejected Kosovar independence. --alchaemia (talk) 12:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Date when the Republic of Serbia established diplomatic relations

Neutrality and reliability of sources in this article is deeply harmed by the entire approach of the article.

  • (1) Article continues with claims of successor of Yugoslavia despite the Agreement on Succession Issues (signed, 2001-06-29, ratified 2002-07-01, in effect 2004-06-02)
  • (2) Article do not mention the fact that Serbia and Montenegro as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia joined the United Nations on 2000-11-01; the Non Aligned Movement (as an observer) on 2001-11-14. Practically the only organization which accepted the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia before the ousting of Milosevic in 2000 was the IMF (to which FRY joined on 1992-12-14.
  • (3) Making the claims of continual relations, by the lettering of the article, with Austria, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, the Vatican City State, Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Iran, Israel (still the SFRY, not FRY), Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Thailand, Viet Nam, Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Australia, New Zealand, and United States based on the wishful thinking of the primary source (without secondary sources) show that the editor who inserted the information do not comprehend that Serbia is not the successor of the SFRY, but only of the FRY and the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (SCG).
    • (3a) the current Constitution of the Republic of Serbia did not name its predecessors. The Kingdom of Serbia did not posses (legally) the current Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, and the Principality of Serbia did not posses Kosovo and Metohija, nor the Province of Vojvodina.
    • (3b) There was a significant interruption between the times of the Kingdom and the times of the Republic, lasting as much as 88 years. In that time much has changed, and the People's Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FPRY) passed a law, by which, all of the acts, laws, decrees, etc., which were passed (approved, etc.) by the former Kingdom of Yugoslavia were invalid (null and void) and that all of the documents by the occupying armies, and quislings were also invalid (null and void). The law (mentioned before) was the official position of AVNOJ; during the Second World War and latter enacted (twice) in 1946.
  • (4) FRY was created on 1992-04-27 and that federation was not the successor of SFRY. FRY agreed on that point on 2001-06-29 (signing of the Agreement on Succession Issues, and joining the United Nations on 2000-11-01)
    • (4a) from that date, and only from that date (1992-04-27), could have FRY established any connections under its own name. For instance the Kingdom of Serbia signed a document with Australia, socialist Yugoslavia used it and then all of the former Yugoslav republics used it (because it was used in the times of socialist Yugoslavia, except if negotiated its own extradition laws with Australia [or any other country]), does this means that the former Yugoslav republics all made connection with Australia in 1966 -- no it doesn't, but it also doesn't signify that Serbia (the Republic) is a direct continuation of Serbia (the Kingdom).
      • Nor the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia says so.
    • (4b) Montenegro establishes (now) its diplomatic recognition despite the Kingdom of Montenegro had established diplomatic relations with the same countries (for instance, the USA in 1918).
  • Conclusion: Serbia claims (by itself) a successor of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (proclaimed on 1992-04-27) and of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro (proclaimed 2003-). Why go against what is the official position of Serbia and claim successor of SFR Yugoslavia. The Kingdom of Serbia (internationally called Servia in those days) did not legally comprise Vojvodina (occupied it in 1918/1919, but formally gained in 1921/1922), and the Principality of Serbia did not comprise Kosovo. Those two entities are not the Republic of Serbia.
    • Reaction: This is why all the years that are not sourced by both the Republic of Serbia and the other bilateral partner country [state] and sourced with a valid and reliable secondary source is removed from the content of the article. If this removal is objected, it should be discussed, thoroughly referenced and tagged with {{fact}} until doing so. Please discuss or WP:DR.
Imbris (talk) 22:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Serbia and Kosovo foreign relations

This article is about Serbia foreign or diplomatic relations.Serbia does not recognise Kosovo thus they can not have FOREIGN relations with the entity of Kosovo.I want to delete Kosovo part.Opinion anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanticm (talk • contribs) 03:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Kosovo is a part of Serbia that doesn't recognize Serbian authority. Kosovos' Albanians are proceedeeng ethnical clensing by driving Serbs out of their homes, by conducting crimes, murders and terror over Serbs. The international comunity is helping Albanians to do that by placing corrupted and not-objective people to govern over international forces. Objective and honest people are replaced or extorted. Serbian officials are kept out by international military (under strict command of NATO only). The countries which are involved in this terror over Serbs, were recognized Kosovo as an independant state even when all the Serbs were not drived out yet. Some weak countries are pressued and intimidated to recognize Kosovo. Kosovo is not recognized by any international offitial organisation and cannot be treated as so just because powerfull few has recognized it, and forcing its recognition! There are no clear and logical explanation abuot why NATO has bombed Serbia and establish their own forces, back in 1999, on Kosovo. But this problem was created then. I think that NATO countries are just afraid to admit that they was wrong, even they know the truth, because than they would have to pay to Serbia for all the damage they made. They want to cover up their errors by inventing and establishing new country and making up forgery of the truth, even when there are hundreds of thoulsands of innosent victims. No informed, independant and truthfull government would recognize Kosovo ever.

Aargh! Hint - if you want to push your pro-Serbian agenda, try and be a little more subtle about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.163.173.141 (talk) 10:51, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Linking

I have restored my clean up of the article that was reverted without explanation by User:PNA record. Here is why I made these changes:

  • acronyms like "EU" should be spelled out the first time they are used
  • there is no need to include an acronym in the link, i.e., "[[Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe]] (OSCE)" does the same job of getting the reader to the link as does "[[Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe|Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)]]", but the first one is shorter, so it clutters the article less
  • an acronym like "ICJ" will not be understood by many readers, so it should be spelled out, and we might as well link it too
  • it is incorrect to repeat the same links over and over - like linking "Kosovo"three times in a paragraph, or "Belgrade" every time it appears in an article - see WP:REPEATLINK
  • consistent spelling should be used -- switching back and forth between "neighbour" and "neighbor" is incorrect. one or the other should be used throughout
  • dates should generally not be linked - see WP:MOSUNLINKDATES
  • an encyclopedia article on Serbia should not refer to "our neighbours"
  • per WP:MOSNUM, numbers ten and under should generally be spelled out if used in a sentence instead of using the numerals
  • the first reference to a person such as Josip Broz Tito should use his full name instead of just his last name

Ground Zero | t 14:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Diplomatic relations with Uruguay

I would like to include this in the section for Latin America, but I have trouble with understanding how to format the tables, so I'd like to ask for help for someone to add the recent news on Uruguay and Serbia cancelling visa requirements for citizens of both countries. Cheers. Eug.galeotti (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Palestine

According to the Google translation of this Albanian news article from October 2011 (more recent than any contradictory sources cited in the article), Palestine has recognized Kosovo. I am going to call the embassy tomorrow for comment, but it will probably be changed. J1.grammar natz (talk) 08:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Greece as Near Neighbor

I don't know, but in the Nearest Neighbors list, more distant countries, than Greece, to Serbia, are listed here, such as Ukraine or Russia, but Greece is not. Since Greece and Serbia are very close both geographically, economically and historically (we even shared borders before FYROM declares its independence from Yugoslavia), so I moved Greece from the 'Rest of Europe' list to the more accurate 'Near Neighbors' list.--85.75.170.45 (talk) 04:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Kosovo

Hmmm... Should we have here kosovo presented like this? Serbia does not recognise Kosovo, and maybe it should not be presented in this way, no matter on current situation... What do you think? --WhiteWriterspeaks 10:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

removing POV template without ongoing discussion per Template:POV instructions

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Foreign relations of Serbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Foreign relations of Serbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Foreign relations of Serbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foreign relations of Serbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:06, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Foreign_relations_of_Serbia/Archive_1&oldid=1136734157"