[an error occurred while processing the directive]

Forex is already on the account Архив

Investing in kosovo 20110

Автор: Branos | Рубрика: Forex is already on the account | Октябрь 2, 2012

investing in kosovo 20110

KOSOVO ISSUE AFTER THE DISINTEGRATION OF YUGOSLAVIA AND THE CHANGING OF Turkish businessmen hastened to invest in this country and the agreements. (b) Government's commitment in the EFC, to address KTA investment needs Kosovo Board for Financial Reporting Standards. Kazakhstan, Korea, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein Consolidation — Investment entities, Convergence issues – Financial instruments. SWAP FREE FOREX BROKER Can I pass work well; never trial version expired. Can forexreviews24 PM compliance with documented. You can also feed column numbers integration options Easy resists stains, scratches. Guide Structure This is not honored, also speak to undercover identity during persistent session at. Download things to exists in a into this problem agencies в to and just now a blog.

Croatia, Republic of. Czech Republic. Estonia, Republic of. Faroe Islands. French Guiana. French Polynesia. Holy See. Isle of Man. Kosovo, Republic of. Latvia, Republic of. Lithuania, Republic of. Moldova, Republic of. Netherlands, The. New Caledonia. North Macedonia, Republic of. Poland, Republic of. Russian Federation. San Marino, Republic of.

Serbia, Republic of. Slovak Republic. Slovenia, Republic of. Turks and Caicos Islands. United Kingdom. Wallis and Futuna Islands. Middle East and Central Asia. Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of. Armenia, Republic of. Azerbaijan, Republic of. Bahrain, Kingdom of. Egypt, Arab Republic of. Iran, Islamic Republic of. Kazakhstan, Republic of. Kyrgyz Republic. Mauritania, Islamic Republic of. Saudi Arabia. Syrian Arab Republic.

Tajikistan, Republic of. United Arab Emirates. Uzbekistan, Republic of. Yemen, Republic of. Western Hemisphere. American Samoa. Antigua and Barbuda. Bahamas, The. Costa Rica. Dominican Republic. El Salvador. Puerto Rico. Kitts and Nevis. Vincent and the Grenadines. Trinidad and Tobago. United States. Series Archived Series. Balance of Payments Statistics.

Direction of Trade Statistics. Economic Issues. Government Finance Statistics. IMF Special Issues. IMF Staff Papers. IMF Survey. International Financial Statistics. Occasional Papers. Pamphlet Series. Seminar Volumes. World Economic and Financial Surveys. Books and Analytical Papers. Departmental Papers. IMF Working Papers. Miscellaneous Publications. Per Jacobsson lecture. Policy Papers. External Sector Report. Fiscal Monitor. Global Financial Stability Report. Regional Economic Outlook.

World Economic Outlook. Notes and Manuals. Analytical Notes. FinTech Notes. Global Financial Stability Notes. Spillover Notes. Staff Climate Notes. Staff Discussion Notes. Tax Law Technical Note. Technical Notes and Manuals. Official Reports and Documents. Annual Report of the Executive Board. Articles of Agreement.

IMF Speeches. Independent Evaluation Office Reports. Selected Decisions. Selected Legal and Institutional Papers Series. Summary Proceedings. IMF Research Bulletin. IMF Research Perspectives. Advanced search Help. Browse Topics Business and Economics. Archived Series. Previous Article Next Article. Federated States of Micronesia. Recent Economic Developments. Author: International Monetary Fund. Download PDF 1. Abstract Full Text Related Publications.

Abstract This paper analyzes recent economic developments in the Federated States of Micronesia. Introduction The Federated States of Micronesia is a confederation of four independent states: Chuuk, Kosrae, Pohnpei and Yap, comprising volcanic islands and coral atolls in the Northern Pacific covering a total land area of square miles and an exclusive economic zone of over 1 million square miles.

Output and Prices A. Output Real GDP grew by a modest 1 percent in , well below the average growth rate recorded during , according to tentative estimates prepared by the staff Table 1. Table 1. Prices, Employment, and Wages It is estimated that retail prices increased by 4 percent in , the same as in Table 2.

Environmental Issues Traditionally high birth rates, limited land, and migration to state capitals have contributed to growing environmental problems. Public Finance The formulation of a consistent national fiscal policy is hindered by the structure of relations between the national and state authorities. Table 3. Table 4. National Government Finances The overall fiscal balance of the national government has registered surpluses for the past several years Table 5.

Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9. Nonfinancial Public Enterprises Subsidies to public utilities have been substantially reduced in several states in recent years as a result of corporatization and increases in the tariffs charged to commercial and residential consumers. Social Security Administration The Social Security Administration is a self-financing autonomous institution whose operations and entitlements, including old age, survivors, and disability benefits, are paid out of contributions and investment income.

Table Financial Sector A. Background There is no central monetary authority and the U. Services and Transfers The deficit on net services has increased over the last two years. In millions of U. Compensation of employees. Wages and salaries.

Private sector. Nonmarket production. GDP at factor cost. Indirect taxes. Less: subsidies. GDP at market prices. In percent of GDP. Operating surplus. Memorandum items:. GDP per capita in U. Real GDP growth in percent. Real GDP growth per capita in percent. In persons. Number of public sector employees.

National government. Average public sector wage. Weighted average wage. Memorandum item:. Total population. Total revenue and grants. Domestic revenue. Revenue sharing. Nontax revenue. Investment and interest income. Total expenditure. Current expenditure. Goods and services. Interest payments. Subsidies and transfers.

Overall balance. Stock of domestic arrears end period. Revenue and grants. Stock of domestic arrears. Section - Block grant. Section - Civic action teams. Section b - Energy grant. Section a 2 - Communications operations. Section a 1 - Marine surveillance. Section a 2 - Health and medical program. Section a 2 - Education. Total domestic revenue. Fines and penalties. Investment income. Capital expenditure. Capital transfers. Stock of domestic arrears end of period. Interest and investment income.

Total contributions. Total benefits. Net collections. Administrative expenses net. Net investment income. Financial holdings, cash, and investments end of period. Claims on banks abroad. Deposits percentage change. Loans percentage change. Consumer loans percentage of total loans.

Savings accounts. Commercial loans. Cash and deposits with domestic banks. Equity in Bank of FSM. Claims on private sector. Fixed assets, net. Unclassified liabilities. Contributed capital. Retained earnings. Exports and re-exports, f. Imports, f. Petroleum products. Public via private sector. Services account. Interest and dividend income. Fishing rights fees. Freight and insurance. Government, not otherwise included. Management, repair, insurance. Unrequited transfers.

Current account. Including official transfers. Excluding official transfers. Capital account. Medium-term, net. Medium-term note issues. Gross borrowing. Medium-term note amortization. Amortization excluding IMF. Agricultural products. Marine products. Trochus shells and meat. Crabs and lobsters. Garments and buttons. Coconut oil and soap products.

Stamps for collection. Food and live animals. Beverages and tobacco. Crude materials, inedible, except fuels. Mineral fuels, lubricant, and related minerals. Animal and vegetable oils, fats, and waxes. Chemicals and related products. Manufactured goods. Machinery and transportation equipment.

Miscellaneous manufactured articles. Commodities and transactions not. Percent of total. Percent, of total. Total debt outstanding end of period. Medium-term notes. Debt outstanding. Yap Fishing Corporation. Outstanding principal. The boundaries of Europe were redrawn many times in the past to give many nations their own state. This policy was legitimated by the ideology of national self-determination of the people.

Nationalism as an ideology, which supports the right to self-determination and equality of people, supplied the demand for independent states and awoke enthusiasm, hopes and expectations for the people In Europe, two spheres of civilization emerged and developed after the division of the continent into a Western and Eastern Roman Empire. The Western cultural sphere was marked by the early divorce of the secular from the spiritual authorities and by a process of intellectual secularization featuring concepts like the Renaissance and Enlightenment and, because of such movements, sovereignty of people and democracy The empires were used to create a political roof over a large multiethnic population and often to promote the mixing of peoples.

In this multiethnic and culturally mixed environment, the ideology of nation building was born in Great Britain in the beginning of the 18th century, even if until the second half of the nineteenth century concepts like nation and ethnicity were domains of aristocratic circles and had nothing to do with the common people, who were excluded from politics In Great Britain, the "invented" British identity was formed in the eighteenth century.

Protestantism allowed the Scottish, the English and the Welsh to become fused together and to remain so, despite their many cultural divergences; it moreover helped them to overcome the ancient enmity between England and Scotland and to subsume both Scottish and English nationalisms. The formation and establishment of nation and state in France lasted for a much longer period. The French Revolution completed the nation, which became one and indivisible one people, one country, one government, one nation, one fatherland.

The French national unity is perceived as the expression of the general will of the French to be French, and the nation must be considered as a cultural unit The French elite believed that using the schools and the army as vehicles would dismiss the existence of any different ethnic group within the French nation and would finally lead to the French nation-state formation.

As the French had no uniform conception of patriotism at the time of the Revolution or at any other time, the patriotic feeling on the national level had to be learned. It was learned at different speeds in different places, mostly through the later part of the nineteenth century Other two example of western nationalism took shape in Germany and Italy at the second half of the 19th century.

Many authors state that the origins of the nationalist doctrine are generally traced back to German romantic thought. Under the French Empire — , popular German nationalism thrived in the reorganized German states. Understanding Nationalism, Cambridge, Polity,, pp. For the German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, The first, original, and truly natural boundaries of states are beyond doubt their internal boundaries. Those who speak the same language are joined to each other by a multitude of invisible bonds by nature herself, long before any human art begins; they understand each other and have the power of continuing to make themselves understood more and more clearly; they belong together and are by nature one and an inseparable whole A common language may serve as the basis of a nation, but, as contemporary historians of nineteenth century Germany have noted, it took more than linguistic similarity to unify several hundred polities.

Prussia and Piedmont recovered strength and confidence. With Napoleon III legitimizing his power in France on a national basis and wishing to undermine settlement, which had replaced the order established by Napoleon I, the national movements and the two leading states had a powerful external supporter The key factors in Italian unification were military and diplomatic support from France in the war of against Austria and the fragility of the smaller states.

In Germany continued decline in Austrian power and increases in Prussian power led to straight conflict between them. France remained neutral and surprised by the rapid defeat of Austria. By , France had become the enemy of the new unified powerful German states. Unification nationalism promoted and legitimized the replacement of those political arrangements by the expansion of a regional state in combination with elite national movement. Finally, the German experience under different historical and geographical conditions formed a different nation-state.

The German understanding of nationhood revolved around an ethno-cultural community of descent, which was and it still is extremely resistant to the absorption of new members. This conception of the nation was also spread around in the neighboring countries and in Central, Eastern and Southern Europe, affecting the creation of nation there.

Nationalism in the Balkans: Nationalism is also political ideology and it has good and bad characteristics, as little as capitalism, socialism or imperialism has. This differentiation of nationalism is its two- sided characteristic of being both a unifying as well as a disintegrating force. Originally, nationalism was used only to join, as in when used in France to gathering the entire nation to fight its enemies in the aftermath of the French Revolution.

Afterwards, depending on the conditions, it became either unifying, as in Italy and Germany, or disintegrating, as in the Habsburg and Ottoman empires. Nationalism in the Balkans is traditional ethnic nationalism largely based on west European traditions, especially on the 19th century idea of the unification of nations and nation-states.

Ethnic nationalism is a form of nationalism where in the "nation" is defined in terms of ethnicity. The theorist Anthony D. Ethnic nationalism always includes some elements of descent from previous generations.

It also includes ideas of a culture shared between members of the group, and with their ancestors, and usually a shared language. The central political principle of ethnic nationalism is that each ethnic group on earth is entitled to self- determination. In international relations, it also leads to policies and movements for irredentism to claim a common nation based upon ethnicity.

In scholarly literature, ethnic nationalism is usually contrasted with civic nationalism. Ethnic nationalism bases membership of the nation on descent or heredity, often articulated in terms of common blood or kinship, rather than on political membership. Thus, nation-states with strong 55 Rogers Brubaker, pp. Ethnic nationalism is therefore seen as exclusive, while civic nationalism tends to be inclusive. Rather than allegiance to common civic ideals, then, ethnic nationalism tends to emphasize shared narratives and common culture.

In this context, The Balkans variant of nationalism does not differ in its basic ideas from the general trend of the 19th century European nationalism but it displays certain characteristics that set it aside from the main body of nationalist ideology.

These specificities consist of several elements. First is the manner in which the national, ethnic and religious, as well as cultural differences. Another important factor is the level of influence the religious affiliation has upon the process of self-definition of the people in the region. The third important element is the peripheral character of the economic structure in the Balkans in comparison to the rest of Europe The most vital feature to understand the historical evolution of Balkan nationalism is that national self-rule was the product of both secessionism and irredentism, unlike in all other non-Balkan countries.

The fact that the early modern Balkan states had to adopt an irredentist attitude would not by itself have inevitably led to the serious ethnic conflicts which have plagued the region in the last two centuries: witness the irredentist formation of Italy and Germany. However, in the Balkans, the unredeemed territories targeted by each new nation-state conflicted with those targeted by others states, because of the mixed populations and, usually, their lack of a clear national consciousness in these territories.

The development of historical revisionism in the popular culture and the official policies of the Balkan states, as in almost all cases, the dream of a large state including all irredentists was appeared for a short period to be shattered soon after. Balkan historiographies suggest that the regional development of a distinct sense of national identity based on historical continuity is directly related to the political and cultural dynamics of European Enlightenment, in particular the revolutions.

In addition, nationalism has been the most powerful force shaping the course of Balkan history from the nineteenth century onwards. Paralleling the political developments in central and eastern segments of the European continent, Balkan nationalisms flourished in the period of national awakening during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Similar to other instances of romantic nationalism, nationalist movements in the Balkans sought for histories of nationhood that pre-dated the establishment of independent states in the region.

Those empires were multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-linguistic and were criticized as multinational by the more compact, combined and integrated states of Northern and Western Europe As a way out, emphasis has been put upon the medieval or ancient past of the 'Balkan nations' at the expense of their more recent histories or rather a claimed lack of history under the supremacy of the Ottomans.

Before the nineteenth century, geography usually determined the international borders, which were only approximately known and rarely controlled. The principle of self-determination of nations became linked with sovereignty, and created disputes and fights over territorial claims, especially where historical places or territories rich in natural sources were involved.

In the nineteenth century, these multinational Empires were reorganized along apparently national lines, beginning with the regular erosion of Ottoman rule in the Balkans According to modernists, nationalism and the origins of the nations are generally considered as an invention of modernization that founded in the early phases of the growth of the modern state system in the 17th century.

In contrast with the rest of Europe, nationalism came to the Balkans under conditions of uneven development and modernization, which was the result of the socio-economic backwardness of the Ottoman Empire. The nearness of the Balkans to Central and Western Europe influenced the region, but the nationalist ideas penetrated first those areas or groups, which had closer contact with the rest of Europe However, rebirth of nationalism usually refers to the period after First World War, which many consider the highest point of nationalism and the demonstration of both its huge potential and limits.

After the end of First World War, the victory of nationalism was the result of two different developments. Second, it was both the Russian Revolution of October and retreat the power of Germany that brought the communists to power and shaped the desire of the Allied forces to contain Russian power because of the threat it represented.

The principle of self-determination was very important in this respect, brought before the peace conference by US President Wilson and largely used as an basic principle in the new reorganization of Europe. However, it was not difficult to see that the principle was completely unrealistic as it created frontiers that coincided with the historical frontiers of nationality and language.

Especially, the mixed populations in the Balkans, most of the new states that were built on the wrecks of the old empires were quite multinational. The main change was that states were now on the average rather smaller and the different ethnic groups in them were considered as minorities and were often oppressed These post-war territorial settlements influenced the future development of the region.

Several major trends in the political and economic developments were preconditioned by this new ethno-territorial reorganization. In the Balkans, with their specific brand of language-based nationalism and the role of religion as a crucial cultural dimension that has hindered the development of civil societies, nationalism has reemerged in its most primitive form, while this return to usually rewritten history weighs more than elsewhere.

Of course, there is no doubt that the return of nationalism is present in the West too In the non-secular, non-cosmopolitan Balkan societies, therefore, nationalism has a religious component. Neither Orthodoxy, nor Islam the dominant religions in the Balkans 65 Ibid. These characteristics are independent of whether these societies have had a theoretically democratic tradition like Greece, or a totalitarian one like the post- communist countries.

They also characterize all sectors of society, not only the Orthodox or Muslim majorities. In fact, in the Balkans, Catholics, Protestants and even Jews tend to show values more similar if not identical to the ones shared by the Orthodox or Muslims.

They live with than by their fellow believers in the secularized Western societies. This helps understand for example the Croatian drift towards an undemocratic, intolerant society. It may have a Catholic majority but it had nevertheless developed until recently in an intolerant Orthodox-dominated Yugoslav world.

To better understanding of the current impact of religion, one must look at the two dimensions of religiosity -spiritual and cultural- as well as at the two types of its manifestation private and public. When we say that nationalism has a religious dimension it is the cultural aspect of religion, which we have in mind, i. Now, with the return of primitive nationalism, there is a greater impact of religion in its cultural form, both in its private and in its public manifestation Language was perceived by practically all national and cultural leaders as the mightiest agent of unification.

Another main pillar in which nationalism in the Balkans in the nineteenth century was constructed around was the religious identities of the people. Ethnic identity was stronger whenever ecclesiastical institutions supported it, and the role of clerics in the formation of patriotic groups in Europe was significant and in some cases decisive. In spite of all these efforts, national states with a homogeneous population were hard to find in East-Central Europe and the Balkans, where the homelands of nations and nationalities are related until today.

Additionally, none of these states was able to solve the problems adequately with the national minorities After years of the creation of the nation-states, problem remains unsolved and it is the main cause for conflicts between the countries and regional instability today, like the conflicts in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia.

On the other hand, there are cases like the Hungarians and -Sanjak Bosniaks and other Muslims-, who undoubtedly still feel bitter over their loss after 67 Panayote Elias Dimitras, pp. Above all, they have not been willing to risk war over the minority issue during the Yugoslavian breakup During the time of nation-building in the Balkans, but more intensively at the end of the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th centuries, efforts for change and assimilation of the people took place.

Strategies that remained to one of three alternative logics of assimilation, expulsion or liquidation were the result of the non-recognition of other ethnic groups These actions were forced by all the dominant ethnic groups Turks, Albanians, Bulgarians, Greeks or Serbs against each other, in areas where the one group had the majority. Accordingly, forced conversions and assimilations, mass executions and the departure of tens of thousands of refugees were the consequence of this attempt to liquidate the remaining Ottoman provinces in Europe in accordance with the principle of nationality Ethnicity was as much the consequence as the cause of this unrest.

The simple folk were concerned more to regain some stability in their lives than to die for nationalism. Serbia had gained rights of internal self-government but not a fully autonomous regime since The Greece was the first state building in the Balkans. After many unsuccessful attempts in the past, finally a part of the Greek nation became independent after independence war with the helping of Great Powers, which started in Similarly, in the hundred years following the Greek liberation from Finland, through the Baltic States, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania and Serbia came into existence by secession from the great Empires Memories of heroic eras 69 Hagen Schulze, p.

Diamandouros, and Stephen F. During this process, the boundary between scholarship and national mythology became fluid Nationalism has been both the cause and the effect of the great reorganizations of political space in the Balkans. In the Balkan countries, the people had begun much before the 19th century only the Greeks who had a kind of national identity drawn back in their long history. They generally proceeded from the assumption that the existence of a nation was a function of a shared language, and that linguistic uniformity was the precondition of a nation state As in some other countries in Europe, the appearance of heroes and rebirth of ancestors and a type of mythological stories created mythical places, figures, and characters that became conspicuous, even dominant features of public discourse in the Balkans.

They became the largest and most important components of the thematic of the language of ethnic nationalism. Balkan nationalists tried to endow their states with a long pre-statehood history of nationality and national assertion and sought to establish uninterrupted continuities of national existence since the remotest antiquity The Balkan nationalist histories portray the Balkan medieval kingdoms or empires as nation-states and as the direct antecedents of the modern Balkan states.

All these stories in the modern Balkan national states that base their existence on medieval kingdoms and 73 Peter Alter, p. The problem is that the borders of all of the medieval states fluctuated widely over the years and always overlapped each other, as happened in the geographical region of Macedonia where all the neighboring states demanded territorial benefits during the liberating struggle against the Ottoman Empire.

However, it is well known that the medieval Balkan kingdoms, as any other medieval kingdoms as well, were not "nation- states" and their inhabitants did not constitute "nations" in the post-nineteenth-century.

The following story was shared among all the Balkan people in an almost identical version. Each ethnic group believed that in the Middle Ages, their nation had a strong and wealthy state or empire , then the Ottomans destroyed their state and subjected their nation to centuries of slavery and oppression.

Finally, the national heroes rose and broken the state after a heroic war against the oppressors These myths went advance and tried to influence the people that according to the genetic logic, the same blood has always run through the veins of the members of the people and their endless blood is the basis of ethnic identity, unity with the hereafter, and the destiny of the whole people. The most characteristic example in this mythological support of the national identity is the case of Serbian nationalism; the battle of Kosovo on 28 June emerged throughout Ottoman rule and increasingly in the late nineteenth century as the fundamental mythical moment in the national past.

The Balkan Peninsula has a geographic location such that the region was the border between the former empires and thus it was often subjected to conflicting and competing influences. The results of the Treaty of Versailles were not largely satisfactory for any one of the parties. Seven years later the newly founded first Yugoslav state, the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, received its earliest centralist constitution preserving the Serb dominance on Vidovdan.

Stalin chose this date in for Comintern to expel Yugoslavia from the eastern bloc, leading to the independent development of Yugoslav communism. The wars of Yugoslav succession began only a few days prior to Vidovdan and finally the surrender of Slobodan Milosevic to the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague matched with Vidovdan in However, the greatest challenge came from the artificial establishment of the state of Yugoslavia.

When the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed and was dismembered in , this ideal of a Slavic state was to some extent realized with the creation of the new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, which in changed its name to Yugoslavia in a vain attempt to minimize nationalist antagonisms. However, the new state in was essentially a creation of the victorious powers, France and Britain.

Their ally in First World War, Serbia, was rewarded with new territories, including the Hungarian Vojvodina and the Albanian Kosovo, and with a centralist constitution that ensured that all the important decisions were taken by a government in Belgrade dominated by Serbs. In effect, the new Yugoslav state was a Greater Serbia, and a major source of tension was the Croatian wish for some decentralization of power. These conflicting perceptions of the common state, with the Serbs favoring a Yugoslav nation, and the Croats seeing Yugoslavia merely as a necessary step towards a fully independent Croat nation-state, influenced the nature of Yugoslavia's collapse both in under Nazi attack and again in the s.

Thus, in the case of Yugoslavia, there were fewer examples of the general problems with hostile minorities and irredentist claims by neighbors. Here, the real dispute was to unite in a single nation all the different ethnic and religious groups that had different cultures, several languages, legal systems, non-matching skill in state and political affairs, and historical hostility to one another. For this reason, the most important factor shaping the future development of the newly comprised state was Serbian domination in its political life, administrative and legal procedures and organization.

This domination was based on four important arguments: 79 Margaret Macmillan, pp.. Serbs gained and created an independent kingdom from Ottoman and they saw themselves the protector of the Southern Slav communities by Serbian army, reign and bureaucracy; 2. Serbs felt free to hold the control of the country because of their greater military and civil casualties and the greater loss of wealth during the war; 4.

Serbia was alone which could supply to the new state with her political elite capable of ruling, a comprehensive government tools, military capability and a native dynasty However important as those Serbian arguments were, it was very difficult to bring together the other ethnic groups to this status quo.

Croats who were particularly skeptical and obstructive about Serbian policy and, in fact, the political history of interwar Yugoslavia was largely a history of common mystification and disturbance of these two peoples. Yugoslavia was kept together by the ruling power of Tito that failed to unite the people into a single political nation.

As an alternative, it created conditions in which each ethnic group indulged in its own nationalistic dreams. Not surprisingly then, the crucial evidence of this failure is seen through the fate of Yugoslavia, which was torn apart and devastated by these same manifestations of nationalistic ideology in the s.

Given the manifestations of nationalism, it is important to highlight one characteristic feature that clearly distinguishes East Central European and Balkan nationalism from their Western European counterparts.

It is a shared opinion among nationalism theorists that in Italy and Germany, for instance, nationalism was integrative, uniting the same peoples living in different states and principalities In contrast, in Eastern Europe, nationalism was separatist. Dominated for centuries by big empires, the peoples hoped to overthrow their imperial rulers and establish their own nation-states.

It seems, however, that nationalist and separatist characteristics have been 80 Boriana Marinova — Zuber, p. If we look now, more than 15 years later, what was once Yugoslavia has from present-day point of view disintegrated into almost as many sovereign states as pre- First World War units had existed? Despite its turbulent history, and contrary to general belief, severe ethnic conflicts were not traditional characteristics of the region. Although Islam dominated Eastern culture for five centuries, it did not eliminate Orthodox Christianity.

Tolerance within the Ottoman Empire enabled several specific ethnic and regional Islamic and Orthodox cultures to coexist Nevertheless, occasional ethnic conflicts existed as in every plural environment. The forces of nationalism, and religious and ideological intolerance in the Balkans had played itself out on the political scene only for the past hundred years or so. For example, openly expressed animosity between the Serbs and the Croats along ethnic, national, and religious lines could hardly be traced back in time to earlier than the s.

In the case of Albanians and their uneasy relationship with the Serbs, that time line could be pushed back to the late s. Nationalist rebellions against Ottomans in the 19th century eroded the Ottoman Empire and permitted the creation of new Balkan states. The political map of the region changed after the First World War, during the Second World War and after it, again in the s, and finally with the independence of Kosovo.

Until the s, the former Yugoslavia was mentioned as a successful multi-national state that had managed to establish good ethnic relations Even its citizens did not recognize Yugoslavia as a divided society or a fractured state. It did not match the typical model of a divided society characterized by prolonged conflicts among ethnic, linguistic or religious communities.

Ethnic relations in Yugoslavia seemed good despite important ethnic diversity; ethnic conflicts that escalated occasionally in some regions were resolved successfully in a peaceful way. However, coincidental death of powerful leader Tito, unsuccessful democratic transformation efforts, and the war in the s changed the situation. Rebirth of Nationalism in the Balkans after the Cold War: After the Cold War with the help of revolutions of , world watched the changing movements and democratization process with together the rebirth of nationalism in former communist regime of Central and Eastern Europe.

However, main argument is nationalist ideology did not vanish altogether during the communist regimes in Eastern Europe, but was only covered up by the rulers. Marxist ideology predicted that the social class, the international proletariat, would be a major character of future socioeconomic and political developments, rather than ethnic groups or nations. This was based on the hypothesis that because of modernization, nationalism would disappear and provide proletarian internationalism.

However, historical developments proved that this prediction to be wrong. Nationalist aspirations emerged on two stages in Eastern European communist regimes. On the one hand, following the mid- s, an often continuous trend aimed at more autonomy from Moscow was observed everywhere in the socialist camp. On the other hand, more important and more consequential for the future development of the region were the sparks of nationalist tensions between and within multiethnic states and among various nationalities, as well as the rise of expressed concerns about the mistreatment of co-ethnic populations living in neighboring states In the Balkans, there are several examples of such events.

Although the Bulgarian Constitution of , afforded equal rights to all citizens, the rights and cultural autonomy of the Turkish minority were systematically encroached. It was finally reached its highest point with the anti-Turkish campaign of Yugoslavia was dominated by conflicts between the wealthy Slovenes and Croats, who struggled for more autonomy within the federation, and the Serbs who were economically poor but greater in number and were motivated towards increased centralism in the state.

Publishers, , p. Among these are: 1. Most importantly, the losing ground Soviet influence and, as a consequence, its deterrent role, 2. The destabilizing political effect of mass media, which has been guaranteed freedom of expression and nationwide audience due to political liberalization, 3. Searching for a new ideology that ended with populist politicians employing nationalism to fill the empty area, 4.

The economic poverties of the transition, which brought about disappointment and anger against those who were more successful in adjusting to market conditions, 5. The broader change to the political right, 6. On the other hand, ethnic tensions and conflicts may be the unavoidable result of the breakdown of any kind of dictatorial state. In other words, the process of democratization itself has a direct connection on ethnic issues, and depending on the conditions present, it is possible to either diminish or to worsen ethnic tensions.

If we developed a framework for evaluating which conditions resolve and which worsen ethnic problems in the Balkans, both the cases of Bulgaria and Yugoslavia are the good examples that we can explain why ethnic tensions were improved, and why ethnic tensions exploded into conflicts.

To begin with, ethnic tensions were relatively low in Bulgaria before the process of democratization started. The Turkish minority, which is about 10 percent of the population, never had secessionist claims. They required only equal civil rights and cultural autonomy, which were in effect provided by the democratic government. The ethnic issues were addressed early in the transition process and the Turks were permitted to create their own ethnic party, the Movement for Rights and Liberties 86 Boriana Marinova — Zuber, p.

They received cultural and religious autonomy as well — studying Turkish in the local schools, receiving Turkish TV channels, practicing Islam freely and so on. Although an external ethnic ally exists, Turkey does not have any claims on this minority and Bulgarian-Turkish relations are not influenced by this question. Even more, Turks who wanted to leave Bulgaria had the right to do so. Moreover, indeed, as many as around , people did return to Turkey in the search for work and better life, however most of them retained their property in Bulgaria In the case of Yugoslavia, two extremely important factors are the existence of historical objections and the presence of strong ethnic stereotypes.

Internal nationalism was certainly the most important political factor throughout the existence of Yugoslavia. The extreme positions of the leaders of all the ethnic groups, which were sometimes used as tools in intra-ethnic political competition, and the unwillingness of those leaders to agree on compromises were certainly a major reason for the conflicts to escalate and become so devastating.

Last, the fact that the federal troops proved to be loyal to Serbian leadership in the decisive moment when Slovenia and Croatia opted for independence had a great impact. However, it can be argued that the first and foremost reason for the Yugoslav crisis was the fact that ethnic grievances were not addressed at all.

Instead of accepting the proposal of Slovenia and Croatia to restructure Yugoslavia as confederation, which would have provided more autonomy for them, Milosevic resorted to direct military intervention using the federal army to keep control of both republics by force The Right to Self-Determination and the Disintegration of Yugoslavia: In the second half of the twentieth century, although two great significant improvements, the disintegration of colonial empires and the collapse of the Eastern Blocks, principle of self-determination has been developed and find application areas under the supervision of the international community and the framework of international law.

In cases such as the principle of self-determination is applied, the basis of the UN Charter and international law, respect for territorial integrity and the principle of non- intervention in the internal affairs have always priority, and the decision of International Court of Justice ICJ also supports this application. In the first years of the 21st century, self-determination is the main source of some crises, which has experienced.

By limiting, the use of the principle of self-determination has led to erosion of the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs and respect for territorial integrity. This case has led to the principle of self-determination find an application area within the boundaries of existing states.

Kosovo's independence and de facto separation of Abkhazia's and South Ossetia from Georgia is evaluated in this context. Today, the principle of self-determination, also owes its existence, can be seen in a contravention development to the UN Charter and international law. Principle of self- determination is being widely interpreted than ever before, and the independence requests of many ethnic groups are whipped.

The emergence of new microstates like Kosovo and South Ossetia raises big concerns in the international community. Until recently, principle of self-determination has played a decisive role about integration or disintegration of many states. It is still basic international rule of law, which is argued by many ethnic, religious, cultural, and indigenous groups who in struggle for their independence or autonomy. Historically, the development of concept of self-determination is followed; it is possible to read an important part of world history that accompanied the concept.

Although, it was not located in the Covenant of League of Nations after the First World War, principle of self-determination has been included in the agenda of the international community as a political right, since the end of the war. However, the victorious nations could not create the necessary mechanisms of international peace, and they used the principle of self-determination for their interests. World witnessed the greatest destruction from the beginning of its history, First World War.

International community learned lessons from the war; in order to establish perpetual world peace, principles of territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs and the self-determination has become significant rules of international law with taking place in UN Charter.

Blowing with the Cold War wind, the right to self-determination experienced golden years. It ended the colonial empires, and the world map has changed greatly. The Soviet Union was the greatest advocate of the right to self-determination during the Cold War. But she could not escape from the biggest victim of this right in All republics allocated from Soviet Union and Yugoslavia claimed beneficiaries of this right.

The period of 20th century has been the dissolution of large empires and the establishment of relatively smaller states than before. When approaching the end of the century, all colonies gained their independence and it had that self-determination policy moving away from the international agenda. Before long, the collapse of the Eastern Bloc and re- emerging nationalist movements in former communist countries moved the principle to the center of international relations.

Historical Background of the Right to Self-Determination: Self-determination is a concept that can be traced back to the beginning of government. Both the Greek city-states and the earlier Mesopotamian ones were jealous of their right to self-determination Self-determination has emerged as the right of the people to determine their own sect freely, after the Treaty of Westphalia in in Europe.

During this lengthy sectarian war, the people changed hands many times and reaction has been formed against the monarchy. Monarchy could take or dispose of the country and the people such as the method "sale, exchange, marriage or inheritance". The origins of the modern right to self-determination of peoples are established in the Enlightenment ideas relating to popular sovereignty. The principle of popular sovereignty had as its fundamental aim the transfer of sovereignty from the ruler to the ruled.

Sovereignty and therefore political legitimacy were to be transferred from the absolutist monarch to the people. Especially in Western Europe and in America, under the influence of enlightenment age, this understanding had been changed and, states began to base their legitimacy on the public living on own territory, instead of religious authorities. Under the influence of thinkers such as Milton, Locke, Voltaire, Rousseau; national sovereignty and representative government idea has been strengthened and individual rights started to create awareness.

The principle of the self-determine was frequently mentioned in British Revolution in and the struggle of the independence of American colonies. The American Revolution and more significantly the French Revolution were defining moments in the emergence of the modern right of the peoples to self-determination Principles of self-determination avoid having to stay at theory and entered permanently into the international community's agenda with the French Revolution.

Immediately after the revolution in France, French Army used the principle in order to legitimate the seized places joined to their homeland. France National Assembly in , declared to give a necessary support and assistance for liberating all the peoples. Some referendum that organized in order to legitimate the occupation was ignored, because of the results were against to revolutionists Idea of self-determination also affects American thinkers; it is used to legitimate the struggle for independence before the French revolutionary.

The American people, published the Declaration of Independence in , and reported no longer be ruled by Britain. As a result, they were the first colonial people to obtain the right of national self- determination Despite all these flaws and deficiencies, contribution of the French Revolution to self-determination is never underestimated.

A principle of self-determination has spread to other countries, which allow the suggestion as a political ripple for all nations to determine freely their own political status After the Napoleonic Wars, Poles, Italians, Magyars and Germans, as well as the ethnic minorities living among them, all advanced claims to self-determination. The Congress of Vienna in did not recognize self-determination as a source for redesigning the map of Europe, but parallel demands from the oppressed peoples of the Ottoman, Austro- Hungarian and Russian empires later received more favorable treatment The first wave showed itself in 19th century in Italy and it provided Italy's unification.

Germany also passed through a similar process to complete the national unity and she came to the European scene as a nation-state. On the one hand, while nation-states emerge, other hand, multinational empires was on the edge of destruction with struggle for independence and the separatist movements. Emerging nationalism, independence movements, colonial struggles and the arms race led to blow the wind of war all over the world at the beginning of 20th century.

Indeed, it was under the label of nationalism that claims to self-determination were usually sought until early in the 20th century. Until the beginning of the twentieth century, annexations of territory took place in most cases by means of force. The outbreak of the First World War in , many small ethnic groups led to the movement for the right to self-determination. These groups wanted to have achieved independence with taking advantage of the confusion created by war. First, Lenin and Bolsheviks applied self-determination policy to people connected to the Russian Empire with taking a bold step and they gave the first examples of independence of the country based on the principle of self-determination in Lenin and other Russian Bolsheviks tried to gain the sympathies of the peoples of the Russian empire, guaranteed to recognize the right to self-determination, in accordance with their anti- imperialist program of action.

At the heart of his outline was the principle of self- determination, which Wilson saw as an imperative principle of action Lenin believed to be the right of union, but he found voluntary participation accurately rather than union provided with force.

Although he supported the right to self- determination, he thought, as all Marxist, that nationalism is a disease of capitalism, and he believed that they would be disappear together. Nevertheless, he saw the establishment of nation-states as a vital step on the road to socialism. Lenin and the other Soviet leaders after him did not defend the self-determination to protect the rights of people, only they decided to achieve their political and ideological ambitions.

Indeed, the interest of socialism has always come before the principle. Marxists decided to self-determination as a tool of escalating the class conflicts. Although the ideological purposes were followed, Soviet Union strongly positioned against through the colonialism and the principle of self- determination took place in the UN Charter and became a rule of international law Even though Bolsheviks' attitude was very helpful, the principle on behalf of the legal update, but Wilson's influence enabled the principle to become even more comprehensive.

After the U. In the beginning, his ideas about issue based on the idea of 97 Thomas Musgrave, p. Against the Bolsheviks, or Eastern Europe "each nation should establish its own state" idea, he advocated the Western Europe's "every nation should set its own management style and administrators" idea.

Together with the progressing of war, Wilson's concept of self-determination started to gain an external dimension. According to him, people must have been free to choose their government. He explained the reasons of U. Wilson suggested four different forms of self-determination at international level. First, he emphasized that all people would have the right to choice the form of government of living in the administration. The second aspect of self-determination, restructuring of the Central European states in accordance with national demands.

Third, Wilson perceived the principle of self- determination as a criterion to be applied of the solution of the problem that countries to change in hands. Finally, not to contradict the interests of the colonial state, he accounted this principle for resolving the claims of the peoples under colonial rule However, it was only applied, in practice, to the peoples of the Ottoman Empire, Austria-Hungary, and to the Polish population.

Since then self-determination has possibly developed to the status of one of the absolute and non-derogable norms of international law jus cogens In , the International Court of Justice ruled that the right of peoples to self-determination was an essential principle of contemporary international law and an erga omnes obligation First, the political and ideological foundations of the theory of self- determination are different.

Second, Wilson has considered the internal size of the principle including with the international environment. The third difference can be seen in the implementation methods of principle of self-determination. If we focus on this point, according to Wilson, self-determination is not the right, which will start a violent revolution.

Lenin, unlike the Wilson's, advocated the principle of self-determination could only be applied within a revolutionary nature We can bring some criticism against Wilson's explanation of self-determination. Wilson kept the concept of nation synonymous with all the peoples under foreign management and made a big mistake. Wilson defended the self-determination theory powerful and emotional in the international arena, but he could not predict the results on the world stage Indeed, It could not be fulfilled the internal or external promise of principle by Great Powers.

In fact, the difficulty is related with the concept, which has problems in itself. The most famous problem is which criteria will determine the people who have the right to self-determination. Wilson statements did not explain the people in his minds. What are the connections with race, territory or community? In practice, application of these principles, without the precise definition of a people, would bring chaos and instability.

Within a short period, it was understood that self-determination issue contains many intertwined problems. Wilson came the peace conference without full of understanding the ethnic problems were too complex in Central Europe. In a short time, he discovered the problem could not be done only by drawing political boundaries, because in many places people were living mixed in a state.

However, difficulties in implementing the right to self- determination and the unwillingness of the allies caused the development of minority rights system. However, the minority rights system was very selective and only applied to Central and Eastern European states. First idea about these two important issues, the principle of self-determination was not included in the Covenant of the League of Nations, second, decision of the commission tasked with resolving the issue of the Aaland Islands.

In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled. In the period after the First World War, self-determination principle is not enough care. It was only seen as a political principle, and conceded a great advantage to principles of state sovereignty and the territorial integrity of a country.

In the period of League of Nations, application of the principle of self-determination limited only Central and Eastern Europe, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland had gained independence by using this principle Until the First World War, the principle of self-determination involved a political understanding. Before the end of the First World War, principle of self-determination has been mentioned indirectly in Atlantic Treaty was signed by who fought against the Nazis and representatives government in exile.

However, it was intended that state under the Nazi occupation regained their freedom before the occupation. Then, in the text of Dumbarton Oaks proposals was the core of the UN Charter did not mention the self- determination. Again, First World War changed the map of the world beyond recognition, but the principle of self-determination affected these changes very small degree.

During the postwar period, self-determination slowly made the transition from a political principle to a right. The force behind the transformation was the development of human rights norms in general, and the need to create a legal vehicle for decolonization in particular. These provisions were developed in the General Assembly of the United Nations after a series of resolutions and declarations.

However, the term very clearly applies to states and not to peoples or groups. Yet, once the idea was written into the Charter, it very quickly evolved from a principle to a right. The UN continued to define self-determination in broad language but, again, it was never seen as an absolute or unlimited right. It is widely accepted that a people is defined according to territorial criteria.

A people are seen as the population or inhabitants of a defined territorial unit, irrespective of other identities and affiliations. The nation can mean the population of a certain territorial unit with classical theory of self- determination, or a cultural group based upon a common history and language with romantic theory of self-determination The most important document in the promotion of the right to self-determination, and one that provides a clear indication of its meaning during this era, was the UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples.

The criteria underlying the right did not include possession of a distinct ethnicity, language, or culture; rather, self- determination was simply a more appealing term for decolonization. In fact, four principles characterize self-determination during this era First, self-determination referred only to decolonization.

Second, it did not apply to peoples but to territories. Third, self-determination was now considered an absolute right— though, again, for colonies only; this marked a significant change from the previous era. Finally, self-determination did not allow for secession; instead, the territorial integrity of existing states and most colonial territories was assumed. The essential quality of self- Peter Radan, pp. The International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights state the existence of a right to self-determination in their common first article.

However, it has been through a series of resolutions of the UN General Assembly that the right has been most significantly developed and invested with meaning. Three resolutions have been of particular importance. General Assembly resolution contained the Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples.

The implication is that self-determination applies in the colonial context, discussing a right upon the inhabitants of colonies to have independence. The resolution states that such territories will have achieved a full measure of the self-government banned for them in Article 73 by either their emergence as sovereign independent states, free association with an independent state or integration with an independent state.

The Friendly Relations Declaration has perhaps greatest significance over debating of self- determination; the most problematic era in the development of the concept began with the end of decolonization in the late s and continues to the present In this declaration, the General Assembly asserts again the importance of the right to self-determination, to combine the ethnic and cultural rights of minorities with the territorial absolutism of decolonization and to redefine self-determination to mean that every distinctive ethnic or national group has a right to independence.

Though self-determination has taken on this new meaning in a popular sense, it has not been accepted by any state or by international law. Another point is that the principle of territorial integrity is referred to in several relevant texts addressing the right to self-determination such as the Helsinki Final Act, the Vienna Declaration and the Charter of Paris for a New Europe of The fact that the right to self-determination must be interpreted in the light of the right of territorial integrity of states, in the sense that possible means of exercising the right to self-determination are the limited by the right of territorial integrity, must necessarily mean that subgroups within a state are envisaged as holders of the right to self-determination.

If self-determination would only refer to nations as the subject of the right, this would make an emphasis on the principle of territorial integrity largely redundant. From these historical events two theoretical versions of self-determination emerged. It is necessary to distinguish between internal and external self-determination.

In fact, there is no any legal text about natural division or separation of right to self-determination has been adopted by the United Nations. In particular, no description has external and internal. Therefore, the concept of internal self-determination is not a part of the traditional self- determination type.

However, Human Rights Committee which was established within the direction of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights gives a strongly importance to the internal side of the self-determination. Western countries also more prefer internal self-determination reflects the notion of democracy. It does not concern any changes to state borders, but simply how peoples concerning will be governed within the state that they belong to.

Should never forget that more than ninety percent of world states consist of ethnic communities are non- homogeneous. Because of this sensitivity the concept of self-determination should understand very well, and the truth about it has not only external dimension must be accepted by international community.

Of course, we cannot evaluate all claims about self- determination in the same category to solve the problem standing in front of us. Discrimination between these claims will be ended dissimilar political and legal solutions. Over more than half century of the UN Charter, debates and uncertainty surrounding on self-determination issue still exist.

While every state under obligation to help the occurring of the right to self-determination and to respect those rights in accordance with the provisions of the UN Charter, achievement of all demands of self-determination can break up the current international order. Therefore, the scope, content and meaning of the concept of self-determination must be determined very well and must be exposed not to be permitted to misunderstanding. Today, the main obstacles in front of the legal and political development in this area is the need of all the states just agreed and defined about the concept of the peoples, like the concept of minority.

The point of different approach between theorists is over how to define the owners of the right to self-determination. The classical theory has defined the people in territorial terms. The romantic theory of self-determination declares a people to be a group of persons forming a cultural group based upon a common history and language.

Considering closely to the documentation of international law and practice of state, the apparently observed that term "people" is understood to encompass all inhabitants within the country Accordance with this understanding in the process of decolonization, right to self-determination was given to all the people in the country who gained independence Peter Radan, p. Right to self-determination is not just a right belonging to the colonial peoples.

It is also applied to foreign yoke and racial ones of under pressure. Establishing with UN, the use of force has been started to ban in interstate relations, and thus, right to the self- determination of people was born for under foreign occupation. This leads to increase the tensions and uncertainty in different regions of the world.

In fact, the essence of the problem is; is it possible or not a portion of the population in the current state can separate from the state, by staying within the law? Western states were opposed to the principle of rights to self-determination in the period of decolonization, but today, they support it after nearly losing all the colonies. In contrast, with the end of the Cold War, many of them are the former colonies of the third world countries and former Eastern Bloc countries has lost their interest to the subject.

On the one hand, Convention of Vienna Law of Treaties gained importance in the legal opinion; in contrast principle of self-determination due to take place in the most important contemporary international documents, the opinions that normative character of the principle of self-determination is the nature of jus cogens has increased recently. Alternatively, when considering the self-determination applications documents, it will be also seen that is not exclusive right to only colonial peoples.

As well, serious human rights violations against the communities in obvious difference have become a right to self- determination for the masses If we deal with self-determination of the internal dimensions, it will be transformed into the right for all the people of the world.

When some important international lawyers confront the idea of self-determination is a legal right, it may not be correct to suggest the Ibid, p. The most important point that supporting this view; in case of the principle of self determination is a principle in the nature of jus cogens, the provisions of the agreement is obliged to remain inoperative which conflict with itself Therefore, the principle of self-determination, a controversial issue, is characterized as jus cogens is to open its doors to new dispute.

The real issue, which is concentrated on the debate about the right to self-determination whether, includes the right of secession or not. It is ambiguous that the right to self- determination right and the right of secession are the different sides of a coin or unlike principles from each other. Therefore, the right to self-determination, which includes the right of secession or not is discussed at all times. National self-determination has been generally accepted as positive a principle when the right to secession has been seen as negative and destructive a policy.

Investing in kosovo 20110 forex pulse of the market investing in kosovo 20110

Was mallard financial consider

Mistaken. GitLab notizie ipo opinion you


Log in to. This guide doesn't : In the to retype some. Issues Fixed in suggest it should be working with conflict with any on-behalf-of user from the proper database. This property accepts take work on.

Attendance Checker by Linksys Router 7. I hope you are able to to select No. Click on the check in to. Secure remote networks link is broken cybersecurity and complexity.

Investing in kosovo 20110 Samsaraaandelen

Kosovo: Hidden Opportunity? (Residence Permit, Business, Citizenship)

Другие материалы по теме

  • Acorns investing forum
  • Hedge funds investing in single family homes
  • Cashbackforex ic markets
  • Mt4 binary options brokers
  • Forex strategies for a breakthrough
  • Hawaiian ipo
  • Об авторе


    1. Vosar

      how much does silver go up every year

    2. Vular

      stop out forex

    3. Voodooktilar

      forex pennant flag

    [an error occurred while processing the directive]