<> Kosova’s formal independence heralds a great perspective for Trans-Dniestr, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, as well as Sanjak and Voivodina in the gradually fading tyranny of Serbia. Furthermore, Kosovo announces a promising future for other oppressed peoples in Balkans, notably the Turks and the Macedonians of Bulgaria, and the Hungarians of Transylvania. As a matter of fact, Kosova opens the way for Catalonia, Corsica, the Bask country, Galicia, Occitania, Brittany, and Scotland.<>
http://www.newkosovareport.com/20080221635/Views-and-Analysis/The-Moral-Victory-of-Kosova.html The moral victory of Kosova Thursday, 21 February 2008 In an earlier article under the title "The Historical Victory of Kosova", we refuted arguments of the opponents of Kosova’s formal independence that involve falsifications of the historical reality. In the present editorial, we will reject biased philosophical / ideological / political approaches propagated by skeptics and adversaries of Kosova’s formal independence. As societies do not exist without a moral order shared by all and stipulated by the democratically elected legislative power, every society’s moral principles and concepts have to be reflected in the politics, the practices of the political life in its entirety. Politics without Moral Order: Utter Barbarism Certainly not all the societies feature the same high moral standards at all times; to use terms used in the discipline of History, we should call this situation ‘decadence’, ‘sociopolitical disintegration’, ‘decay’ or ‘fall’; it actually characterizes the end phases of earlier civilized societies. Representative and or totalitarian, monarchical, communist or republican, no political establishment escapes from this, as decay and fall may at a certain moment characterize any society. The inception of the international or global community is a modern phenomenon that pertains precisely to fundamental moral concepts and principles as diffused and prevalent everywhere. The rise of the concept of Crime against the Mankind (which did not exist in the Antiquity of the Christian and Islamic Ages) hinges on moral and philosophical considerations; the term encompasses flagrant violations of moral codes that are common to, valid for, and accepted in (and by) all societies. We cannot therefore dissociate the proclamation of Kosova’s independence, the international recognition of the country, and its entrance in the UN and other international bodies from fundamental political considerations of purely moral character. This becomes clear in the light of terms used by those who deny Kosova the right to formal independence; moral particularly, the Russian president called Western countries’ support to Kosova as 'immoral and illegal'! The outgoing Russian leader, who may soon feel absolutely comfortable in the shoes of the future Russian prime minister, went on accusing the European countries of their double standards, and saying that they should be "ashamed" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/14/kosovo.russia). What is moral, and what is legal in politics, and subsequently in international politics? Confronted with conflicting ideas, clashing concepts, and opposite principles, one has to identify the most fundamental elements of the Moral Philosophical Order from which all the other commonly accepted moral values have derived. Proceeding so, one defines Humanism and the Human Values, as conceived, analyzed and systematized by the Renaissance and the Classicist philosophers, as the foundations of today’s international Moral Order and Code. Humanism, People, Nation and State At the epicenter of the focus of our civilization, and cornerstone of its integrity is the Human Being; human freedom and dignity, equity and justice, equality, tolerance, altruism and respect for the other are epigrammatically the pillars of our world. The seminal importance of the Human Being within our system of values is extended to the human society, and every ethnic, linguistic and religious group that self defines itself according to their specific cultural and national identity. Thus, the importance of the Human Being is transferred to the ‘People’, a large group of human beings sharing common origin, language, culture and religion. Viewed diachronically, a ‘people’ is called ‘nation’. The latter term was repeatedly confused with the state, the organization setup by a people in order to provide infrastructure for organized social life. This created a great confusion; states (also called nations, as we said) antedate the rise of our modern world, and the Renaissance humanist philosophers. But states (nations) at the end of the Christian and Islamic Ages were not conceived in the same way as today. The concept of the nation at those days hinged on the feudal and imperial systems. A nation was personified by a feudal lord, and/or an emperor. With the rise of the Absolutism and the Absolute Monarchy, the same word took a markedly different meaning, and this was exemplarily highlighted by the notorious statement of the Roi Soleil, Louis XIV, "L’ état, c’ est moi" (I am the State/Nation). The concordance between ‘people’ and ‘nation’ is a later philosophical conclusion, and as debate it dates back to the 18th century, representing the epitome of Enlightenment; it was formed under strong classicist impact, and in opposition to the respective Medieval or Renaissance concepts. However, the rise of Romanticism, as a rejection of the Classicism and as a nostalgia for aspects of the Renaissance world, brought about Romanticism, a system with incredibly rich and complex ramifications one of which was Nationalism, one more connotation of the already rich in nuances word. At the times the International Law was emerging as concept and approach, ‘nation’ was identified with ‘people’ for some philosophers and intellectuals, whereas for others nation was the supposedly apparent organization of a people into a system, namely the state. The importance of the state was practically undeniable as the two world wars were triggered, undertaken and won by states, despite the participation of vast masses. When the UN initiative was launched during WW II, few would react to the equation of the nation with the state. With the rise and the fall of the Soviet block the equation prevailed for long. Today, we cannot afford to stick to the aforementioned obsolete, trivial, and utterly anti-democratic equation. The fall of the Soviet regimes demonstrated clearly that, if a society is democratically organized, the equation of the nation with the state does not occur at the prejudice of the sovereign people. But if the society is not democratically organized, and the administration does not reflect the will of the people, the state is a mechanism of oppression. And the original fact, value, and concept is the ‘People’; the ‘state’ exists as a derivative value and concept. The value of a state is relative; it consists in mere reflection of the value of the people, under the condition of representativeness, involving democratic elections and genuine and accurate reflection of the popular will. National Sovereignty and Territorial Integrity Consequently, the principles of national sovereignty and territorial integrity have to be considered as applicable and valid only in case of democratic states reflecting as best possible the will of the indigenous people (nation) or peoples (nations). National sovereignty is to be considered as sovereignty exercised by an individual national group organized as a democratic society; national sovereignty is the privilege of a people (historically viewed as a nation) – not of a state. The privilege is transferred to the state, only in case the state genuinely and accurately reflects the will of the indigenous people (nation). National sovereignty cannot be exercised by one specific nation over another nation, as this would automatically imply servility and voluntary submission, attitudes that contradict the human nature. National sovereignty can be shared between two nations under condition of internationally recognized, democratically expressed agreement (referendum); however, even in this case the cohabitation of the two nations has to be evident at the level of the administration, the political life, the educational; system, the free market, and the armed forces. When therefore we refer to the principles of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, we can only accept them as correctly valid, conforming to Humanism and Enlightenment, if applied in an independent nation, not an independent state that may comprise more than one nations, eventually oppressing one or more. Serb national sovereignty is for Serbs – only! The sovereignty of Serbs is therefore a moral value as long as it is applied to Serbs and not to Kosovars, Sanjakis, Voivodinians (term regrouping several non-Serb nations cohabitating in Voivodina), Macedonians, Albanians, Bulgarians and Greeks. If for any reason Serb national sovereignty is exercised over another nation – without that nation’s explicit consent –, this consists in a tyranny and it should be abolished. Subsequently, the territorial integrity of Serbia consists in a value as long as it encompasses Serbs; any effort to include another, unwilling, nation within the Serb territory is barbarism as it takes us back to the primitive hordes of the Neolithic. The sooner this becomes clear to nationalist – chauvinist Serbs the better. No national rule can be maintained over other nations anymore. In this regard, the fundamental concepts of Humanism and Enlightenment have prevailed in the case of Kosova’s formal independence, which is a Great Moral Victory for the undeservedly persecuted Kosovars, as well as for many oppressed and tyrannized nations allover the world. Kosova’s formal independence heralds a great perspective for Trans-Dniestr, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, as well as Sanjak and Voivodina in the gradually fading tyranny of Serbia. Furthermore, Kosovo announces a promising future for other oppressed peoples in Balkans, notably the Turks and the Macedonians of Bulgaria, and the Hungarians of Transylvania. As a matter of fact, Kosova opens the way for Catalonia, Corsica, the Bask country, Galicia, Occitania, Brittany, and Scotland. By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis Abouth the author: http://www.buzzle.com/authors.asp?author=973 Serbian News Network - SNN [email protected] http://www.antic.org/
