Talk:International recognition of Kosovo/Archive 40

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 35

←

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

I think Indonesia's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence should be merged into this article as it is not inherently notable as its own subject; worth a paragraph in International recognition of Kosovo or two at most. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd agree with that. Indonesia's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence seems to be rather short of notability in its own right. It would be better to discuss it here. bobrayner (talk) 01:48, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

• Disagree - Indonesia's reaction was moved to a new article for technical reasons, i.e. reducing the size (and useability) of this article per WP:TOOLONG. Indonesia was one of the longest sections in this article, taking up (on my monitor at least) an entire screen. It is best kept separate. Of course, if its content were to be sensibly reduced (without removing anything important) then I would not necessarily argue with its reincorporation here. Bazonka (talk) 06:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  • That's a good point; this topic in general, and the Indonesia text in particular, is getting a bit bulky. bobrayner (talk) 09:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
• Disagree - Indonesia is the fourth most populous country, the most populous Muslim country, and one of the biggest economies of the world. If its relations with Kosovo are not notable, then very few of the breakout articles would be. Bazonka is right: if everyone is going to chime in now and say that these breakout articles are not notable, then the info included in this article will need to be reduced: sensibly, but drastically. Konchevnik81 (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
• Weak Disagree It is a very long in depth article regarding the recognition/ non-recognition of Kosovo by Indonesia aka the largest Muslim country in the world, therefore I can see why Indonesia's non-recognition is important and notable compared to other smaller countries; especially as Kosovo has been seeking recognition from the Islamic world. Then there is the article size issue. IJA (talk) 17:11, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
• Agree. If the section on Indonesia had become overlong then the solution should have been some editing to cut it down to size.Dejvid (talk) 23:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Dejvid, the "too long" template at the top of the article states "please consider splitting content into sub-articles". That's all we're doing here. Yes, some trimming may help, but that will have the detrimental effect of reducing the level of information available - Wikipedia is all about information dissemination. Also consider WP:NOTPAPER - it's only the technical limitations of long articles that force us to split. Personally, I think that this proposal to merge the articles back together is just ridiculous and hasn't really considered the bigger picture. Bazonka (talk) 06:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Unless anyone vehemently disagrees, I'm going to remove the merge template. We're not going to reach consensus on this, and it's leaning towards the don't merge camp anyway. Bazonka (talk) 07:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Gazeta Express published an article who is written about the recognition of Kosovan passport by the People's Republic of China, PRC recognise KS passport in example of Greece and Slovakia. PRC office in Pristina helped the process. Interesting news about the relations between Pristina and Beijing, but more interesting is the news from Slovakia. Express Link The Economist journalist asked the new Foreign Minister of Slovakia Miroslav Lajčák about Kosovo recognition. Lajcák said: “our position is given but it is not set in stone. It will certainly be adjusted when the situation on the ground is different.”The Economist link During the Global Security Forum in Bratislava, Slovakia invited Kosovo's Deputy Foreign Minister Petrit Selimi. In the context of “Globsec” conference Selimi also had a meeting with the Political Director of the Slovak Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Peter Michalko. Mr. Michalko confirmed that Slovakia supports Kosovo’s European perspective and encouraged Kosovar authorities to continue the cooperation with the EU as the fastest way of normalizing relations in the Balkans. MFA of Kosovo Irvi Hyka (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Recognoize of passport is to enable land locked Kosovo citizens to be free to travel. It is not automatic recognition of country, even it could be seen as to.

Hmmm ... Young nationalisms are hard to nornalize. But common interest of Serbia and Kosovo could be EU integration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rastavox (talk • contribs) 16:56, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I need to point out that the caption is wrong where it states Albania has "de jure recognised since 1991". The situation is that Republic of Kosova was declared during this time and its proponents initiated certain institutions, these however were dismantled by the would-be authorities upon the creation of UNMIK whereby Kosovan local authorities fully observed U.N. Res 1244 at all times between its inception in 1999 until February 2008 when they declared independence. The self-governance within Kosovo 1999-2008 with no interference or presence from Belgrade's authorities neither amounted to the continuation of Republic of Kosova neither did it represent an entity outside of Serbia/Yugoslavia's sovereignty; had this been so, the declaration of independence in 2008 would have been pointless since ethnic Albanians would have recognised continuation of a state formed 1990/91. To that end, Republic of Kosova ceased diplomatic missions from 1999 and Albania was in no position to continue recognition of a defunct state. So recognition firstly of Kosova until 1999 and Kosovo from 2008 must be treated as two subjects otherwise it is misleading. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

It is the Albanians themselves who linked the two, as you can see in the links provided. "Based on Declaration of Assembly of Albania, on October 21, 1991, in compliance with decision of Assembly of Kosovo, on February 17, 2008 for Declaration of Independence, based on the rights of people for self-determination, based on principle of good-neighbourhood relations, I will call tomorrow a Council of Ministers meeting to decide the establishment of diplomatic relations between Republic of Albania and Republic of Kosovo at Ambassador level." --Khajidha (talk) 06:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure you follow my point. Yes I know Albania recognised Kosova in the 1990s and wasted no time in recognising Republic of Kosovo in 2008. The page focuses on the post-2008 entity and it does not make sense to present Albania as having recognised an entity which establsihed itself in 2008 from as far back as 1991. It needs an amendment such as "also recognised previously self-declared republic 1991-1999" but you know that within the first eight years of UNMIK/1244 governance, there was no sovereign element for Albania to recognise and therefore that period if no other presents a vacuum. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 10:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Evlekis please stick to the sources.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 11:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

All right, you find me a source to state that Albania recognised an independent Kosovo during the period between 2001 and 2006 - who was Kosovo's ambassador to Albania at this time? What was the address of Albania's diplomatic mission in Kosovo in that time? And what was the occasion of Albania formally recognising Republic of Kosovo in 2008? You are claiming there was continued recognition going back to 1991. So where is the source? Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 12:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Not only that but stating that Albania has "de jure recognized" Kosovo since Oct. 21, 1991 seems to be at odds with the information in the Albania - Kosovo relations article, which says that Albania recognized the Kosovo independence movement in 1992 but then reaffirmed Yugoslavia's borders in 1994. Also, how credible would a recognition coming from the Albanian government be when it was still in the process of transitioning away from communism? The country didn't have its first fully democratic elections until 1992, and so I'm not even sure if pronouncements made in 1991 count as positions of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania or of the modern Republic of Albania.

Long and short, this info seems better integrated into the Albania - Kosovo relations article, if anywhere. This article should stay focused to reactions to the 17 February 2008 declaration.Konchevnik81 (talk) 21:33, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 04:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The ridiculous bit is that there wasn't a Kosovo claiming to be independent between 1999 and 2008. Albania is saying that they're recognising Kosovo in 2008 for the same reasons they recognised Kosovo in 1991. Albania did not recognise Kosovo between 1999 and 2008. It is pretty f**king ridiculous to be honest, not to mention it is just confusing our readers. "Based on Declaration of Assembly of Albania, on October 21, 1991, in compliance with decision of Assembly of Kosovo, on February 17, 2008 for Declaration of Independence, based on the rights of people for self-determination, based on principle of good-neighbourhood relations, I will call tomorrow a Council of Ministers meeting to decide the establishment of diplomatic relations between Republic of Albania and Republic of Kosovo at Ambassador level." does not equal "de jure recognition since 1991". They are just recognising Kosovo for the same reason they did in 1991. I propose we get rid of the 1991 de jure bollocks as it is false and as it is confusing to our readers/ audience. IJA (talk) 16:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Never mind the audience, it confuses me too, and I like to think I understand the subject matter. I say that we take it out as well. Bazonka (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Unless a RS can be found to support the claim that Albania de facto recognized since 1991, it should be removed. TDL (talk) 20:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I found a peer reviewed article in VANDERBILT JOURNAL OF TRANSNATIONAL LAW (which is definitely a RS) by Jure Vidmar Vol. 42:779 2009, but for some reason the link is blacklisted to the PDF. If you search "albanian recognition of kosovo 1991" on Google it should come up. (Blank link maybe because its linking through google docs?). See pages 789-790 (11-12 in the PDF). Quote: "On September 22, 1991, the underground parliament of Kosovo Albanians proclaimed the Resolution on Independence and Sovereignty of Kosovo. The decision was subsequently confirmed at an underground referendum held between September 26 and 30 of the same year. A reported 87% of the electorate voted in the referendum, and 99.87% of the votes cast were in favor of independence. Following the referendum, the underground parliament declared independence onOctober 19, 1991. Only Albania recognized Kosovo’s independence." That is backed up by this reference "JAMES CRAWFORD, THE CREATION OF STATES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 408 (2d ed. 2006)." An offline source I don't have access to. Ravendrop 20:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

@ Ravendrop What is your point? IJA (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Apologies. I missed the 'since' above. I thought the very instance of Albania's recognition of Kosovo in 1991 was questioned. I reread through the article I cited, and while it doesn't outright state that Albania continued to support Kosovo it does somewhat hint at it, but the above is far more convincing. Ravendrop 01:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Totally unacceptable. Tirana had recognised Kosovo on 21 October 1991, after the referendum (Kosovan independence referendum, 1991). This is the fact. I think other discussion are illogical. Why should we have double standard? Sudan recognized South Sudan 1 day prior to independence. (See Chronology of diplomatic recognitions and relations of South Sudan) In political diplomacy Albanian recognition of Kosovo and Sudan recognition of South Sudan prior to DOI are particular historical and political decision. Irvi Hyka 22:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

No one is disputing the fact that Albania recognized the Republic of Kosova as proclaimed in 1991. But how is this relevant to the Republic of Kosovo which declared it's independence nearly 2 decades later? They are 2 different states. We don't list states that recognized the Kingdom of Montenegro on Foreign relations of Montenegro, the recognition doesn't carry over. If they were the same state, why did they declare independence again in 2008? TDL (talk) 23:24, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Including references to the Republic of Kosova are illogical to this article. If the Albanian recognition from 1991 applies to the current Republic of Kosovo, then why would Albania recognise it a second time in 2008?Konchevnik81 (talk) 02:40, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I totally agree. As Konchevnik81 said earlier, this would be better in the Albania - Kosovo relations article. Bazonka (talk) 07:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't accept the elimination of the reference about the Albanian recognition. Is unacceptable. Republic of Kosovo is a continuity of Republic of Kosova. It is simply chronological order of the history: Autonomous Province of Kosovo i Metohija (dispute status), Republic of Kosova under Ibrahim Rugova, Kosovo War, UMNIK Kosovo, Republic of Kosovo. Albania today for example is the continuity of Albanian Kingdom, Albania under Italy (lost Independence)...People's and after also Socialist Republic of Albania. Swiss according this verbal note [1] had recognizable Albania in 1922, Albania lost its Independence in 1939, but Swiss don't re sent an other verbal note. What it is? Switzerland does not recognize Albania?! :) or Sudan for example recognized South Sudan 1 day prior the DOI. Now, with your arguments I can go in the article Chronology of diplomatic recognitions and relations of South Sudan and to pretend than Sudan never recognized South Sudan. Unacceptable. Other fact for example, in the web page of the presidency of Kosovo (Republic of Kosovo) is listed Ibrahim Rugova as former president [2]. Why? Other facts are the laws of the Parliament of Kosovo approved prior to 2008 according your arguments are nullus, all laws approved during the Republic of Kosova or Uminik Kosovo are in force also for the Republic of Kosovo. It is for this that I have say that de jure Kosovo declared the Independence not from Serbia, but from UMNIK chronological order of history. Albanian recognition happened in 1991, in 2008 only the decision to to accredit an ambassador. Irvi Hyka 12:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm happy with your latest change, moving this information into the notes section. Bazonka (talk) 13:04, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

@Irvi: With respect, it appears that you are the one taking an unacceptable position. You have contributed greatly to this article, and I commend you for that. Nevertheless, you take a very maximalist approach to what needs to be included in this article. Your counterexamples are not relevant: an invasion of Albania by Italy in 1939 was not an internationally legitimate act, and the monarch of Albania opposed it in exile. This is very different from the Republic of Kosova voluntarily dissolving its institutions in order to implement UNMIK and JIAS. I'm not even really sure what your point with South Sudan is. And no, pre-2008 laws are not nullus, much as Ottoman and British law is still partially used in Israel. Regardless, that has precious little to do with the subject of this article, which is the recognition of the February 2008 declaration of independence.

If you really want to include this reference, then you will need to make corrections to the Albania - Kosovo relations article, because what you are saying flatly contradicts what is written there: ie that Albania recognized the Republic of Kosova in 1992 and withdrew that recognition in 1994. That fact has a cited reference. What you are claiming seems to be original research. If you want to include this information, then please provide a reference where the government of Albania states it has always recognized an independent Kosovo since 1991.Konchevnik81 (talk) 14:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, I see where the info is now, and like Bazonka says I think what the note says is fine. However, the declaration in English clearly does more than just send an ambassador to Kosovo. Albania is using its 1991 recognition of the Republic of Kosova as a precedent for doing the same with the post-February 2008 Republic of Kosovo. So that much is a little misleading. But I'm not going to quibble about footnotes.Konchevnik81 (talk) 00:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The new President of Serbia (elect) Mr. Tomislav Nikolić visits Russia. The Serbian parliament looks set to consider formal recognition of the newly-independent republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In an interview with the Voice of Russia the country’s President-elect Tomislav Nikolic dismissed any comparison between the sovereign status of these two South Caucasus republics and that of Kosovo. During a meeting with Russian Presidnet Vladimir Putin, Nikolic reiterated Serbia's uncompromising stance on Kosovo even if it hampered its bid to join the EU.Voice of Russia

Georgia's reaction Georgia aims to avoid Serbian recognition of breakaway republics.[3]

This news have a great interest. If Serbia according the news of Voice of Russia will recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia comes out every argument sesns of so called "territoral integrity". Irvi Hyka (talk) 15:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

If Serbia does recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia, then I wouldn't be at all surprised if Georgia recognises Kosovo in retaliation. Bazonka (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

@Bazonka Georgia more likely in the case of recogniting the breakaway regions of Georgia suspends diplomatic relations with Serbia. Georgia has so far reacted similary to the PRC's One China Policy. However recognition of Tsinisvali and Suhhumi separists is likely to cost Serbia's EU membership perspective as the EU is for territorial integrity of Georgia. --Juhan 19:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juhan (talk • contribs)

After Nikolic swear maybe something will change. According the news from some media Putin "gift" Serbia $800 million, I believe if Belgrade will recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia their argument about a so called "territoral integrity" will not have most sense.The Moscow Times Nikolic also said in Russia that for the recognition of Kosovo by Serbia will happen only through a referendum.[4] Irvi Hyka (talk) 00:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The MFA of Kosovo has announced that Chad recognizes Kosovo. [5] The source is in Albanian, but they usually issue English version releases in a day or two. --alchaemia (talk) 19:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Problem with the map. Chad isn't stained. Irvi Hyka (talk) 16:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be "stained" now. Bazonka (talk) 18:19, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Probably just a problem on my end, but Chad is not showing up colored when the map is used on the article but is colored when I open the map image. --Khajidha (talk) 08:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a problem with caching. It'll probably sort itself out in a day or two. It works for me though. Bazonka (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Countries that do recognoize Kosovo have previously recognoized Serbia with Kosovo after Balkan Wars and First world war, again when Yugoslavia was internationally left to go (The Arbitration Commission of the Conference on Yugoslavia (commonly known as Badinter Arbitration Committee)and again when Serbia and Montenegro dissolved.

This means legally that they should undo the previous recognition and brake relations with Serbia.

How can countries do both? In return, Serbia should start recognoizing Corsica, Quebec, Northern Ireland, Texas etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rastavox (talk • contribs) 16:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

These countries still recognise Serbia as a sovereign nation, just with a smaller territory. Using one of your hypothetical examples, if a country were to recognise Quebec as a sovereign nation, then that wouldn't mean that it stopped recognising Canada's sovereignty over Ontario etc. Bazonka (talk) 16:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Well it does violate its souverinity since (in this case Serbia) claims souverenity over its territory. Once the Serbia recognoizes Kosovo, rest of the countries that recognoize Serbia should follow.

Because if it is as you say, then smaller fragmentation is allowed. E.g. Serbia should recognoize Kosovo and at the same Serbs should declare of Republic of Nothern Kosovo under same claims (human rights, rights to self determination etc. and Serbia coild recognoize it, too ...

Its not that common in international practice, but countries that have recognoized you under international borders should not recgnoize parts of that country as independent state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rastavox (talk • contribs) 17:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

States can do as they please. It's not illegal to recognize a state created by secession. The ICJ ruled that secession itself was not illegal and thus Kosovo had not broken international law by its act of secession. The United States recognized Kosovo immediately. That does not mean the US ceased to recognize Serbia or that any rupture in relations occured. It means that the US recognized Kosovo as a state and no longer considered it to be a part of Serbia. Recognition of secessionist entities is not uncommon. It's up to the international community as to whether to accept the claimed state or not and it is equally up to the state that was seceeded from to decide how to react to recognitions. Georgia has opted to sever diplomatic relations with any state that recognizes Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Serbia's initial response was to recall ambassadors. Claiming it violates sovereignty is ultimately a matter of opinion, and it's something you could argue ad infinitum. The Serbs in northern Kosovo could declare their own state and Serbia could recognize it and make it a new province or add it to an existing one. I doubt that many other states would accept this. States must take their own interests into account in evaluating such actions - it has little to do with "right" and "wrong." - Canadian Bobby (talk) 00:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

But Serbia could not recognise a North Kosovo state without acknowledging that Kosovo is not sovereign Serbian territory, which it is unlikely to do. As far as Belgrade is concerned, North Kosovo is Serbia. Bazonka (talk) 08:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

What I meant is that north Kosovo could declare it's no longer part of Kosovo and Serbia could accept it as a new administrative unit or assign it to one that already exists within Serbia. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 14:08, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with what both Bazonka and Canadian Bobby have to say. Just because a state recognises State X doesn't mean that it no longer recognise state Y, which State X declared independence fro,. However I must also state that Wikipedia is not the place for the issues which Rastavox raised per WP:NOTAFORUM. IJA (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Two edits referring to the vote for Kosovo's IMF membership have been rejected (by Kajidha and Bazonka), as not worth being in the lead. I would be happy with this but it is difficult to see where else in the article one can put the basic fact that formal acts of bilateral recognition are not the only measure of recognition, without making the article intolerably long. The focus of both the Serbian and Kosovo governments on such formal acts has obscured this.

[Some of] the basic facts are these.

Some countries have a policy of not making formal bilateral acts of recognition. Usually they recognise de facto, by voting for a new state to enter the UN or another international organisation whose membership is limited to States. Other countries may not have recognised Kosovo either because they do not see the need to take any position, or simply because an act of formal recognition requires a bureaucratic process (say, agreement by the Head of State) which takes time for their small diplomatic --79.126.152.70 (talk) 08:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)services and the Head of State which is simply way down their list of priorities. Thus Montenegro has fewer formal bilateral acts of recognition than Kosovo, despite - or because of - the fact that it is a member of the UN and that its separation from Serbia, two years before Kosovo's declaration of independence, was not contested by Serbia.

The IMF vote for Kosovo's membership as a "seceding state" saw 98 votes cast for Kosovo, several more than states which have issued formal acts of bilateral recognition. In 2009, a US statement to the International Court of Justice claimed that the IMF vote, plus those who had formally recognised, totaled over 115 countries. (One should be careful; the IMF voting breakdown was not published, although one can get details of how countries voted from a Wikileaks version of a State Department cable; and South Africa, whose Foreign Ministry says it will not recognise Kosovo, is recorded as voting for Kosovo's membership - probably because the Finance Minister took a different view and did not tell his Foreign Ministry colleagues how he was voting. This is probably a unique case). --Markd999 (talk) 20:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The IMF is just one of many organisations and voting in the IMF doesn't directly/explicitly mean or refer to recognition. Greece voted in favour of Kosovo joining the IMF, will they recognise Kosovo in the intermediate future? Will they hell! They just believe the people of Kosovo can better themselves with IMF assistance and they think Greece will be more likely to get economic assistance from voting in favour others as we all now know Greece has a poor economy. Nothing to do with recognition, hence why the IMF isn't in the introduction of this article. IJA (talk) 23:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Greece in fact voted against. The specific basis on which the vote was held was whether Kosovo should be admitted "as a seceding state". Any vote for membership was therefore an acceptance that Kosovo was a state, in other words recognition. There are admittedly some international organisations (such as the WTO) where statehood is not a criterion for membership, but this is not the case for the IMF.--79.126.152.70 (talk) 08:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

End of the day a Country could not recognise Kosovo and vote yes (which obviously happened due to the voting majority) and a country could vote no even if they do recognise Kosovo meaning that the IMF Vote means SWEET FA when it comes to recognition. IJA (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

By this line of reason, "partially recognised states" becomes a meaningless term. If only a formal bilateral act of recognition is counted, then almost every state is a "partially recognised state". Montenegro has fewer formal bilateral recognitions than Kosovo, because in international law and practice a vote for a country's membership in an international organisation restricted to states is considered an act of recognition. Some countries have a policy of not making formal bilateral acts of recognition (New Zealand, for example, although in Kosovo's case it eventually waived this policy). I will not push further for my proposed change, but largely because the IMF vote was not intended to be public. --Markd999 (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Mohamed Morsi, the main presidential candidate in Egypt promises to recognize Kosovo. In the 1st round of Egyptian presidential election, 2012 won 24.78% of votes and resulted first. Morsi gained the highest percentage of votes, and in the second round, his rival will be Ahmed Shafiq, the last Prime Minister of Hosni Mubarak. Morsi is also the leader Freedom and Justice Party (Egypt) strong links to the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, the largest and best-organized political group in Egypt.

Mohamed Morsi meet Beqir Ismaili, external adviser of Minister Enver Hoxhaj. Morsi stated that the Egyptian people stated he supports the freedom of the people of Kosovo and appreciated its sacrifices for freedom and independence. He stated that the Egyptian nation has always supported the independence of Kosovo and if he were to be elected President, the decision to recognize Kosovo will follow very soon. He also expressed interest in furthering ties between the two countries, in particular now after the fall of Mubarak from power.

Even in another visit to Cairo of Kosovo’s Minister Hoxhaj where he met the Egyptian presidential candidate, the latter had also promised at the time to recognize Kosovo if he would win the presidential bid. MFA of Kosovo Irvi Hyka (talk) 17:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

But till adoption of the new constitution, is unclear who will be responsible on the recognition - the president or the parliament. Aotearoa (talk) 15:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

He is only a presidential candidate, not president. Therefore he is not yet qualified to speak on behalf of the country. I don't know if we should include this in the article. Bazonka (talk) 16:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

@Aotearoa. The party of Morosi Freedom and Justice Party (Egypt) and the coalition Democratic Alliance for Egypt won in last election Egyptian Shura Council election, 2012 (the upper house) and Egyptian parliamentary election, 2011–2012. Morosi's party have now in the People's Assembly 217 / 498, Shura Council 105 / 180, Constituent Assembly 16 / 39. The coalition of Morosi (including his party) have in the People's Assembly 235 / 508, Shura Council 105 / 180, Constituent Assembly 17 / 39. @Bazonka in analogy in your country the leader of the main party in parliament haven't an importance. Irvi Hyka (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

It is still entirely possible that his rival Shafiq could win. It will not be long- let us just wait until the second round is complete. --Yalens (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Even if he does win I'm sure he has more important things to deal with first. I don't think there is much we can with this information at the moment. IJA (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2012&mm=06&dd=19&nav_id=80830 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.235.202.44 (talk) 09:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

What the news article actually presents is a second-hand claim based on “unofficial sources” that EU suggested to ask Serbia to open its representative office in Prishtina in the course of ongoing negotiations. There is nothing which would imply that the office would be diplomatic, or that this condition will be actually part of the final EU/Serbia deal, let alone that Serbia already decided to open the office. IOW, it has no relevance to this article.—Emil J. 10:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Here you from horses mouth: I will never be president of government in Pristina. Serbia President is preparing. http://www.blic.rs/Vesti/Politika/332487/Nikolic-Mislim-da-vise-nikada-necu-biti-predsednik-u-Pristini/komentari#ostali — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.235.202.44 (talk) 12:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

During the official visit in Saudi Arabia (Jeddah, Mecca and Riyadh) Kosovo's Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi dhe DPM Behgejte Pacolli met the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and the Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu. According to the news agency "MENA-FN" from the Middle East, Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Ihsanoglu has welcomed the application tabled by the Republic of Kosovo to become an official and permanent member of the organization. He told the visiting Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi following a meeting Saturday in Jeddah that the OIC had since 1996 supported Kosovo's right for independence. "Kosovo suffered a lot from injustice and repression under an administration that did not care for the political, religious and cultural rights of the people of the country. Now, after independence and the recognition of 91 countries including 30 OIC members, the organization looks forward to Kosovo soon becoming a member of the UN and the OIC," he said.

Thaçi, on his part, appreciated the continued support of the OIC to his country until it gained independence and said he discussed with the secretary-general all the available means of further consolidating cooperation between Kosovo and the 57 OIC member countries. Thaçi said the policies of his country, with more than 95 percent of its population Muslims, were in conformity with the general political stances of the Muslim countries.[6] [7]

but the official website of the government of Kosovo not mention the memberships [8]...???

Please sign your comments. Kosovo isn't set to join, Kosovo has applied to join; big difference. Yes the Sec-Gen may have welcomed Kosovo's application, but it doesn't mean the non-recognising countries will allow Kosovo's membership. Don't forget Russia's buddies in Central Asia. Pakistan blocked India from joining, a country could easily block Kosovo from joining too. For the time being I suggest we add to the OIC section that Kosovo has applied to become a full member. IJA (talk) 16:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

This Telegrafi story quotes Hoxhaj as saying that Kosovo did not apply for membership [9]. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 18:26, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the text about the OIC membership application from the article. Bazonka (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Why removed the information about the OIC membership? Artan Behrami, adviser of Minister Hoxhaj (not Hoxhaj) said that Kosovo will apply for membership but in the status of OIC must be UN member. This isn't true because Palestine isn't member of UN, but is member of OIC. fo me Kosovars gov are find excuses. Kosovo will be member of OIC after the membership at UN, this is the position of Prishtina in 2009 declared by President Famir Sejdiu then[10]. Justifications, KS like OIC recognition, investment but for the membership other idea...??? Irvi Hyka (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Syrian National Council or Syrian opposition officially invited the Republic of Kosovo (Minister of Foreign Affairs Enver Hoxhaj) in the meeting of Friends of Syria Group [11] [12]. Syrian National Council is not simple opposition but by some countries is recognised as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people. Seeing the article International recognition of the Syrian National Council, noted that Libya, France, Spain, United States, United Kingdom, Egypt, Albania and Kosovo recognised SNC as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people and other countries have informal relation with SNC. SNC except international recognition has control in one part of the territory.

I propose to restore the information on the invitation they have given to Kosovo as a de facto recognition of Kosovo by Syrian National Council. Irvi Hyka (talk) 17:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

While beside states that have recognized Kosovo simply note the fact, beside those that do not there is often extensive details. The justification, I presume, is that it allows users to assess for themselves how likely it is for that state to recognize Kosovo in future. When a regime is as shaky as that of Asad the views of the alternative are clearly important. Hence I support restoring that information.Dejvid (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

That seems reasonable to me, but we have a new neutrality problem: We must try not to misrepresent the situation in Syria, or pretend that some spokesperson has stronger official backing than they claim, &c. I would also suggest that we keep such things short; the important thing is the statement of support rather than the exact wording &c. bobrayner (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Or we could just wait a few weeks until the SNC is in full control... Bazonka (talk) 16:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

While I support mentioning the position of the Syrian opposition, I'm not sure this particular item is notable enough. I see no mention of the SNC recognizing Kosovo the the sources. All I see is that Kosovo attended a meeting of the Friends of Syria Group. Were they invited by the SNC? Does the SNC have control over who attends? Otherwise, I don't see how the info is relevant. TDL (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Isn't there something called recentism in WP? Why don't we simply leave Syria alone, until there is a new government in Damascus? Who knows when (maybe tomorrow maybe in weeks or months to come)... --E4024 (talk) 18:17, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The SNC is not a government, least of all because it controls very little of Syria. The last I had read was that it sits in Istanbul. When and if it constitutes the government of Syria, then it can recognize anybody it wants. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

But we could still put it under the "other actors" section, right?--Yalens (talk) 22:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

@TDL The official of SNC led by Ammar Abdulhamid visited Kosovo in April 2012. MFA link SNC representatives said that Kosovo is a state and Damascus will recognise Pristina in the first day of the triumph of democracy (For SNC Kosovo is a state). SNC is an entity recognized by many countries as the only legitimate representative of the Syrian people (including 3 permanent member of UNSC). Russia recently accused Kosovo that is training the Syrian revolutionaries. [13] [14] The relations between Kosovo and SNC are friendly. Irvi Hyka (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you are mischaracterizing the International recognition of the Syrian National Council. According to that article, only Libya recognizes the SNC as the *only* legitimate representative in Syria. The three UNSC permanent members that you refer to only state that the SNC is a legitimate opposition movement. That doesn't mean that they recognize it as the legitimate government of Syria - the Embassy of Syria in Washington, D.C. and the Embassy of Syria in London still seem to be under the control of the Assad government, even if diplomatic relations have been frozen. So maybe a mention under "Other actors" as Yalens said, but otherwise the SNC is not a country or even a widely-recognized national government (it has about as much international recognition as Northern Cyprus, and technically even less than, say, Abkhasia or Transnistria).Konchevnik81 (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Whatever relations (as can be had by the SNC) between the Syrian National Council and Kosovo, the SNC is NOT a sovereign nation-state entity, government-in-exile, or a government in control of part of any country. The SNC could be compared to the Libyan Transitional National Council in the opening days of that nation's civil war; but currently it does not directly control any territory in Syria, nor is based inside Syria (unlike the NTC which was in Benghazi). Certainly it is recognized by some nations as a "partner for dialogue" or an opposition group with which to hold talks with (even China and Russia have at least met with SNC delegations at high levels), but only Libya recognizes them as a government. Worth a mention somewhere here separately from the Syria entry, which should be the Assad reaction (until the time where/when/if the Assad era ends). Where the SNC should go is up to debate. It's not secessionist movement, nor a government-in-exile (The SNC has denied that they want to be classified as such, and usually a gov-in-exile is a group that has been kicked OUT of power, not a whole new group seeking power). It surely is a resistance movement. It fits as a non-state actor. But where to classify them in the context of this article? And certainly we should not bloat this too much either. Ajbenj (talk) 13:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

While the SNC controls little territory, so long as it controls some populated territory outright it can be considered a soveriegn state under some definitions. The key to recognition is either a statement giving recognition, signing a treaty or other official diplomatic document that treats the polity on an even footing in terms of sovergiegnty between signatories, or the acceditation of diplomatic personel (consuls and ambassodors). Whether a states government is based in its own territory is not relevent to its legitimacy, there have been several states throughout history that have had their seats of government outside of the territory of the state, Lichtenstein for instance.XavierGreen (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia in the article about Syria, has removed the flag of Assad as the flag of Syria. In the Template:Politics of Syria, the article Politics of Syria changed the flag accepting the new dispute government in Syria. In the article Flag of Syria, the SNC flag replace Ba'atist flag.

Free Syrian Army and Syrian Liberation Army (SNC army) control a large part of territory, including part of national capital Damascus, Aleppo the largest city in Syria.

International recognition of SNC
1 UN member (Libya) recognised SNC as legitimate authority
+2 UN member and 1 UN non-Member (Spain, Albania and Kosovo) recognised SNC as representative of Syrian people
+2 UN member (UK and US) recognised SNC as legitimate representative of Syrian (not an opposition) See the declaration of Clinton [15] and Huge [16]
=6 states recognised SNC
10 UN member (Turkey, Tunisia, Italy, Bulgaria, Canada, Netherlands, Germany, Qatar, Australia and Austria) reject Assad government

Only Egypt and France recognise SNC as an opposition group or interlocutor.

No double standard for Syria, if in the main article about Syria is reflected the SNC we must take into consideration that, not to ignore SNC. Irvi Hyka (talk) 13:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The SNC is not recognised by the United Nations. We therefore cannot mention it in the UN Member States section. Bazonka (talk) 18:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I havent seen any evidence that any state other than Libya has recognized the SNC as Syria. Being recognized as the legitimate government of a state, or having its diplomatic personel accredited instead of that of the assad regime are the only means which matter hear. Being recognized as a belligerent or as a representative of the people does not equate to being recognized as a soveriegn polity.XavierGreen (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Not to get into the weeds too much here, but I think it's worth pointing out that the Syrian National Council is not the same thing as the Free Syrian Army. The former is a political opposition group based in Istanbul, and the latter is a military organization comprised of Syrian army defectors that is engaging in the actual combat in Syria. The two organizations were formed separately, and have a complicated relationship with each other. So to be perfectly honest, it is not correct to even say that the SNC controls any territory or population in Syria: the FSA does.

I actually think the SNC info should be merged into the Syria infobox. As it stands, it is currently a bigger entry than the regular one for Syria, including (in my opinion) a completely irrelevant discussion of what the SNC is. It's definitely not an autonomy or secessionist movement, so probably the SNC info doesn't belong there. It also hasn't actually recognized Kosovo; it has just promised to do so *if* it forms a new Syrian government. Kosovo attended the Friends of Syria conference, but again, as this article is about the official diplomatic recognition of Kosovo, that information is largely irrelevant to this article. Keep the SNC promise if you must, cut the rest of the info and merge it into the Syria box.Konchevnik81 (talk) 15:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed with everything Konchevnik81 has said. The sources don't even support the claim that the SNC invited Kosovo to the FoS conference. It was organized by Kosovo-recognizing states, so Kosovo was likely invited by them. Either way, I don't see how it's relevant to the scope of the article. I do agree that the promise of recognition should be kept. I'll revert to the stable version. TDL (talk) 18:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel, Danny Ayalon said that the Government of Israel is considering the possibility of recognising Kosovo's independence. He said that recognising the new state of Kosovo by Israel will be not later than next year. [17] [18] Irvi Hyka (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I've added a blurb about this. TDL (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

According the media in Prishtina, informal references by MFA tell that two countries recognise Kosovo. The Togolese Republic and Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia made a decision to recognise the declaration of independence of Kosovo. The verbal note of both countries are in process, but the respective government decisions have been taken. What to do? [19] [20][21] Irvi Hyka (talk) 17:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

It's certainly worth noting in their entries, but I don't think we should move them until the MFA announces them. TDL (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Do nothing until there is official confirmation. Otherwise, we're spreading media rumours. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Koha Ditore and most other major newspapers of Kosovo haven't published anything on the matter, so we'd better not add the events until official confirmation.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 21:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Ethiopia and Togo have both said they will recognize. Kthimi në Shqipëri (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

They can say it as much as they please, but until it's in writing it means nothing. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:19, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

This one. The FM of the RoC declares that they will not recognise Kosovo but they will support its EU integration. Absurd. I would delete it outright but there already is a "beginning" of a kind of edit war there. So I propose to remove that declaration which really does not contribute anything to the article... --E4024 (talk) 20:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

At the very least I don't see why we need to say the same thing several times. TDL (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Dan. And the IBRD membership has nothing to do with this. I heard that they are even planning to send an Hon. Consul to Belgrad... --E4024 (talk) 17:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

See Greece's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. No double standard, in Greek position is also mentioned that will vote FOR Kosovo's membership on European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Irvi Hyka (talk) 19:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see WP:OTHERCRAP. Just because it's mentioned somewhere else doesn't mean we should mention it here. Also, in the case of Kazakhstan, the source doesn't say they supported their membership in the IBRD, it just says they'll think about it. That's not notable. TDL (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

This week, the DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli, proposed 6 consuls of Kosovo in different countries. In the list of Pacolli approved by MFA is also a consul of Kosovo to the Kingdom of Thailand, Ms Mom Luang Rajadasari Jayankura. We know that officially Thailand don't recognise Kosovo. Is that possible? (Accredit a consul in a country that don't recognised the DOI; How will be handed over credentials to the King of Thailand?) [22] Irvi Hyka (talk) 19:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

This person would be an honorary consul. Typically, the states in question do have at least consular relations, if not diplomatic. They do not present credentials. The ministry of foreign affairs of the receiving state issues them an exequatur, which authorises them to perform consular functions. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 02:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus/TRNC and Taiwan/ROC have Consulates/ Representative Offices in the UK yet we don't recognise them. Kosovo already has a representative office in Greece without Greek recognition. IJA (talk) 22:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I imagine that all they are really doing is renting an office room somewhere in the country and paying someone to staff it. It is possible to do this nearly anywhere. The issue here isn't whether Kosovo can open such an office, but whether the Thais recognise it as a consulate or not. Bazonka (talk) 07:09, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't even have to be a rented office. I know of one country whose consular presence in the UK seems to be a UK national, working from home. (In this case the main problem isn't recognition; it's that the country is poor and cannot afford to send ambassadors all over the world). Whether or not somebody at a desk is putting stamps in passports &c (something which doesn't actually involve routine contact with the host country's MFA) is rather separate from the question of formal recognition at a national level. bobrayner (talk) 10:12, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Gazeta Express reports that Kosovo today is recognized by Republic of Mali. Someone should add. Digitalpaper (talk) 14:31, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

All the Kosovar media are reporting it. I added it. I'm sure the Foreign Ministry will have it up next week and we can refine anything that requires it, such as the date of recognition. I do not know how to change the "as of" and the statistical coding. Maybe User:IJA would be so kind? - Canadian Bobby (talk) 15:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I've updated it. For future reference, this is changed by amending Template:Numrec/Kos. Bazonka (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Danke! - Canadian Bobby (talk) 17:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Here's the Note Verbale if we want to use it as the reference [23]. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo MFA confirms it: [24] Mali is on the list. --Juhan 17:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juhan (talk • contribs)

Strange, now it is gone from the list. --90.190.188.77 (talk) 11:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it. The note verbale shows that it's definitely happened. Bazonka (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Mali didn't recognise Kosovo, it is a fake letter according to Mali's President. He is very clear that Mali didn't recognise Kosovo. [25] IJA (talk) 11:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The President will "punish the authors". I think we should hurry to add his words... --E4024 (talk) 11:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I rushed here to post this same link but apparently someone else did so before me. Still: don't forget it's a Chinese website and China is opposed to Kosovo's independence, so maybe it would be better to wait for another source. I've been looking for this supposed statement of Mali's President and I didn't find it on the official Presidency website. But something else is strange: I am French and when I read the supposed note verbale, I was surprised that it was written in such a bad French, with several quite basic grammatical errors. I find it hard to believe a President of a French-speaking country writes so badly. Anyway: we don't know if the document is authentic yet, so my opinion is, wait and see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.158.219.121 (talk) 12:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Global Times of China is the only source reporting the story. It's up to you guys if you want to take Mali off the list or not. I would support removing it until the MFA confirms it. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 12:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

No, it's not the only source: several Chinese media do so, and media from other countries are quoting them. You can find it if you search for "Kosovo Mali" in Google News. Anyway, as China is against Kosovo I'm not sure if this sort of information is reliable - but keep in mind what I said before: the note verbale looks fake to me. So, I suggest not taking it off the list but at least mentioning the controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.158.219.121 (talk) 12:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

We have had huge arguments in the past about listing countries and "mentioning the controversy." They always end in disaster, because there is never consensus on whether there should even be a notation and, if there is, how it should read. I would favour an all-or-nothing approach - either list Mali or do not. It would be nice to hear from Pacolli or the MFA on this. In the past, it would be the Serbian media quoting anonymous foreign officials or their own FM, Vuk Jeremic, saying they didn't recognise - I'm sure IJA and the other old-timers here remember Oman and Guinea-Bissau, in particular. We even had those saying the G-B Note looked fake because it was written in French and G-B's official language is Portuguese. This could be a new anti-Kosovo strategy or it could be fact and Mali did not recognize. My own suggestion would be to remove Mali from the list pending confirmation, but that's just my own opinion. We would have to achieve consensus in order to do this. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 13:23, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh joy, here we go again... Who knows what's really happened? We either need to list it in the recognisers list, with a comment that explains that there is doubt. Or we list it in the non-recognisers list, with a comment that explains that it may actually have recognised. Since we have no mechanism for us to add comments to the recognisers list, I think our only real option is to move it back to the non-recognisers. Also, because the Kosovo MFA no longer lists the recognition on their website, there is obviously some significant doubt over the authenticity of the note verbale. (I note that someone has already moved Mali from the recognisers list, but not re-added it to the non-recognisers list. I'll fix this.) Bazonka (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Pacolli is going back to Mali to receive clarification. [26] - Canadian Bobby (talk) 23:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

For those still curious, Pacolli has been posting on his facebook page about the Mali situation. To sum up, he insists the recognition was real and legitimate, but that there is a power struggle between the civilian leadership, which is very weak, and that of the military, which overthrew the last government in a coup. The civilian government extended recognition, but the military intervened and withdrew it. He does say, though that so far as he's concerned, the Note Verbale is still valid and the recognition is thusly valid, as there has been no official communication from the Malian government retracting the recognition. You can read all about it on his page [27] - Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm having second thoughts about this Mali non-recognition. Due to the attempted coup in Mali not so long ago, Mali consequently has two Presidents, a civilian elected President and a Military President. This article has conveniently "forgotten" to mention which President has stated this and hasn't mentioned any names. The civilian president recognised Kosovo whereas the military president hasn't. Both Presidents claim to be the legitimate President, but which President do you think is more credible in this power struggle? Pacolli has been to Mali since and the Civilian President will reconfirm the recognition of Kosovo by Mali. All other media which is reporting this same story are using www.globaltimes.cn as their reference point. IJA (talk) 17:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware Mali doesn't have two Presidents. The President at the time of the coup (Amadou Toumani Touré) was ousted and the military took control. However, in April an agreement was reached with the Military to return the country to constitutional rule. Touré agreed to resign and the civilian President of the National Assembly of Mali (Dioncounda Traoré) would serve as acting president until an election. Traoré (allegedly) signed the original document. However, the denial statement fails to mention any names and uses the phrase "The Presidency" as opposed to "The President".

It seems pretty obvious what's going on here. The military took control in a coup d'état because they were frustrated with the governments handling of the separatist rebellion, which shortly after the coup led to the declaration of independence by Azawad. Given their sensitivities to this separatist issue, it's hardly surprising that they would be opposed to recognizing Kosovo. Since the statement doesn't refer to Traoré, or even "The President", it seems likely that this is an attempt by the Military to discredit the actions of the constitutional government. Of course, this is all my OR speculation... TDL (talk) 18:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Hashim Thaçi is claiming that the recognition is legitimate: [28]. Also, similar confusion has surrounded Mali's request for ECOWAS military help, "heightening the perception that the soldiers who led the March coup — but were then pressured into handing power back to civilians — are still calling the shots." TDL (talk) 23:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

The MFA of Kosovo, Enver Hoxhaj, visits the Republic of Fiji. Hoxhaj meet with the Fiji's Foreign Minister Mr. Inoke Kubuabola. Kubuabola welcomed the first visit of the Foreign Minister of Kosovo in his country and said that the Government and people of Fiji have sympathy for the people of Kosovo, in response to the request of Hoxhaj to recognise and establish diplomatic relations with Kosovo. MFA of Kosovo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.77.230 (talk) 12:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Although the article is missing a Fiji entry, I'm not sure how much can really be used here. A little context for the visit is | here, | here and | here. Kosovo is attending a regional conference of mainly Pacific Island nations along with other invited development partners, including Kazakhstan (!). While it does say something about Kosovo's overall acceptance into the international community that it participates in such events, it's not really related to any specific events or efforts leading to new diplomatic recognitions, and even the quote from the MFA is pretty vague: it's not even a promise to think about recognition. Guam and the Northern Marianas are also invited participants to the conference, but that's not conferring any sort of diplomatic recognition to them either. The MFA page, from what I could see through the link, is just a photo opp.Konchevnik81 (talk) 14:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The article also says that Kubuabola said that Fiji has a very positive attitude regarding the recognition of Kosovo, so I think there is something that we can use here. Although it's not especially informative, it's better than nothing. Bazonka (talk) 16:57, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

He also has a cool shirt. Bazonka (talk) 17:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

OK I'm seeing that quote now on the MFA site... I think it was getting scrambled earlier. And indeed, that is a cool shirt.Konchevnik81 (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I wish I had a shirt like that... --E4024 (talk) 11:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

A question. You are talking about Hoxhaj's shirt or Kubuabola's shirt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.77.230 (talk) 11:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The short sleeves of course. (The other one is also beautiful but I already have a similar one.) Need my mail address? --E4024 (talk) 11:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Kubuabola's shirt is the best. Hoxhaj is just jumping on the snazzy shirt bandwagon. Bazonka (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The MFA of Kosovo, Enver Hoxhaj meet with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade of Solomon Islands, Mr. Clay Forau Soalaoi. Soalaoi, said that his country would consider such a request [recognition of the Republic of Kosovo], expressing strong sympathy for an independent and democratic Kosovo. MFA of Kosovo

Another cracking shirt from the Polynesians. Hoxhaj just can't compete. Bazonka (talk) 19:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Too bad Hoxhaj didn't use that opportunity to clear up whether Solomon Islands accepts Kosovar passports or not.Konchevnik81 (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the East Timor, José Luís Guterres said that people of his country always supported indestructible aspirations and will of Kosovo citizens to achieve their main goal, independence of Kosovo. "We have closely watched bitter past of Kosovo population as well as its suffering, and we also have very positive altitude about official recognition of independent Kosovo”, stressed Minister Guterres. MFA of Kosovo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.78.77.230 (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

A positive altitude? He must be high on something. I've added a few words. Bazonka (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Please stop giving comments like that. 79.243.220.136 (talk) 06:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I am wholeheartedly sorry for making a joke based on an amusing spelling mistake. I can't promise it'll never happen again though. Bazonka (talk) 10:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I missunderstood. I thought you were referring to something else. 79.243.204.252 (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Bazonka, IMO your shirt jokes are better though... :-) --E4024 (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Guterres' shirt doesn't have as much flair. If this is still the same Pan-Pacific meeting, I have to say that the conference room that they did the photo op in has to be the most depressing office room in all of Fiji.

Back to the subject at hand, it always struck me as a little weird that East Timor has dragged its collective feet on Kosovo so long. Based on similar roads leading to independence you'd think they would have shown more solidarity. They even recognize the Sahrawi Democratic Republic in Western Sahara.Konchevnik81 (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

just a guess for why.--Yalens (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Express, being quoted by Telegrafi, is in turn quoting the FM of Nigeria saying they never recognized Kosovo [29]. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

RTS quotes Express too and adds that Guinea-Bissau, Oman, Uganda are also dubious. We list all four without even a hint that there something could be wrong. This is by all means not NPOV.--Avala (talk) 13:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Where there is a credible claim that recognition didn't happen then we must definitely mention it somewhere in this article. Credible being the key word. There may be a case to make regarding Nigeria, but we have notes verbale from Guinea-Bissau [30] and Uganda [31], and fairly strong (but not conclusive) evidence of the establishment of Oman's diplomatic relations [32] (and why would they do this with a country they haven't recognised?). So any competing claims must be pretty robust. Bazonka (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Serbian TV RTS also claim that recognition didn`t happen. News (on serbian) --Јованвб (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

We are not following serbian propaganda. We have clear evidence. 79.243.199.13 (talk) 06:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Where is this evidence? A Serbian website that says that it didn't happen, doesn't mean that it didn't happen. The truth is, we don't really know, but notes verbale from Uganda and Guinea-Bissau are fairly good indicators that recognition was made by those countries. Bazonka (talk) 09:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Guinea-Bissau, Oman, Uganda, etc. are covered ground. This is about Nigeria. I guess the best indicator would be if the MFA takes it off the list of recognizing states. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 12:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Whether something is covered ground in YOUR opinion is not relevant. It's important that we neutrally note all issues in the article and let the readers decide.--Avala (talk) 13:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it's not MY opinion. It was the consensus achieved at the time. We have debated these silly notions endlessly and I see you're wanting to go another round. I can find a site that says the earth is flat - does that mean we have to change the geology articles to include the flat earth opinion? - Canadian Bobby (talk) 19:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

It would be interesting to hear what Pacolli says about Mali + Nigeria here if any one can translate. TDL (talk) 23:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I have added a footnote about Nigeria's doubtful recognition. The fact that the Nigerian Foreign Minister himself is quoted as saying that it didn't happen is stroung grounds for doubt. Of course the truth of the matter is still unknown. Bazonka (talk) 21:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Since when are we believing serbian propaganda? 79.243.205.203 (talk) 06:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Sigh - I can't do right for doing wrong. If I totally believed this claim, I would have removed Nigeria from the recognisers list. But to maintain neutrality we must show both sides of the argument. In the case of Nigeria, there is significant doubt, but nothing conclusive. Crucially, the report that claimed that the Nigerian Foreign Minister had denied recognition was published in Albanian media, not Serbian. Bazonka (talk) 07:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Guinea-Bissau, Oman, Uganda and Nigeria did not recognize Republic of Kosovo. You can see that in Serbian and Albanian news. 178.223.13.69 (talk) 15:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Ex-Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic has said that Uganda did not recognize the independence of Kosovo, unilaterally proclaimed in 2008, and does not intend to do so in the future. Information that Uganda had recognized Kosovo’s independence was spread by Albanian authorities in Pristina on February 17th - the anniversary of proclamation of independence. At the same time, Vice-Premier of the Government of Kosovo Behgjet Pacolli made reference to an "oral note" from the government of Uganda. Jeremic, refuting Pristina’s statement, referred in turn to a conversation with Uganda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Henry Okello Oriemom. According to Jeremic, the authorities in Pristina are yet again out to deceive the public, as was previously the case with Nigeria and the Central African Republic, which, contrary to the Kosovo leaders statements, had refused to recognize Kosovo's independence. 178.223.13.69 (talk) 15:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

How do you explain these notes verbale then? [33], [34], [35]. Bazonka (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Don't listen to the serbian nationalist. 79.243.215.115 (talk) 19:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

It is easy to explain, these "notes" are from Albanian sites and news. This article must be neutral, but it's not. I can find on Serbian sites that these countries did not recognize Kosovo. I'm just telling that you are not neutral. I am Serbian nationalist and proud to be Serb. Бранко Џиновић (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

And that is a very bad thing. People like you are the worst thing that can happen to Serbia. 79.243.203.79 (talk) 06:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

When Alabian on this pages said that he is proud of it, that is OK. When Serb on this pages said that he is proud of it, it is wrong. When some Jeremeic's statement wasn't true, all Serbian references on this page are treated as lies. When Paccoli's statement was proven as a lie and his "Note Verbal" as a notorious counterfeit, all other his statements, and Albanian sources, are still OK (and in most of cases, the only one, no matter that they are in Albanian on English Wikipedia). Very reasonable, I must admit. Logical reasoning of people who are most influential on this page is just for Nobel Prize. --109.121.1.116 (talk) 21:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

That's nonsense. Every nationalism is wrong and Pacolli is not a liar. 79.243.217.26 (talk) 07:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Astonishing argument! :) --79.175.67.77 (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Not really. Only the truth. 79.243.221.160 (talk) 07:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Reopening, if there is an issue with 2 IPs then wrn thenm. Others can discuss.(Lihaas (talk) 10:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)).

One of the IPs stated that he/she distrusted the Notes Verbales because they are from "Albanian" sources. I assume he/she means the (ethnic Albanian) Kosovar government, but I must ask "where the heck else do you expect to get them from?" A note verbale of recognition is sent from the recognizing country to the recognized country. There is neither a need for the recognizing country to send them to anyone else nor for the recognized country to release them. The Kosovar authorities make these announcements to sway opinion in undecided states by showing them the number of other states that have recognized. As far as the supposed denials from Nigeria et al, I find the fact that these denials only come from Serbia is strange. Not because I feel that Serbia cannot be trusted but simply because if a country really wants to deny that they have recognized Kosovo it would simply make more sense to announce it to the world at large and not one or two Serbian politicians. --Khajidha (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. If a note verbale is provided as documentation, then really the level of documentation that would be needed for a counter argument is official communication to the contrary from the supposed recognizing country . The countervailing documentation in the Mali case was sufficient to put that one on hold. Otherwise, third-party politicians and media outlets making contrary claims just doesn't really hold water. Unless something can be produced from the Foreign Ministry or Government of Nigeria saying it never recognized, that's the case. Please no more forum discussions, unnamed IPs. Thanks, Konchevnik81 (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

See the link in Canadian Bobby's post right at the top of this thread - an Albanian-language article quoting the Nigerian FM stating that there was no recognition. Not a direct quote by any means, but the fact it is in an Albanian and not a Serbian publication lends extra weight. Bazonka (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Good point, Bazonka. I would leave Nigeria as a recognizer and perhaps add the Telegrafi story as a note (somehow...I know the article doesn't do this with recognizers). Let me just point out that since that story broke in Albanian media there was a news | bulletin in Nigerian media that the Nigerian Foreign Ministry wanted to open a trade office in Pristina, so on balance I'd say that Nigeria still appears to be a recognizer.Konchevnik81 (talk) 19:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Bazonka has already added a note to Nigeria. TDL (talk) 19:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

To me, the authoritative record is the listing given by the Kosovo MFA. They had Mali up, briefly, then took it down. My guess would be they have seen something we haven't and that's why they continue to list Nigeria. They have no love for Pacolli and aren't fans of his, so I'm sure he didn't browbeat them into listing it. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic received letters of credence from Nigeria's new Ambassador Harold Augustus Koko. This marked the reopening of the Nigerian Embassy in Belgrade after ten years. Nikolic said Serbia and Nigeria were tied by traditionally friendly relations and commitment to international relations based on international law and the UN Charter. Nikolic thanked the new ambassador on Nigeria's principled position of not recognizing Kosovo's independence and the violation of a country's territorial integrity. [36] Let me see you now! Бранко Џиновић (talk) 15:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

NIGERIA HAS BEEN REMOVED!! IT`S CLEAR,THAT NIGERIA HAS NOT RECOGNIZED KOSOVO!! http://www.kosovapress.com/?cid=2,86,152280 http://voiceofserbia.org/content/nigeria-denied-recognition-kosovo MARCO,USA, 79.233.7.124 (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE THE LIST AGAIN!! NIGERIA HAS OFFICIALLY NOT RECOGNIZED KOSOVO AS AN INDEPENDENT STATE! THE WEBSITE OF THE MFA OF KOSOVO STILL HAS NIGERIA IN IT`S LIST,BUT IT`S A MISTAKE!! MARCO,USA,79.233.7.124 (talk) 06:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think there is now significant evidence to show that Nigeria has not recognised. However, I don't think we should remove it from the list until we have consensus here. (By the way Marco... or should I say Sascha - you are obviously a sockpuppet of blocked user User:Sascha30 and I have reported your actions.) Bazonka (talk) 06:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I have sent a message asking for some information. 79.243.216.99 (talk) 08:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Please wait for the answer. 79.243.216.99 (talk) 08:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

But we have consensus here! I don't know what is problem now? Remove Nigeria! Бранко Џиновић (talk) 10:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You do not have consensus. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 11:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

The facts do not require consensus. The case of Nigeria is very clear, so further discussion is pointless. Aotearoa (talk) 15:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Your account should be removed. We are waiting for the official information. 79.243.205.25 (talk) 11:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

That can take a few days. Please be patient. 79.243.205.25 (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

It's very hard to remove ONE country from the list. I know that... Бранко Џиновић (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Please keep your natiolistic nonsense and wait till we have an answer. 79.243.217.203 (talk) 16:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi all, please let's keep the back-and-forth to a minimum, and have a straight vote.

KEEP AS RECOGNIZED - After thinking this over, I think the note is sufficient. Kosova Press and Serbian media are reporting differently than (the admittedly sparse mentions in) Nigerian media and the MFA of Kosovo. The actual Foreign Ministry of Nigeria doesn't say one way or another. Until we have an official denial of recognition from Nigeria I think it's wise to keep things as-is, with the dispute note.Konchevnik81 (talk) 19:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

My opinion is that we should remove Nigeria from the list. The evidence for non-recognition is much stronger than that for recognition. Consider: a news report quoting Pacolli as saying that Nigeria has recognised versus Nigeria's foreign minister denies recognition and then he says it again. We don't actually have anything linking a recognition statement to any Nigerian officials, whereas there is a clear link to the FM and a denial. Something directly from a Nigerian source would obviously be better though. Bazonka (talk) 06:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

A reasonable counter-argument, but at the same time let's be clear that it's not repeated denials: both of the links you mentioned, and most of the other similar stories that I can find online, are all referring to one interview statement from Express. So ultimately it's the word of the MFA of Kosovo against the word of Express.Konchevnik81 (talk) 13:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Wait til we have the information I'm waiting for. 79.243.219.190 (talk) 08:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Who have you contacted? In any case, whatever reply you get is unlikely to be usable as a WP:RS. Bazonka (talk) 08:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I've written a mail to the Ministry. 79.243.219.190 (talk) 08:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I presume you mean the Nigerian Foreign Ministry? But as I said, a reply to you is not usable as a reliable source and if there is enough other evidence, then we should use it. No point waiting. (Also, please can you intent your posts using colons - it will make this talk page neater and easier to read.) Bazonka (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

It is of course usable. 79.243.219.190 (talk) 08:31, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

No it isn't because it won't have been published. Read WP:RS, and use colons when you reply in talk pages (see WP:TP#Indentation). Bazonka (talk) 08:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

On a totally irrelevant note: The 2011 census results of Kosovo were published yesterday[37], so many articles require updates. Normally, I'd have requested assistance on WPKS, but it's inactive and this page is the most active Kosovo-related talkpage.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 10:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Telegrafi and Kosova Times are reporting that Papua New Guinea has recognised Kosovo - [38], [39]. Nothing we can use in the article yet, but certainly something to keep an eye on. Bazonka (talk) 06:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Any news from the Pacific meeting where Kosovo participated (see sections above about Fiji, Timor-Leste, Solomon islands) about positions of Tonga, Cook Islands, Niue? Japinderum (talk) 10:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Cook Islands and Niue recognise Kosovo via New Zealand. IJA (talk) 17:31, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Although they probably follow NZ's lead, they are independent, and conduct their own foreign affairs. Bazonka (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Related hypothetical questions: can Niue and the Cook Islands recognize a country that NZ refuses to recognize? Or that NZ simply hasn't recognized? --Khajidha (talk) 13:53, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Theoretically yes, but they probably wouldn't do anything different. Bazonka (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

[40]

Nothing new here. Bazonka (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Togo

According to Klan Kosova, the Presindet of Togo, Faure Gnassingbé, is expected to submit a verbal note of recognition to Kosovo's Presindet, Atifete Jahjaga, [on 22 September 2012] during the Sixty-seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly. It has not happened yet. [41]

No point reporting this if it hasn't happened. Bazonka (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo member of European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Acoording Kosovo's PM office, the Republic of Kosovo has enough votes to become a member of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has learned Telegrafi from Government sources. According to sources, the issue has remained on the agenda introduction EBRD membership.[42]

Countries that do not recognise Kosovo as Greece or Egypt had promised their vote in favor long time ago.

I'm not sure if we can use this information. Ideally we need a statement from the EBRD expressing their position on Kosovo. Bazonka (talk) 16:39, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Madagascar

DPM of Kosovo Behgjet Pacolli met the Permanent Representative of Madagascar to the United Nations, Zina Andrianarivelo-Razafy. Mr. Andrianarivelo-Razafy confirmed to Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli that he will draft a well-studied report relating to the process of recognising Kosovo and the same will be forwarded to the capital of his country. DPM Kosovo

Splendid. I have added a new section about a country about which we previously had no information. Bazonka (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Egypt

The Chairman of the Assembly of Kosovo, Jakup Krasniqi vists Egypt. Krasniqi met with the Head of Shura Council (the upper house of Egyptian Parliament), Ahmed Fahmy. Fahmy said that Egypt has not yet recognised Kosovo but, according to him, the people know and expressed hope that soon a decision on recognition by the new Egyptian government. He said that this visit itself and the official reception, proves this.

Krasniqi is hosted in separate meetings by the Egyptian Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Muhammad Mahsub (Committee on Foreign Relations and the Economic Affairs). Egyptian Minister Mahsub said he was aware of the delay in the recognition of Kosovo, but urged Kosovo to the understanding of the period in which it is going through Egypt. He spoke to Egyptian institutions commitments for the completion of the transition, the adoption of the Constitution and democratic processes through which it is passing the country and its people, expressing the hope that the end of these processes, the recognition of Kosovo will come naturally. Assembly of Kosovo link

Krasniqi also met the leader of some political party. Assembly of Kosovo link

RTK link Telegrafi Egypt State Information Service link

After the vistit, in the Egyptian newspaper: President of the Supreme Chamber of the Egyptian Parliament, Ahmed Fahmy, told Egyptian newspapers Egypt after the January 25 Revolution differs from that which has previously been associated with many global issues. He pointed out that the Supreme Chamber of the Egyptian Parliament, as an institution chosen by the Egyptian people, supports the independence of Kosovo, expressing full sympathy with the people of Kosovo. Fahmy has confirmed the importance of strengthening the cooperation between the two countries in economic and cultural field, expressing confidence that the new Egyptian government, unlike government policy before January 25, will take the decision to recognize Kosovo soon.

Meanwhile, Hossam Ghariani, president of the Human Rights Council and chairman of the Constituent Assembly, which will draft the new Constitution of Egypt, has expressed hope that Kosovo will soon be a member of the UN. "This will be a great impetus for further development of Kosovo and the realization of the ambitions of people in Kosovo, which has close historical ties of brotherhood with the Egyptian people." [43]

There is a lot to think about here, and I haven't got time right now. But I'm sure we will be able to add a few sentences to the Egypt's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence article. Bazonka (talk) 17:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I've now added a paragraph. Bazonka (talk) 15:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Bhutan

DPM of Kosovo Behgjet Pacolli met the Permanent Representative of Bhutan to the United Nations, Lhatu Wangchuk. On the other hand, the permanent representative of the Kingdom of Bhutan, Mr. Wangchuk confirmed to Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli that his country is deliberating on the issue of Kosovo. In this context, Mr. Wangchok stated that the upcoming meeting to be held in the next days between Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bhutan, who is also leading Bhutan’s delegation to the U.N., will be welcomed as it will serve to collect as much information as possible. [44]

Thanks. I've added a sentence. Bazonka (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Iraq

DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli, met with the Presidnet of Iraq, Jalal Talabani. President Talabani expressed his satisfaction for the meeting with the Deputy Prime Minister Behgjet Pacolli and stated that he appreciates the interest of the Republic of Kosovo to create friendship with his country. President Talabani invited Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli for an official visit to Iraq in order to discuss in more depth the further steps to create inter-state relations. DPM KS

This news also is published by Iraqi media [45] [46]

Thanks, I've added a sentence. Bazonka (talk) 16:59, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Intresting is the fact that also the party of President Talabani, Patriotic Union of Kurdistan]], published the news [47] PUK: "The two sides discussed bilateral relations between the Republic of Iraq and the Republic of Kosovo and stressed the need to strengthen and expand them in order to serve the common interests of the two friendly countries." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.13.38 (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

East Timor

MFA of Kosovo Enver Hoxhaj vistis East Timor. Hoxhaj met with East Timor MFA, José Luís Guterres. Mr. José Luís Guterres stated that he is honoured with the visit of Minister Hoxhaj and which is taking place on the 10th anniversary of East Timor. “Your nation was always in our hearts. That is also why the recognition of the Republic of Kosovo, beyond a formal act, is an obligation which stems from our heart”, underlined at this meeting Minister Jose Luis Guterres. MFA KS

East Timor newspaper (more news): Diário quotes Guterres. "I invited the Foreign Minister, Enver Hoxha, to inform us regarding the developments and processes that are taking place in his country. We discussed the deepening of political and diplomatic relations," said Minister Guterres. To get formal recognition of Kosovo's decision, Guterres said that he would consult with the Prime Minister, the President and the Parliament of East Timor. "There is no legal reason that may prevent us to recognize Kosovo's independence. According to the Constitution of East Timor, our country supports countries that have fought for their independence. Majority of states have recognized Kosovo, including states Asian, European Union countries, the United States. therefore, East Timor will join those countries that have officially recognized Kosovo's independence, " added Guterres. According to him, the visit of the Minister Hoxhaj in East Timor will strengthen cooperation between the two countries in the field of education and diplomacy. Minister of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo, East Timor is hosted by state protocol, until he held bilateral meetings with representatives of the state. [48]

The first reference has already been used in the article, but the second one is new and I have added a couple of sentences. Bazonka (talk) 17:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Singapore

DPM of Kosovo Behgjet Pacolli met with Singapore Counsel in New York, Ms. Yuin-Lyn NG. Ms. Lyn said that Singapore has followed the ongoing political developments around Kosovo. She added that Singapore will study in detail, the decision about the recognition of Kosovo. DPM KS

On 26 September 2012, the Singapore MFA Shanmugam said that Singapore has a very positive attitude to the independent state of Kosovo and would consider the request to recognise it. [49]

This information is already in the article. Bazonka (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

The second part is in the artcile, but the first part, the meeting between Pacolli and Singapore Counsel in New York, Ms. Yuin-Lyn NG isnt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.13.38 (talk) 14:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

It is effectively the same as what Shanmugam said, and there isn't really any point in repeating ourselves. Bazonka (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Pacolli: On Nigeria and Mali recognition

In an interview given to emission Interaktiv, Kohavision, the DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli clarify the situation on the recognition of Mali and Nigeria.

Mali

Pacolli said that his advisor Mr. Zyberi had called and told him that from Bamako had arrived the note verbale. Pacolli said that earlier Mali presidency had sent him a prayer to donate some computers and armchairs to fix the office of the Presidency after the May 2012 attack when Dioncounda Traoré. (BBC Mali President Traore beaten up by protesters. Traoré was then stripped naked, with members of the crowd carrying away pieces of his clothing. [50]) After this attack the Presidnecy was destroyed. Pacolli said that he said he was helping by logistics, to reconstructed the presidency. As a sign of thanks presidency had issued a note verbale. But the problem was that after the attack the presidency of Mali governed by Burkina Faso knowing that the control over Bamako de facto had the army. Pacolli therefore said that the military leaders had expected he in Bamako, but their requirements were unacceptable for Kosovo (maybe they were looking armaments). While the journalist was angry with the fact that Pacolli had requested the assistance of occupants of the legitimate president (the Army). Pacolli said that everything he had done had made for the benefit of Kosovo. Pacolli admitted his mistake he had gone to talk with the military. Are certainly those that once completed their requirements forced the president in such choices. Pacolli said that after the media had published the news had gone to meet the President of Mali to Burkina Faso. At this meeting Pacoli had brought forward the verbal note with his signature, but President remained silent implying that he had not even a force in Mali. Pacolli said that everything that has made in the name of his philanthropy and that there is no connection that he gives aid African countries for the recognition of Kosovo.

Do we need to mention any of this in the article? Bazonka (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Of course we should. 79.243.202.126 (talk) 18:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Nigeria

During the interview Pacolli asked by the jornalist about Nigeria said that the recognition by Nigeria happend and the news that and Express newspapers spread news about Nigeria's foreign minister is a fallacy. Pacolli said he would denoconte newspaper for false news. He demanded that the newspaper should publish audio registration of the call. Pacolli added that the newspaper had not ever spoken with Nigerian Minister. He said that after the publication of this fake news he call the Nigerian minister and asked him if he had issued such a statement to the media in Pristina. Nigerian Minister of Foreign Affairs denied any communication with the media in Pristina. Pacolli declare that recognition has occurred. Even the Nigerian government had donated Kosovo a building in Abuja to set up the diplomatic representative office of Kosovo there. Pacolli said that Nigeria is ready to receive the credentials of the representative of Kosovo, but accuse Enver Hoxhaj is not moving in this area.

The newspaper did not comment on the Pacolli statement. Info: Gazeta Expres is an opposition party newspaper.

[51]

Thanks for translating the video. But I think we still need some firmer evidence one way or the other. Bazonka (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is important because Pacolli said that the communication call between Express and th MFA of Nigeria has not occurred. Video is better than something written.Pacolli can not oppose what he said in the interview. Express is an opposition newspaper. No wonder that their behavior against Pristina government passes Jeremic, Serbia & Co :)

Papua New Guinea

On 19 September 2012, the public broadcaster of Kosovo, Radio Television of Kosovo, reported from sources within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo do know that Papua New Guinea has recognised the independence of Kosovo. According to these sources, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo is waiting the verbal note recognition from Papua New Guinea to confirm the recognition. [52]

I have already mentioned this in a section above. Please continue the discussion there. Bazonka (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Bahamas

During the meeting at UN of MFA of Kosovo Enver Hoxhaj and the MFA of Bahamas Frederick A. Mitchell, Mr. Mitchell said that his state has sympathy for the independence of Kosovo, and that the Bahamas will support the state of Kosovo. [53]

This information is already in the article. Please check before reposting stuff here. Bazonka (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Antigua and Barbuda

DPM of Kosovo, Pacolli, met the PM of Antigua and Barbuda, Baldwin Spencer. Prime Minister Spencer said that the recognition of Kosovo is on the agenda of his state. In this context, Prime Minister Spencer, has invited Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli on an official visit to his country. DPM of KS link

Thanks. I have added a sentence to the article. Bazonka (talk) 16:28, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

PM Thaçi, DPM Pacolli and MFA Hoxhaj at UN

In the web of PM of Kosovo, published several reports made at the UN meetings.

Prime Minister Thaçi meets the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Botswana, Phandu T. C. Skelemani [54]

Prime Minister Thaçi asks Tanzania to recognize Kosovo [55]

Prime Minister Thaçi meets the President of Equatorial Guinea, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo [56]

No news.

No news. So why mention here??? Bazonka (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Because it's important. 79.243.214.47 (talk) 17:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

How is it important? Nothing was done or said that is relevant to this page.--Khajidha (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary, the meetings themselves are interesting evidence. 79.243.197.235 (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Remember that this Talk page is WP:NOTAFORUM for general discussion about the topic, and should only be used to discuss potential improvements to the article. Mentioning something that Thaçi did is not relevant, unless it is something that could be used in the article, and in this case it can't. Bazonka (talk) 16:40, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Bazonka! Good work.

http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,92816

Nothing new here either. Bazonka (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

The 1st Deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo site contains an article about a meeting between Behgjet Pacolli and the Seychelles' Foreign Minister Jean-Paul Adam [57]. This contains the sentence "Prime Minister Spencer said that his country is not against Kosovo's independence, while formal recognition will happen very soon". There is clearly an error in the report because there was no-one called Spencer at the meeting. A previous new report gives information about a meeting between Pacolli and Antigua's PM Baldwin Spencer [58]. This doesn't mention anything about a forthcoming formal recognition, so presumably someone's got their names muddled and the sentence in the Seychelles report should instead be attributed to Adam. I am only assuming that this is what it should be. If Adam did say this, then we should definitely mention it in this article, but due to the error, I'm not sure that we can use it. What do you think? Bazonka (talk) 07:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I read that story earlier today and came to the same conclusion as you. Other sources have picked up the story with the reference to Spencer intact: [59]. Unless we find a source that attributes it to Adams, I don't think it should be used. Perhaps an email to Pacolli would get them to correct the story? TDL (talk) 07:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I've sent an email to point out their error. Bazonka (talk) 16:41, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly, the Serbian version of the story cites Adams, while the Albanian and English cite Spencer. TDL (talk) 22:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

That's good enough for me. Let's use it. Thanks. Bazonka (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Ha! The 1st DPM website is a joke! The Serbian translation says that "Minister Adam said his country is against the independence of Kosovo, and that formal recognition to come very soon". Clearly another error as it differs from both the Albanian and English versions, and is self-contradictory. Therefore I have referenced both the English and Serbian versions of the report - between them they give the correct picture. Bazonka (talk) 08:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I saw that as well, but I think it's just a translational issue. When I parse the statement down to the key bits I get "not against Kosovo independence" (nije = is not). Plugging the full statement in here gives a "not" as well. TDL (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Typo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.13.38 (talk) 14:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Currently the page covers almost all, but the following: Republic of Congo (voted "yes" at IMF), North Korea, Myanmar, Cook Islands, Niue. Japinderum (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Without any information, there's not a lot we can say about those. What we certainly shouldn't be doing is adding sections that say that we know nothing. Best to leave them out. Bazonka (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I listed these here so people knowing the respective languages can help fining information about their positions. Japinderum (talk) 09:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I find something about Congo.

Republic of Congo

IP editor found one source - see below.

North Korea

Nothing yet.

Myanmar/Burma

Nothing yet.

Cook Islands

Nothing yet.

Niue

Nothing yet.

The website is down. 79.243.212.236 (talk) 16:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh. Why don't we wait for it to come back? Bazonka (talk) 17:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You don't get the point. I presume something important is happening there. 79.243.212.236 (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

A power cut or something probably. It goes down fairly often. Bazonka (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

What has happened? I dont understand anything.

Togo

The last news about Togo was important because also th MFA of Togo confirm the important meeting. Albanian MFA, Edmond Panariti, met the MFA of Togo, Elliott Ohin, at the UN. Minister Panariti emphasized the importance of the recognition of Kosovo by Togo, as a positive step in strengthening peace and security in the region. On his part, the Foreign Minister of Togo expressed his confidence that the forthcoming meeting between the Presidents of Togo and Kosovo will deliver results in this direction. Albanian MFA

But probably something has not gone as it should. Togo President met the head of GA at the UN, Jeremic, and the President of Serbia, Nikolic. In the web of the President of Togo is written that no statement was made ??after the the meeting with Serbian President. Presidency of Togo GOV of Togo

During the meeting with Jeremic in another Togo's GOV web site is written that the meeeting between Togo's President and Jeremic in New York, the agenda has nothing to do with Serbia.[60]

Something has happened. While Kosovo President Jahjaga has turned into Pristina. [61]

I've added a sentence about the meeting with Panariti. There really isn't anything we can say about the meetings with Jeremic. The Kosovo President link isn't working. (Please remember to sign your posts in future.) Bazonka (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Fiji

MFA of Kosovo, Enver Hoxhaj, met the MFA of Fiji, Ratu Inoke Kubuabola, at the UN. Mr. Kubuabola said that Fiji Government is examining Kosovo's request for recognition. Kubuabola reiterated that Fiji has always had sympathy for the aspirations of Kosovo to be an independent country and has a very positive attitude with regard to the recognition of the Republic of Kosovo. MFA OF KOSOVO

The MFA site is down, but I think we already have this information in the article anyway. Bazonka (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

East Timor

MFA of Kosovo, Enver Hoxhaj, met the MFA of East Timor, Guterres, at the UN. Mr. Guterres said that the recognition of Kosovo by his contry is a question of days. MFA OF KOSOVO

The MFA site is down, but again, this doesn't seem to be anything new. Bazonka (talk) 19:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

African Union

The Chairperson of the African Union, also President of Benini (contry which has recognized Kosovo), Mr. Yayi Boni met the DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli. President Boni promised Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli his support would continue until all African countries have recognised Kosovo. According to the website of DPM Pacolli Boni as head of AU will help Kosovo for a full recognition by AU members DPM OF KOSOVO It is necessary to quote even African Union.

Also the new President of Ghana, John Dramani Mahama (contry which has recognized Kosovo) stated that his country will continue to strongly stand beside the Republic of Kosovo and offer its contribution in receiving new recognitions.[62]

These are the positions of Benin and Ghana, and not that of the Afican Union. We can't use this information. Bazonka (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

South Sudan

PM, DPM and MFA of Kosovo, Thaçi, Pacolli and Hoxhaj met with the Vice President of South Sudan, Riek Machar. Vice President Machar during the meeting invited the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kosovo Thaçi for a state visit to South Sudan, which will be discussed to build bilateral relations between the two countries. The references in English PM OF KOSOVO DPM OF KOSOVO

This information is already in the article, but Riek Machar is the Vice President of South Sudan not South Sudan's Deputy Prime Minister that the user:Bazonka wrote.

Fixed. Bazonka (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Burundi

The PM and DPM of Kosovo, Thaçi and Pacolli, met the 1st Vice President of Burundi, Terence Sinunguruza and the MFA of Burundi (Antoinette Batumubwira). Sinunguruza together with his Foreign Minister invited Kosovo's Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli on an official visit to Burundi where he will discuss the construction of bilateral relations between the two countries. PM OF KOSOVO DPM OF KOSOVo

This information is already in the article, but Terence Sinunguruza is the 1st Vice President not only Vice-President. According this article Vice-President of Burundi, the position of Vice-President of the Republic of Burundi was created in June 1998, when a transitional constitution went into effect. It replaced the post of Prime Minister. The notice said that also was present the Foreign Minister of Burundi in the meeting (not quoted the name Antoinette Batumubwira). Perhaps it is important to add she.

I have fixed Sinunguruza's title. Batumubwira isn't reported as saying anything of note, so no point mentioning her. Bazonka (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Mozambique

The MFA of the Republic of Albania, Edmond Panariti met the MFA of Mozambique, Oldemiro Julio Marques Baloi. Panariti made a presentation on the situation of the region and especially the recent positive developments in Kosovo asking Minister Marques Baloi, Mozambique's recognition of the state of Kosovo, a matter for the Minister Marques Baloi said that his government would reconsidered. MFA OF ALBANIA

Thanks, I've added a paragraph. Bazonka (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Zambia

DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli, met the MFA of Zambia, Mr. Given Lubinda. Minister Lubinda said that his state there are no reason to not recognize the Republic of Kosovo. Mr. Lubinda invited the Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli on an official visit to his country, during the month of October. [63]

Thanks. I've added a sentence. Bazonka (talk) 20:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

During his missions in Africa with the project "Flying for Kosovo" in February 2011, Kosovan pilot James Berisha met the Minister of Sustainable Development, the Forest Economy and the Environment of the Republic of the Congo, Mr. Henri Djombo. Minister Djombo expressed that Kosovo should be recognized by his government and that it would be the right thing to do. He reassured Berisha that he would do anything possible with his coworkers and partners in order to push Kosovo independence issue forward with his government.

Mr. Djombo then called his Director of Communications who took charge right away by directing Berisha to the Minister of Foreign Affairs office for a meeting. At first, Berisha were told that the Minister’s day was packed with appointment. However, Berisha learned later that the Minister had some hesitations about meeting with him due to his concern that he would receive repercussions from his superiors. On the other hand, that means that the Minister already knew the purpose of Berisha visit and that Bersha had Vlora Citaku’s letter to deliver to him. Thanks to all of the MFA staff for the sense of care that they showed to Berisha mission during this time and specifically to Mr. Gasto Bavovidits, Chef de Secretariat du Cabinet of the Minister, who promised to pass Berisha much treasured letter from Ms. Çitaku directly to his boss, the Minister himself. [64]

Can we put something about Congo? For example the statement of the Minister of Environment and the reluctance of Foreign Minister.

• OK the Minister of Environment is not his job to say something about Kosovo, but he remains a member of the Council of Ministers of his country. Congo voted "YES" at IMF.

This is rather tenuous, and I'm not sure it is worth mentioning something that an environment minister said about foreign affairs. Almost certainly his personal opinion and not that of his government. Bazonka (talk) 20:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Of course it is important. 79.243.205.61 (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Why? Bazonka (talk) 18:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

@Kosovo-Hater Bazonka: It is an reaction from a member of the government. 79.243.212.79 (talk) 06:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

WP:NPA please. Yes, this was a reaction from a member of the government, but it is highly likely that his comments were not made on behalf of the government, but in a personal capacity. What do other people think? Bazonka (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The link states that this is Djombo's personal opinion ("Mr. Henri Djombo was very thorough in trying to understand the issue of Kosovo’s independence and personally expressed that we should be recognized by his government and that it would be the right thing to do."[emphasis added]). Thus, there is no story here. --Khajidha (talk) 09:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It makes no difference for us. It is important either way. 79.243.206.228 (talk) 06:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

No, it's not. I don't know why you think it is, but it isn't. This is the personal opinion of a man with no say in his country's foreign policy. It is completely and totally irrelevant. --Khajidha (talk) 21:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC) (PS-I'm very much in favor of Kosovan independence, and I don't see how this statement is relevant.)

[65], [66], and [67] - Canadian Bobby (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Macedonian news: here

Quote: "Today we are officially informed through our Embassy in Tokyo that the Government of Papua New Guinea made a decision to recognize independence of Kosovo.. Prime Minister of this country, Peter O'Neill, made already public this decision..We will soon establish diplomatic relations with this country, "Artan Behrami, advisor to the minister Enver Hoxhaj, confirmed to Koha.net." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.179.181.23 (talk) 12:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

In June this year, the U.S. Embassy in Pristina said that he had information that 89 countries have recognized Kosovo, and not 91, then claimed that Kosovo officials. "The United States had been informed that 89 countries have recognized Kosovo. It is a statement that Uganda and Nigeria have recognized Kosovo. The letter that we saw and sent by President Museveni of Uganda Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli is not a confession. U.S. has not seen a diplomatic note to the Government of Nigeria that could be used to establish that the recognition of Kosovo," the release from the U.S. Embassy in Pristina. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nigeria in September, has denied that the African countries recognized Kosovo's independence, as it was, exactly a year ago, another man claimed the government in Pristina Behgjet Pacolli. Oman and Guinea-Bissau are also, in September last year, denied the news of the recognition of Kosovo. [68] Бранко Џиновић (talk) 13:05, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are asking. Why do we care what the US Embassy says? The relevant countries here (as with any recognition) are the recognizing country and the recognized country. Even this denial from the Nigerian MFA is not a direct statement from them to the world press or United Nations, but a report of what was supposedly said coming from a third party. --Khajidha (talk) 14:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

But a the US are quite in favour of Kosovo, the fact that they claim recognition by two countries to be fake is a serious point to consider doubt. So after this and all the other points that have already been suggested, it seems to me that it is far time, not to remove these countries as there still seems to be more evidence for than against recognition, but at least to include some kind of note expressing the uncertainty, on order for the article to stay truly neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.158.219.121 (talk) 20:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't say that at all. The US being unaware of something is not the same as the US saying that it is fake. Bazonka (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

We've been over this a million times. Every so often an anti-Kosovo poster comes breathlessly rushing in to post this, as though it's the first time we've ever heard of it. It's a non-issue. Let it go. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 03:16, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Canadian Bobby - I'm not an anti-Kosovo poster, I am personally in favour of Kosovo's independence (although that has of course nothing to do here, I just say it as you assume the contrary which I find quite insulting as you don't know me). I just realise that there are several serious media reports, most of them a priori anti-Kosovo but not all of them as some of them even are quotes from Kosovo media, who doubt the authenticity of MFA-claimed recognition by Nigeria especially, and to a lesser extent by some other countries. Still, there seems to be more evidence that there is recognition that that there isn't, so it's perfectly right to keep these countries in the list - but claiming this is just a non-issue is perfectly dishonest, and as there is a certain amount of uncertainty, some kind of note MUST be introduced into the article to reflect this. If people keep talking about it again and you're sick of it, maybe it means it's time to stop turning a deaf ear on them.

Anyway, I admit I was wrong for what I wrote yesterday on the US Embassy claiming these recognitions to be fake - I didn't read the whole article, so I thank Bazonka for correcting me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.157.206.129 (talk) 10:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

What on earth happened there? I'd like to make a recommendation that the entire last paragraph be deleted. Everything mentioned there is discussed in some form elsewhere in the article, and talk of unnanounced implied recognitions via IMF votes and unofficial liason offices is getting a little off-topic (if not OR). The introduction should be a summary that tries to state the most important and relevant facts as clearly as possible. Konchevnik81 (talk) 13:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree. That paragraph should be deleted immediately. 79.243.205.168 (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I also agree. I tried to delete it a few days ago but User:Japinderum put it back. It was originally placed there by User:Markd999. Bazonka (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The latest version has a hint of OR/synthesis to it, but I think it would be good to cover the subject of implicit/indirect recognition if we could get more solid, more specific sources rather than reading between the lines. bobrayner (talk) 19:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

But what even is implicit or indirect recognition? There is de facto and de jure recognition. This article is mostly concerned with de jure recognitions, and any instances of de facto recognition (like non-recognizing EU states accepting Kosovar passports) is best mentioned under individual country descriptions, if not in other articles altogether. A diplomatic recognition, especially in such a controversial case as Kosovo, is a pretty public act. As mentioned a while back, it's not really something a country can secretly or implicitly do: either it's done or its not.Konchevnik81 (talk) 21:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

There are shades of grey in recognition and nonrecognition. Some parties are so hostile that they won't even sit at the same conference table; others are indifferent; others will make a point of not recognising but still try to cooperate on minor matters (such as commerce or customs) - something we have occasionally seen happen in Kosovo, depending on the political climate, regardless of the positions taken by extremists. It's very hard to get sources that look directly at the grey area, but if possible it would be very helpful for our readers rather than painting some selective black-and-white picture which is purely about diplomatic recognition, even though formal exchange of diplomats is a pretty small part of how states interact. Even if we just consider Serbia rather than all the other hundreds of states, 5 minutes googling will find a dozen Serbian sources saying that the SAA constituted "backdoor" or "implicit" recognition of Kosovo. ;-) bobrayner (talk) 22:03, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Konchevnik81, implicit, de facto, de jure and other diplomatic recognition types are described at the source. Both de jure and de facto recognitions can be implicit or explicit.

The problem with the section:

"This article refers only to formal bilateral acts of recognition. In a secret ballot, 108 states voted in June 2009 for Kosovo's membership in the IMF,[69] [unsourced text=which might be interpreted as unannounced implied recognition.][source2] States which do not recognise Kosovo as an independent state (China, Greece, Russia and Slovakia), nonetheless retain liaison offices there and routinely perform actions which might be interpreted as de facto recognition,[source2:][70]["Recognition needs not to be express. It may be implied in certain circumstances. There are circumstances in which it may be possible to declare that in acting in a certain manner, one State does by implication recognize another State or government. However, because of this possibility, States may make an express declaration to the effect that a particular action involving another State is by no means to be regarded as inferring any recognition. This position, for example, was maintained by Arab States with regard to Israel.] however they have explicitly declared that they don't recognize Kosovo.[See reactions of China, Greece, Russia, Slovakia to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence.]"

is that it's first section is about unannounced implied recognition (and that's kind of OR/SYNTH - we have source describing implied recognition (e.g. establishing diplomatic relations), but it doesn't say anything about whether secret ballots are considered such or not) and it's second section is about cases that would've been implied recognition if the states weren't explicitly declaring that this isn't the case (as the source describing implied recognition states - no action implies recognition when the state issues a statement to the contrary).

I inadvertently restored the section, because of edit conflict - I was adding sources to it at the same time Bazonka was deleting it.

I think the place for these two sentences isn't in the lead, but in the respective countries position boxes. The would've part maybe is already mentioned, e.g. "maintains liaison office, but has issued statements clarifying that this isn't an implied recognition, not even close". The unannounced implied recognition can easily be mentioned in the box of each current non-recognizer who voted "for" Republic of Kosovo IMF membership. Of course this won't solve its synthish nature. Before it was proposed IMF for votes to be simply mentioned - but editors disagreed. I think readers should be aware how a country voted at the only occasion so far when almost all members of the international community were placed in a position to decide whether Republic of Kosovo is a state or not. Japinderum (talk) 06:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This page should include info that allows readers to speculate as to how likely countries are to recognise Kosovco. For that the stand of Kadafi is no longer relevant. If the article was really top show "how positions have changed over time" we would still include the info for countries that have recognised Kosovo.Dejvid (talk) 19:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

If you are going to delete the Gaddafi information from Libya, then for consistency you should also remove information from the other countries that pertains to previous governments. This would be quite difficult to do, and may leave the article without much content. Bazonka (talk) 21:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

To be consistent, if we keep the Kadafi statements, we should include all the statements given by governments that have recognized Kosovo giving their reasons - this would be far harder to do. The article as it stands is over-long and a reduction size would not hurt. But above all the Libya is an especially stark example of including info that is out of date because of the complete break with the past that the new government represents.Dejvid (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Once a state has recognized Kosovo, any notable content can be moved to an article such as Kosovo–Malaysia relations. However, it doesn't make much sense to start a Kosovo–Libya relations article if there are no diplomatic relations between the states. Just because the government has changed in Libya doesn't make historical information non-notable. Yes it's not up to date, but it's still relevant and notable. TDL (talk) 03:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

There is quite a lot of information about Libya in this article - it could be moved into a spin-off Libya's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence article. That would have more scope for splitting into sections for Gadaffi's government and the new government. Bazonka (talk) 07:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Wasn't there a decision already to split-out like that the too long sections? Japinderum (talk) 09:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Bazonka - "If you are going to delete the Gaddafi information from Libya, then for consistency you should also remove information from the other countries that pertains to previous governments." I disagree: most government changes don't mean complete regime changes as most new governments don't reject absolutely everything that their predecessor did, but go on building upon it. In the case of the Lybian Revolution, Gadaffi's whole policies are completely irrelevant to the new Libyan authorities today. Still, I don't think the part should be deleted, but perhaps shortened to one phrase something like "Before the Libyan Revolution, Gadaffi regime was opposed to Kosovo's independence." with a few links showing this; and then on with the new regime's position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.157.206.129 (talk) 09:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Either this article is the history of international recognition or seeks to explain the current situration. If historical then countries that have recognized ~Kosovo need to have their reasons for recognition included. If it is on the current situation then past governments need to cut. (I would be less opposed to keeping the stance of a past government when a new government has yet to make a statement.) So what is the article history or current? Dejvid (talk) 10:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

It's an overview of the history of recognition. However, due to WP:SIZE constraints some of the historical content has been WP:SPLIT off to other articles. If you have content that you'd like to add regarding the reasons for recognition, you should add it to the appropriate "Country-Kosovo relations" page as this article is already too long. TDL (talk) 15:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

In that case the selective deletion of the views of some governments is creating a serious POV problem. You are excluding the views of governments that have recognised Kosovo and these, no surprise here, the ones most sympathetic to recognition.Dejvid (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that there is an imbalance in the way that we present historical information between the recognisers and the non-recognisers, but I don't think there is any POV. Those countries that haven't recognised have all sorts of stances, from the will never recognise, to the don't care, to the will recognise soon. Whereas the stances of the recognisers is obvious. It would be extremely difficult to replace historic information for the recognisers, especially taking into account the WP:SIZE problem, and removing it from the non-recognisers would be damaging. I say leave things as they are. The IP's comment about shortening the Gadaffi information is not a bad one, and moving the section to a new article is probably better still. Bazonka (talk) 22:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I have been bold and moved it. Bazonka (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

That does not solve the problem. While it is true that non recognizers do include countries that intend to recognize Kosovo they will almost all be at best counties that do hold strong opinions. The countries that have the strongest reasons for supporting Kosovo have done so long ago. Hence as a representation of the debate it is totally distorted. Hence plenty of mention of undermining the principle of territorial integrity but no mention that a government in Belgrade was, a little over a decade ago, conducting a campaign of genocide in Kosovo. I don't however believe that people come to this page looking for a detailed history. What they want is info that will give them some idea as to how likely countries are to recognize Kosovo.

I don't believe a page on Libya's reaction to Kosovo independence is notable. Gadafi's views are being given as great indeed greater prominence that those of the current government. I don't believe new pages should be created simply to avoid necessary pruning.Dejvid (talk) 20:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

New pages are not being created "to avoid necessary pruning" — they are being created to deal with the WP:SIZE problem. Bazonka (talk) 20:51, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, a little while back, I did edit to say (among other things) that Gaddafi's government had been ousted and no longer represented Libya. --Yalens (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

That's not remotely relevant. 79.243.222.177 (talk) 18:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Kosovothanksyou has it as confirmed but the MFA and the website of Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli has still not listed it. 79.243.214.29 (talk) 16:19, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

There is an MFA report here [71] Bazonka (talk) 16:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

PM O'Neill has sent a letter to PM Thaçi. The MFA of Kosovo published today a news about PNG. Prime Minister of Papua O'Neill has sent a letter to the Prime Minister of Kosovo Thaçi. The letter states that the recognition comes as a result of ongoing conversations had in the past two years between the two Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Government. "I want to refer to the talks that the governments of our two countries have had over the last two years, and to express appreciation for the opportunity that these talks have given us to exchange views on issues of common interest, including the development and recognition of the Republic Kosovo from Papua New Guinea" said the letter sent to the Prime Minister Thaçi. In this paper, Prime Minister Peter O'Neill confirms the decision of his government to recognize Kosovo an independent and sovereign state. "I have the honor to inform you, and through you the Government of the Republic of Kosovo, the Government of the independent state of Papua New Guineas, recognize the independence of Kosovo," said Premier O'Neill on paper, congratulating the people and the Government of Kosovo in their efforts and aspirations.MFA OF KOSOVO The problem is which is the date when Papua recognized Kosovo. The PM O'Neill published the decision of his government to recognize Kosovo on 3 October, but the letter [note verbal] arrived today. --Irvi Hyka 17:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

We should show the date when the PNG government recognised Kosovo, not when the date when they told the Kosovo government about it. So it's probably 3 October, and certainly not today. Bazonka (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

This, dated October 3rd (a wednesday), says "Prime Minister, Peter O'Neill, today announced the National Government's decision Tuesday." So it seems that the recognition was decided upon on the 2nd (the tuesday) and announced on the 3rd. Also, it says "Prime Minister O'Neill said instruments to this effect will be formalized and exchanged soon through diplomatic channels." So it's possible that the formal date of recognition is later than this. TDL (talk) 21:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the recognition can be dated any later than the 3rd. Making the announcement means that it already existed. If it was voted on on the 2nd then the date is either the 2nd or the 3rd depending on the wording voted on. --Khajidha (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

But as you said, we don't know the wording of the text that they voted on or of the announcement. If they voted to "authorize the PM to recognize Kosovo at some point in the future" then the 2nd/3rd wouldn't be the correct date. I'm not saying that's the case, but from the sources we have it's not 100% clear. TDL (talk) 19:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

If it was to take place after the third, they would not have announced it on the third or would have stated when it would take effect. --Khajidha (talk) 19:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

How do you know they didn't? Do you have a copy of the statement? Just because they decided to recognize on the 2nd doesn't mean that the act was done then.

I found a more detailed explanation of the timeline here: "According to him, in the last meeting on September 27 that the minister Enver Hoxhaj had with his counterpart from Papua New Guinea in New York, has received the confirmation that their Government has taken the decision to recognize Kosova, whereas today this decision was made public." So according to this it was prior to Sept 27th. TDL (talk) 20:13, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

http://www.indeksonline.net/?FaqeID=2&LajmID=34310 69.206.233.6 (talk)

Burundi recognized Kosovo. Indeks published today on 28 October 2012 the news from the office of Pacolli that the Republic of Burundi has recognized Kosovo.[72] In the web page is also published the verbale note signed on 16 October 2012 by the Burundi's foreign minister, His Excellency Mr. Laurent Kavakure Verbal Note of Burundi (in French). Minister Kavakure also sends a notification to FDPM Pacolli. Note to Pacolli (in English). A photo is published. In the photo according to the news is the Minisiter Kavakure and Pacolli. In pictures seen the moment of submission of the note verbale in the capital Bujumbura on 16 October Photo of Pacolli and Kavakure during the ceremony. Pacolli probably preferred to publish the note after his arrival in Pristina.--Irvi Hyka 16:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

By the way it is on the list on the website of the Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli. 79.243.214.115 (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Albanian Minister of Foreign Affairs and President of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Mr. Edmond Panariti, held meetings with the highest officials of Tunisia during his official visit in the role of the President of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Panariti meets with Tunisian President, Speaker of Parliament and Foreign Minister.

On the other hand, Tunisian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Rafik Abdessalem said that the Tunisian government is seriously considering the issue of the recognition of Kosovo. MFA of Albania--Irvi Hyka 21:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

This is news is being reported by RTK (public media in Kosovo)188.222.103.245 (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)AK link http://www.rtklive.com/new/index.php?cid=1&newsId=66970&mf#Z83D=09A42dUR686cdfCia75n*KK79-AmBc6H2^^o/VK9t7mfe!V/93K&cBi&28E7w-!Z1k*Zf3_i*8d8dQ*V*miJ3)!-dfmz8W

Confirmed by the Kosovar Ministry of Foreign Affairs http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,1479 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ermir Ismaili (talk • contribs) 11:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

By the way, here is the Note Verbale given by the Timorese MFA to the Albanian community in TE : http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8067/8171165751_9692eae762_b.jpg & http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8201/8171166295_786dae8b58_b.jpg Ermir Ismaili (talk) 11:40, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Ermir IsmailiErmir Ismaili (talk) 11:40, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

It would be interesting if these documents are posted in readable form (scanner or close-up picture), not as camera shots. Japinderum (talk) 06:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The woman holding the papers was given them by the Minister of FA to reward her for her long and hard work in lobbying for Kosovo's recognition. She has now left Timor-Leste so hopefully these papers will be scanned soon. Ermir Ismaili (talk) (talk) 08:34, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

If you zoom in you can just about read the wording on the first image. The document is dated 20 September, so I'll amend the date in the article accordingly. Bazonka (talk) 09:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

So, this is very strange. Official statement of TL government, dated on 20 September, has been given to private person, and information about this fact we have almost two months later... We really don’t know about what document presented on photo is. Maybe this is statement on recognize, maybe not. But we can’t give date of recognize from this bad quality, and ambiguous photo. 89.75.159.33 (talk) 12:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The recognition is being reported by B-92 and M-mag, the latter with wording that matches what I can see in the photo. While the circumstances are a little odd, I don't think we can deny that this is a real recognition. --Khajidha (talk) 14:04, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the recognition is in doubt, but it's a question of whether we should use the date as seen on the fuzzy document or not. Given that the date is barely discernible (as is the text where it says that the government of T-L recognizes Kosovo) and it's published by an unreliable source, I tend to agree with the IP. TDL (talk) 21:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Barely discernable? Zoom in! It's slighly fuzzy but it obviously says "I have the honour to convey to you and through you to the Government of the Republic of Kosovo that the Government of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste recognises the independence of the Republic of Kosovo", and this is dated "Dili 20 September 2012". The source that published the image may not be reliable, but the letter itself is from a reliable source. This is a case for WP:IAR. Bazonka (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

We do not know the state protocols of the government Timor-Leste. It is probable that it takes some time until this or that branch of the government decides/ratifies the recognition. It is also possible that TE recognized weeks ago but made the recognition public only now that they established diplomatic relations with Serbia http://www.tanjug.rs/news/62534/serbia-establishes-relations-with-south-timor.htm Ermir Ismaili (talk) 21:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

@Bazonka: Yes, that's why I said barely discernible and not indiscernible. What evidence do you have that "the letter itself is from a reliable source"? The fact the the source of the image is unreliable necessarily implies that the origin of the letter itself is unknown. Anyone can fake a letter, scan it, post it on the web and claim it's official. I doubt that's the case here, but unless a RS says this is an authentic document it shouldn't be our only source for the date. TDL (talk) 22:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

According to Ahmed Fahmy, speaker of the Egyptian Shura Council who is leading a large multipartite delegation for a three-day visit in Kosovo, it is a matter of days before Egypt recognizes Kosovo. Source Ermir Ismaili (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Gazeta Express quotes a source from the Kosovan MFA that the tiny Caribbean country has recognized Kosovo. The act will probably made public once the note verbale reaches Kosovo. The minister himself, Enver Hoxhaj is currently attending an international conference in Djibouti and couldn't be reached. Ermir Ismaili (talk) 10:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

It is premature to add St. Christopher and Nevis to the list. There is no confirmation or Note. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 20:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I have not edited the table, but limited myself to the talk page.Ermir Ismaili (talk) 21:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

It's not to early. 79.243.219.164 (talk) 09:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

http://www.kosovapress.com/?cid=2,86,155674 79.243.219.164 (talk) 09:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how many stories there are - they're all quoting the same original. It's an echo chamber. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 12:56, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Why was the site vandalised? 79.243.217.53 (talk) 13:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't vandalism. Referencing a news story with an anonymous source is not a usable. There's no official notification or Note Verbale. It's not a story yet. It's a 'maybe.' Calling me a "Kosovo Hater" in a private message is supremely amusing, by the way, considering I've been working on this page since its very beginning. It's also an ad hominem attack, which are the most charming/fatuous kind. You will not find consensus to add St. Christopher to the article until the story is confirmed or a Note Verbale turns up. - "Kosovo Hater" Canadian Bobby (talk) 18:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The article clearly states that it was confirmed from peope at the MFA. 79.243.206.157 (talk) 19:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

WHO at the MFA? We need names. While I have no doubt that this will be confirmed soon, Bobby made the right call here. --Khajidha (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The Deputy Foreign Minister of Kosovo, Petrit Selimi, through a tweet from his official Twitter Account welcomes the report made ​​by the media. Selimi writes "Media report of #StKitts recognizing #Kosovo as independent. More on this soon. Recognition wave these weeks has been relentless. Soon 100!".[73] According to this tweet he knew nothing, and the news has received from the media.--Irvi Hyka 20:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

In a 15 November 2012 meeting during the 39th Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, between Kosovo's Foreign Minister, Enver Hoxhaj and Cameroon's Minister of External Relations in charge of Relations with the Islamic World, Adoum Gargoum, said that his country has no political or legal reasons to not recognise Kosovo's independence, expressing the sympathy of his people for the people of Kosovo. MFA OF KOSOVO --Irvi Hyka 19:16, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposition to add the Republic of the Congo

Country	Position	Relevant international membership
Republic of the Congo	In February 2011, a member of the Government of the Republic of the Congo (Minister of Sustainable Development, Forestry Economy and Environment), ruling political party Labour Party, and Parliament, Mr. Henri Djombo expressed that Kosovo should be recognized by his government and that it would be the right thing to do. He reassured that he would do anything possible with his coworkers and partners in order to push Kosovo independence issue forward with his government.[74]

This has been discussed earler and rejected. You'll need consensus for this, and currently you don't have it. Please remember to sign your posts. Bazonka (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree adding the above and keeping it until we find a better source. Japinderum (talk) 06:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Why? It's the personal opinion of someone who has no mandate on foreign affairs. Bazonka (talk) 06:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The Republic of Kosovo establishes diplomatic relations with the Republic of Ghana

On October 4th 2012, Kosovo and Ghana's ambassador to US, Mr Akan Ismaili and Mr. Daniel Ohene Agyekum signed the act of establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries.

The ceremony of the establishment of diplomatic relations was held in the offices of the Embassy of Ghana in Washington DC.

The document expressed the willingness of the Government of Kosovo and the Government of Ghana to promote the bonds of friendship between the two countries, expanding the horizons of cooperation and support to the cause of international peace and security.

Further, to reaffirm the commitment of both governments to the United Nations and the principles of international law, including mutual respect for national sovereignty, territorial integrity and interference in the internal affairs of another state.

Republic of Ghana has recognized Kosovo an independent and sovereign state on 23 January 2012, with some high personalities of Ghana visited Kosovo.MFA OF KOSOVO

The offical Facebook of Kosovo's Embessy to US relased also phtoto of the event.[75]

In August 2012, the MFA of Ghana, Mr. Muhammad Mumuni vistis Kosovo. In the framework of the official visit to Kosovo, the delegation of the Republic of Ghana, led by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ghana, Muhammad Mumuni, accompanied by First Deputy Prime Minister of the Government, Behgjet Pacolli, have developed a visit to Kosovo historical president family, Dr. Ibrahim Rugova. Foreign Minister of Ghana, Mumuni made to Rugova family, discussed the challenges that Kosovo has gone to come to the end of supervised independence. In a very warm family atmosphere and a very friendly reception, Family of Ibrahim Rugova, thank Foreign Minister of Ghana for the recognition of Kosovo by Ghana, informing Mr. Mumuni, largely to the activity of President Rugova and his early vision for Kosovo freedom and independence. Also, the family of President Rugova expressed respect for the government and people of Ghana, highly appreciated the decision of the state to develop diplomatic and friendly relations with our country. On the other hand, the Minister Mumuni, appreciated the image of former President Rugova, his vision of peace to realize his people rights to freedom and independence. In this context, the Minister Mumuni, has said that between President Rugova and historical president of Ghana (John Evans Atta Mills) has great similarities, because both have as doctrine, peaceful and freedom-loving vision of great Gandhi. Mumuni Minister accompanied by Pacolli have also paid homage at the grave of former President Rugova. Also during the day, Foreign Minister Mumuni participated in the international conference for the completion of supervised independence, which is being held in Pristina. Minister Mumuni, in this case held an opening speech, praising the work of the Kosovo institutions to arrive at the decision to the completion of supervised independence.DPM OF KOSOVO

Wrong article. Discuss here instead: Foreign relations of the Republic of Kosovo. Please remember to sign your posts, and note that Facebook is not a reliable source.. Bazonka (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

But his is: http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=2,4,1428 79.243.204.243 (talk) 17:26, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Kosova and Liechtenstein to establish diplomatic relations

Principality of Liechtenstein and the Republic of Kosovo have agreed to establish diplomatic relations between the two countries. Upon request of the Embassy of the Republic of Kosovo in Switzerland, Liechtenstein Embassy in Bern confirmed the agreement of this Principality to establish direct diplomatic relations with the Republic of Kosovo, based on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961.

After this mutual agreement, diplomatic relations between the two countries, through the accreditation of ambassadors, will be established in the near future.MFA OF KOSOVO

Discuss this here instead. Bazonka (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Grenada

In April 2010, the MFA of Grenada, Peter David, promised that he will do everything possible to make sure that the topic of Kosovo’s independence will rise to the top of the agenda.[76]

Thanks. I've added a sentence. Bazonka (talk) 17:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Catalonia

Catalan nationalist parties react to the international recognition of Kosovo's independence [77] Something should be added on Catalonia in e.x of Basque.

I've added a new section. Don't forget to sign your posts though - without them Talk pages can get confusing and messy. Bazonka (talk) 18:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

UN

The media in Pristina commented the visit of Kosovan delegation at the UN. The media commented that Kosovo (President Jahjafa, PM Thaçi, DPM Pacolli and MFA Hoxhaj) go to the UN or invited by a country (ex: Albania, US) or under the banner of UNMIK and EULEX. But this suspicion was rejected by the authority of the UN. Jérôme Bernard, a cabinet official of Ban Ki-moon and spokesman of UN a, said for the first time that Kosovo delegation represents the Kosovo authority at UN [78] The UN has created a new term for the representation of Kosovo in New Yorl.

I don't really understand this. The Google translation of the article is largely incomprehensible. I could guess, but I wouldn't be confident in what I'm writing. Bazonka (talk) 18:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Bangladesh

In July 2012, a delegation of Bangaldesh Parliament (Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir and Jatiya Sangsad) visit Kosovo. Pacolli and Members of Parliament of Bangladesh, who are also leading parliamentary committees, have agreed to develop a visit by Deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo there, that visit to the main topic will be the recognition of the Republic of Kosovo.[79]

Meh - this isn't particularly noteworthy. If we didn't have much information on Bangladesh, then I might be tempted to add some text, but we've already got loads of stuff, and this isn't really telling us anything new. Bazonka (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Kosovo does not recognize Serbia as a state

In May 2012, Kosovo's MFA, Enver Hoxhaj, said before the Foreign Commission of the Assembly of Kosovo led by Alin Kurit, that Kosovo does not recognize Serbia as a state until Serbia does not recognize Kosovo.Telegafi

This is not directly relevant to the recognition of Kosovo. Bazonka (talk) 18:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

So Serbia is a partially recognized country? --82.113.99.91 (talk) 05:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

President Traore: Mali has not recognized Kosovo

Serbian media: The president of Mali, Diokunda Traore informed his Serbian counterpart Tomislav Nikolic that Mali has not recognized Kosovo, agency Tanjug learns from the Nikolic’s press centre.Serbian media

We already know that. Bazonka (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Libya

Kosovo's Assembly Speaker, Jakup Krasniqi, met with a delegation from Libya, led by Khalal Al FALLAH, the Chairman of the Council of Libyans Combatants. Krasniqi congratulated the representatives of the Libyan people for democratic change in their country and for the easy passage of rapid transition.

Libyan Combatants Council Head, Al FALLAH gave an overview of current developments in Libya, after the revolution achievements and challenges facing the new institutions in establishing the rule of law in the country. He spoke of the willingness of these institutions to recognize Kosovo and added that it is expected to occur immediately after the consolidation of the new Libyan government, despite resistance from elements of the previous regime. Libyan representative described many important achievements in Kosovo, showing interest to take its experience in building democratic institutions and legal infrastructure creation. RTK

This is just repetition of what Al Fallah said when he visited Kosovo. Nothing new. Bazonka (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Uganda

The President of Uganda, His Excellency Mr. Yoweri Museveni invited the Fisrt DPM of Kosovo, Behgjet Pacolli, in the Gold Ceremony of the 50th anniversary of Uganda's independence on 9 October 2012, in the state capital Kampala.DPM of Kosovo

We can't use this in the article. Bazonka (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Different method of recognition

We have read the note verbale of recognition from Uganda and often have cast doubt on this recognition. Ugandan president wrote that Uganda joined with the states that recognised Kosovo. But it was commented by Serbian MFA that there wasn't a recognition. This is meaningless because every state follow its own way how to recognise another state. There is no international rule what should be written in the note verbale. Another state has recognized Kosovo in this way. Federated States of Micronesia in its verbal note publishet by the web site of the FSM Government [80] recognised Kosovo in the same way as Uganda. (Micronesia has joined the growing number of countries that have formally recognized Kosovo)

Ugandan Verbal Note = Micronesian Verbal Note

We discussed about Uganda, but not about FSM.

What is there to discuss? Bazonka (talk) 18:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Oman

Very intersting news was published by Oman newspaper. Accordit to the Oman's newaspaper Oman Daily Observer. In September 2011, durin the 66th session of the UN General Assembly, the delegation of Oamn at UN ruled by the MFA of Oman, Mr. Yusuf bin Alawi bin Abdullah met the MFA of Kosovo, Enver Hoxhaj. Also on the sidelines of the UN session, Alawi met with Enver Hoxhaj, Foreign Affairs Minister of Kosovo. The meeting discussed means of promoting relations between the two countries and matters of common concern. The meetings were attended by Lyutha bint Sultan al Mughiriyah, the Sultanate's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, and the official delegation accompanying Alawi.[81] this confirms that Oman has recognized Kosovo and speculation on Oman drop down.

Oman newspaper also publshed that another article: Sultanate, Kosovo to boost cultural ties. Habib bin Mohammed al Riyami, Secretary-General of the Sultan Qaboos Centre for Islamic Culture, received in his office here yesterday Shaikh Naim Ternava, Head of Islamic Union of Kosovo and General Mufti and his accompanying delegation. The two sides discussed the importance of communication between the Sultan Qaboos Centre for Islamic Culture and the Islamic Union of Kosovo, means of enhancing joint co-operation and exchanging visits. The guest praised the Centre's efforts in highlighting Islam and disseminating the Islamic culture.[82]

Oman and Kosovo not only had polical and diplomatic relationship, but also cultural relations. I believe that Omani be discussed or should think Oman newspapers lie.

Again, what are we supposed to be discussing? Don't forget to sign your posts. Bazonka (talk) 18:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Nepal

The website of the Government of Nepal, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Recognized Kosovo as a Destination Country [83]

Yes, but what does that actually mean? Does it show that there is a de jure recognition, or is it just acknowledgement that Kosovo is outside the control of Serbia and just de facto independent? This is a bit like the old Solomon Islands case (see [84]) where the information was removed from the article as being WP:OR or WP:SYNTHESIS (I forget which). Bazonka (talk) 18:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Lots of countries list "Taiwan" as an entity without that conferring diplomatic recognition. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 17:34, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Morocco

On October 8th 2012 in Strasbourg, the PM of the Republic of Albania, Mr. Sali Berisha met the PM of the Kingdom of Morocco, Mr. Abdelilah Benkirane. PM Berisha assured the Moroccan prime minister of Albania stance about recognition of Morocco integrity. Further on, PM Berisha focused on the situation in the region and especially in Kosova and emphasized that the process that has already started there is irreversible. He invited the Moroccan authorities to send envoys to see from very close this new reality. In this context, PM Berisha said that the Albanian authorities would welcome if Moroccan authorities took under consideration the recognition of the new state of Kosova.

The Moroccan prime minister thanked PM Berisha about the integrity issue and promised to consider the request of the Albanian authorities given that it’s a very important subject for the region. Albanian PM office

So they'll think about it. This isn't anything new and probably not worth mentioning. Bazonka (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Kenya

On 10 October 2012 In the context of visits to various states on the African continent, the Deputy Prime Minister of Kosovo, Mr. Behgjet Pacolli visited Kenya, where he was met by the Prime Minister Mr. Raila Odinga.

Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli informed Prime Minister Odinga about political processes in Kosovo, with particular emphasis on those which have been successfully concluded, namely the full implementation of the Ahtisaari Package, which resulted in the successful end to supervision of independence.

In this context, Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli, said that recognition of Kosovo by all states in the world is a decision which fully respects international law and the will of citizens of the Republic of Kosovo.

Prime Minister Odinga confirmed to Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli that his state is seriously addressing recognition of Kosovo and that the outcome will be made public in the near future. DPM OF KOSOVO

Again, this is not showing a change of stance by Kenya. It's basically the same as the last lot of information that we wrote for the country, and so possibly not worth mentioning. Bazonka (talk) 18:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Serbia and EU Commission

The European Commission (EC) demand for Serbia to respect "the territorial integrity of Kosovo" in progress raport 2012. The PM of Serbia, Ivica Dacic, said that EC report phrasing puts dialogue in jeopardy. Daici accused Brussels and threaten to interrupt the dialogue between the Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Kosovo. B92

Papua New Guinea recognition

On 3 October the advisor of the Kosovo MFA Hoxhaj said that PNG recognize Kosovo. <The advisor of Hoxhaj said that a delegation of PNG have gone in the Kosovo Embassy in Tokyo to confrim the recognion of Kosovo by PNG. Before the media in Oceonia:

Pacific Islands News Association

PNG recognises Kosovo By Online Editor 1:23 pm GMT+12, 03/10/2012, Papua New Guinea Papua New Guinea has recognized the Republic of Kosovo and will enter into full diplomatic relations with the new Balkan State.

Prime Minister, Peter O'Neill, today announced the National Government's decision Tuesday.

The National Executive Council (NEC) made the decision, based on a submission from the Foreign Affairs Minister, Rimbink Pato.

Prime Minister O'Neill said instruments to this effect will be formalized and exchanged soon through diplomatic channels.

He said Kosovo is a former state within the now disbanded Federation of Yugoslavia.

It gained Independence on February 17, 2008 and has many things in common with PNG.

O'Neill said Cabinet’s decision is in line with the Governments' foreign policy to have international relations with countries that have mutual interest with PNG.

He said Kosovo’s primary import of coffee and cocoa makes it an ideal market for PNG's primary produce.

PNG joins Australia, Samoa, New Zealand, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Kiribati, Marshalls, Palau, Tuvalu and Vanuatu - countries that have recognized and entered into diplomatic relations with the Republic of Kosovo. [85]

Another Papuan media published the news [86]

Post-Courier Online, PNG newspaper

PNG links with Kosovo

Prime Minister Peter O’Neill has announced the national government’s decision to officially recognize and enter into diplomatic relations with the Republic of Kosovo. “I am pleased to announce that the NEC, based on a submission from the Foreign Minister has approved for PNG to officially recognise and enter into full diplomatic relations with the new Balkan State” Mr O’Neill said in a statement. “I have the honor and privilege to therefore announce that PNG recognises the Republic of Kosovo as an independent state among nations. Instruments to this effect will be formalised and exchanged soon through diplomatic channels.” Kosovo is a former state within the, now disbanded Federation of Yugoslavia. It gained Independence on 17th February, 2008 and has many things in common with PNG. “As both the Foreign Minister Rimbink Pato and I have recently stated publically, PNG’s foreign policy must be based on international cooperation in which there is mutual interest and benefits.” Kosovo has consolidated relations with the democratic and economic powers of the USA, European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and others. “Kosovo is ethnically diverse and rich in natural resources, and is now enjoying stability and peaceful co-existence among its different communities and religions”. Mr O’Neill said. “Its primary import of coffee and cocoa makes it an ideal market for our primary produce” Other Pacific countries that have already recognised and entered into diplomatic relations include Australia, Samoa, New Zealand, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Kiribati, Marshalls, Palau, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Fiji and Solomon Islands are going through internal processes to conclude formalities before taking the diplomatic steps required to effect recognition. As of June, 2012, the Republic of Kosovo has received 93 diplomatic recognitions as an independent state, 91 of them, members of the United Nations. [87]

But the web of the MFA of Kosovo has not published in list PNG yet. Why?

There's plenty of circumstantial evidence, but has anything official been published by the PNG or Kosovo governments yet? I think it is safe to keep PNG in the recognisers section at present. Bazonka (talk) 18:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Fiji and Solomon Islands

According to the Papua New Guinea newspaper Post Courier on Kosovo recognition, Fiji and Solomon Islands are going through internal processes to conclude formalities before taking the diplomatic steps required to effect recognition. Post-Courier The vist of the MFA of Kosovo Enver Hoxhaj in Oceania has been a considerable success. Papua recognition and Solomons Islands, Fixhi, East Timor under way of the recognition.

I don't know if we can use this source because it doesn't directly say where in Fiji or the Solomon Islands this information came from (probably someone with a groovy shirt though). It could just be conjecture. Please remember to sign your posts. Bazonka (talk) 18:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Every time again Kosovo-Hater Bazonka is telling us, that something is not important. 79.243.204.243 (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Sigh... Just because I disagree with your suggestions about Wikipedia, it doesn't mean that I disagree with your politics. As a matter of fact I am neutral when it comes to Kosovo vs. Serbia. WP:NPA please. In this particular case of Fiji and the Solomon Islands, the issue is really one of WP:RS. Bazonka (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

The Post-Courier's website is awful, but they do seem to be fairly reputable; I think they'd be a sufficiently reliable source for PNG government statements like this (it's not a dramatic or speculative statement, and the paper isn't putting a spin on it). The statement also seems to have been printed in this edition. bobrayner (talk) 00:51, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough - WP:RS isn't quite appropriate in this case. The issue isn't really the reliability of the source, but I do question where they got their information about Fiji and the Solomon Islands from, since it doesn't seem to be published elsewhere, especially in media from those countries. Bazonka (talk) 17:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

According to the Kosovan Prime Minister, Mr. Hashim Thaci, Fiji has recognized the indipendence of the Republic of Kosovo, bringing the total number of recognitions to 96.Source.Ermir Ismaili (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

EBRD
EBRD votes to give Kosovo membership. The office of PM of Kosovo announced today that Kosovo became a full member of European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Acoording to the news more than 2/3 members of EBRD voted in favor of Kosovo's membership, including some countries that don't recognise Kosovo. Nearly 30 member states of ERBD don't recognise Kosovo. PM of Kosovo

Reuters published this news. Reuters

ERBD

Yemen
During the meeting with Hoxhaj, the Foreign Minister of Yemen, Abu-Bakr Al-Qirbi, said that his country is in a transition phase. "That was why we did not take important decisions in foreign policy. Have full understanding and sympathy for the people of Kosovo and do not have any political or legal barrier for not recognizing Kosovo ", said Minister Abu-Bakr Al-Qirbi, expressing support for the road of the independent and progress made by Kosova.MFA of Kosovo

Iraq
Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, has expressed support of his country for an independent Kosovo, appreciated the progress achieved in Kosovo after the declaration of independence. Zebari also said that Iraqi authorities follow the developments in Kosovo with great care. "We know that most of the Arab and Islamic countries have recognized Kosovo's independence, and that you are doing a great progress in the process of recognition," said Minister Zebari, inviting the minister Hoxhaj to visit Iraq.MFA of Kosovo

OIC
Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, has appreciated the progress made in Kosovo, further expressed support for strengthening the international subjectivity of the Republic of Kosovo. He said that the OIC supports the recognition of Kosovo and strengthening subjectivity in the international arena. MFA of Kosovo --Irvi Hyka 20:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

If this page is intended to reflect the history of the recognition issue than it should reflect all points of views equally. The current page includes the views of a number of governments that Kosovan independence represents a dangerous precedent. The contrary view of governments like Britain that hold Kosovo to be a special case[88] are excluded because they have recognised Kosovo. I say if because I am far from convince that is what the role of this page is. However, there is no consistent NPOV criteria that excludes the views of recognisers yet includes the views of former governments that are no longer relevant such as Gadafi.Dejvid (talk) 11:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought that this page was about the current status of the recognition issue. If that is the case, then there is no reason to give any details on those countries that have recognized. The fact of recognition is all that matters, anything else could be covered in a "Kosovo-_____ relations" article. As for non-recognizers they should have their most recent statements here, along with any significantly different prior statements. As for the Libyan issue, the current wording seems fine ("During the rule of Muammar Gaddafi, Libya's was opposed to the independence of Kosovo. But since the fall of his government, the country's stance has been favourable towards it.") --Khajidha (talk) 14:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)Note: just noticed a typo in the Libyan note. It should be either "Libya" or "Libya's government", "Libya's" makes no sense.

I agree it should be about the current status but in that case Gadafi's oppinion should be cut completly and the most recent quote of the current government should suffice. The current note gives both governments equal status while in the subpage the Gadafi government completely swamps that of the current one.Dejvid (talk) 16:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Removing historical stuff would be fine if all we wanted to portray was the current situation. However, that smacks of WP:RECENTISM to me; readers may be interested in previous situations too. bobrayner (talk) 16:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Some countries keep changing their mind or giving conflicting positions. If we only displayed the most recent information then we would lose this important narrative. I understand Dejvid's point of view that there is an imbalance between the way we represent information for the recognisers and for the non-recognisers, but I disagree that there is anything undue in the article. We are certainly not favouring the pro-Serb stance (just look at the complaints that we are too pro-Albanian in the article feedback) - there are plenty of independence-leaning countries who haven't recognised yet. In any case, there's not much we can do about it - it would be almost impossible to include historical information for the recognisers, and removing information from the non-recognisers would be damaging. Bazonka (talk) 16:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I was assuming that older material would be moved to "reaction" pages if it is redundant or left here if it showed significant differences from the current statement. As for Dejvid's concerns about the Libyan presentation, equal weight is appropriate here as the new government hasn't actually recognized as yet and the Libyan reaction page obviously has more on Gaddafi's government's reaction because of the longer period of time during which they could react as opposed to the short period the new government has had. Note that "reaction" is not limited to dealing with "now", while "recognition" seems (to me at least) to imply the current situation. --Khajidha (talk) 17:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed with Bobrayner. Gaddafi was in charge for that majority of the time since Kosovo's declaration of independence, so it would be silly to ignore this entire time period. Dejvid, if you think that the position of the current government isn't sufficiently covered, you're more then welcome to WP:FIXIT by adding more recent info to the subarticle. However, the soulution isn't to delete notable historical content because of a perceived lack of current content.

One possible solution would be for a brief paragraph at the start of the "Entities that recognise Kosovo as an independent state" section which summarizes the arguments made by recognizing states, as opposed to a state-by-state explanation which isn't possible due to WP:SIZE issues. TDL (talk) 17:06, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The reaction pages (e.g. Libya's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence) were intended solely to address the WP:SIZE problem for countries where we have a lot of information. They are not intended to have a different scope from this main article. Bazonka (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I understand that, but most countries that don't have reaction pages still wouldn't need them under my proposal as there really isn't anything to remove from them as they only have one or two statements. --Khajidha (talk) 17:11, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I'm not losing any sleep over the pro/anti thing. It's a mosaic; if we get all the individual pieces of the mosaic right, then the complete result will tend to be an accurate portrayal of reality. I think that some historic coverage - perhaps showing how individual governments have changed or developed their positions - would be appropriate to avoid a bias towards the present day but we don't need exhaustive detail. I'm happy splitting out some of governments where we have a large volume of text (like Libya, or bigger) to stop this page turning into War & Peace. bobrayner (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think our positions are as far apart as you might think. --Khajidha (talk) 12:37, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

>>Bazonka:"it would be almost impossible to include historical information for the recognisers,"

It would be difficult but not impossible - see the link above which discusses the British governments reasons. The reason it would be difficult is because much of the online pages on this issue are only temporary. But this applies across the board. About half the links from the on Libya page from the Gadafi era are dead links. They are unverifiable and as such should be removed for that reason alone.Dejvid (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

That's not a reason to delete stuff - see WP:LINKROT. Bazonka (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Our options

So what are we actually going to do? Please can you express your preference below, remembering to sign each comment:

1. Do nothing. Leave the article in its current structure.

• Support The article has stayed this way for years without any complaints. Change would be unnecessary and disruptive. Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Sympathy but not outright support. This article would definitely benefit from some tweaks and maybe some updates over time, so "do nothing" looks unreasonable to me. However, I would be happy to keep the overall structure and I don't think drastic changes are needed. bobrayner (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Yes, keep the article the way it is now. 79.243.219.183 (talk) 16:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Support - The overall structure as a Wikipedia:General overview article works. States that warrant an individual article can be linked to, giving their reasons for recognizing or not. TDL (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Sympathy but not outright support - per bobrayner. Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose -This article is already too long, and needs to be simplified. Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Support Unless someone can find a technical way of downsizing the article without affecting the content. IJA (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
• Sympathy but not outright support - per bobrayner. --Khajidha (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

2. Add lots more information about the countries that have recognised.

• Oppose This would be very difficult to achieve and would be counter-productive to the WP:SIZE problem. Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - The article is already far too long. TDL (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - the "lots" of information should go in the "Kosovo-XXX relations" articles. Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose Not only do we not have the relevant information to add, but we have been asked repeatedly to reduce the size of the article. Bad idea. Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose There isn't much more you can say apart from the fact they did recognise and the date. Anything more belongs on "Foreign relations of Kosovo" or the article for the recognising country, ie "Foreign relations of Country X". IJA (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose, for the reasons IJA gave. --Khajidha (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

3. Add a brief summary to the countries that have recognised.

• Weak support This would need to be kept very brief so as not to affect WP:SIZE too much. Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Support - Agreed with Bazonka, it would need to be kept brief, but this would help address the NPOV concerns raised above. TDL (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• See suggestion Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose Adding more info to this page would make it increasingly unreadable for some users, which would be counterproductive. Nevertheless, a column with links to the "Kosovo-xxxx Relations" pages would perhaps be useful Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose See my comment for 2, same argument. IJA (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose, as per my response to 2. --Khajidha (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

4. Remove all old information from the non-recognisers, leaving just the most recent statements.

• Strong oppose This would be damaging as we would lose important historical background. Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose; systematically removing information on a partisan basis is not a sane defence against the NPOV problem. bobrayner (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - Unless this content is split to a new subarticle, deleting notable content isn't productive. TDL (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - historical information and evolution of position is notable - and should be preserved - here in full or in brief and at "Kosovo-XXX relations" articles in full. Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose While I agree that there is no point in removing information that is already there, many if not all boxes on non-recognizers need to be re-written in a much more concise way. The nature of this article is that as information has been becoming available we have been adding to it sentence by sentence, and an accumulation of information in that way makes for awkward reading. Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose How do we define what is old? In most cases it is still relevant. IJA (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose as stated. While I have advocated removing redundant information (do we need to repeat that Randomcountristan has stated 37 that they do not recognize Kosovo?), I have never said that ALL older information be removed. I have advocated having: 1)the initial response, 2)any statements covering things not expressed in the original statement and 3)the most recent statement. --Khajidha (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

5. Remove old information from the non-recognisers, except for significant changes of position.

• Oppose Whilst not as damaging as the previous option, this would still remove important background, except where there is clear duplication in the messages. Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Maybe: When it's framed in terms of trimming one "side" but not another, it sounds bad; but focussing on "significant changes of position" is relatively sensible for any entry in this article, because it's already very long. bobrayner (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - Unless this content is split to a new subarticle, deleting notable content isn't productive. TDL (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - historical information and evolution of position is notable, including for not major changes (major being from leaning to no-recognition to recognition or vice versa) - and should be preserved - here in full or in brief and at "Kosovo-XXX relations" articles in full. Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose, but see above. Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose like I said it is still relevant to the content in the article and our audiences require such information. IJA (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

See my response to 4. --Khajidha (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

6. Something else.

• Any suggestions? Bazonka (talk) 09:37, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
• Recognizers:
  1. add wikilinks to the respective "Kosovo-XXX relations" article - with the same text on each line, e.g. like "relations" - either in the notes column or in a separate column. We currently have those links in the non-recognizer section.
  2. add column with date of establishing diplomatic relations - I know those are already mentioned at Foreign relations of Kosovo, but that's a/the major event (after or together with diplomatic recognition) - the importance of which is shown also by "MFA has initiated the process of establishing diplomatic relations with all states that have recognized Republic of Kosovo". Having both recognitions and relations in the same sortable table is very convenient for the reader (such as at Montenegro and South Sudan).

I think adding those two items will give enough context and "further info" in the recognizer section - without encroaching on WP:SIZE or providing grounds for future debates whether a particular source/historical news should be added to the table (it can be added to the Kosovo-XXX relations article instead). Japinderum (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I think a link to the "Kosovo-Country relations" page for recognizers is helpful, but the date of establishment of diplomatic relations has nothing to do with the topic of this article. We've already got a link to Foreign relations of Kosovo, copying all that content here would be redundant. This article already encroaches on WP:SIZE, we're at more than twice the size that the article should "almost certainly should be divided". Repeating content here simply because it's "convenient" for you (but probably not so convenient for those readers who have mobile browsers and can't even load the page because it's too large) is a very bad idea. We should be WP:SPLITing stuff off, not duplicating content here. TDL (talk) 21:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

OK. And, please, no need of mocking "my convenience". I'm aware of WP:SIZE, but this discussion was opened because editors complained recognizers section lacks info. My suggestions are two easy to add in a good looking form items. Both are redundant, but the idea is to address the expressed concerns. If the consensus is to add only one of these two - fine. Japinderum (talk) 08:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Have you even read the original posters concerns? It has nothing to do with a general concern that the "recognizers section lacks info". The issue is with giving WP:DUE weight to both the recognizers and non-recognizers justification for their position. How does including random trivia which is only tangentially related to the topic, such as the date of establishment of diplomatic relations, address this issue? TDL (talk) 01:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

No concerns of the original poster, but of others. Japinderum (talk) 13:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Such as who? TDL (talk) 18:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

See for example Dejvid comments above. Also, establishment of diplomatic relations is neither "random trivia" nor "only tangentially related to the topic", but I'm sure you don't need further explanation why is that so. Japinderum (talk) 08:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

You're confused. Dejvid is the original poster, and you just said that it wasn't his concerns that you're trying to address. I explained Dejvid's concerns to you above above, and how this clearly doesn't address them. Another guess?

Foreign relations of Kosovo is a different topic. That's why we have a separate article to discuss it. In the context of "International recognition of Kosovo" it's only tangentially related. TDL (talk) 17:26, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

"countries that have recognized ~Kosovo need to have their reasons for recognition included.", "You are excluding the views of governments that have recognised Kosovo" - those comments I'm referring to. As I already said - adding "Kosovo-XXX relations" link and date of establishment of relations are two ideas, that can be neatly implemented and won't increase the size too much or change the focus of the article. You agree with one and not with the other, fine. Let's see what others think. You also ask useless questions ("who says recognizers positions aren't presented"), which I find to be unproductive. I'll appreciate if you explain your accusations here. Japinderum (talk) 09:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Right, but you still haven't explained how adding the date of the establishment of diplomatic relations addresses the concern that "countries that have recognized ~Kosovo need to have their reasons for recognition included." The dates don't explain the reasons why they have recognized. TDL (talk) 19:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

It addresses the general information lack regarding recognizers. Those dates are highly notable, very well sourced, can be uniformly presented for each entry, do not take too much space and do not increase the size too much. And as I said - if there is no consensus to include those, fine. Japinderum (talk) 07:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Sigh, and now you've gone full circle and are right back where you started. Who says there's a "general information lack regarding recognizers"?

I've never disputed the notability or sources for these dates - that's why we've dedicated an entire article to them. However, you've yet to give a coherent, policy based argument for why they should be duplicated on this article, which is specifically about recognition and not diplomatic relations. TDL (talk) 09:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

If someone goes in circles, that's you. You don't agree to show relations, I agree and we had enough circular discussing above, so let's see what others think. Japinderum (talk) 07:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I can't see any reason to add dates of diplomatic relations. At TDL says, this is only tangentially related, and we have another article about it already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bazonka (talk • contribs)

• I suggest that we organize ourselves to systematically re-write most of the non-recognizing countries´info boxes in a way that preserves the information there, but presents it in a much more concise way. I also support the addition of a link to the Kosovo-xxx relations pages from the recognizer's section Jsaldarr (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, much of the content could be rewritten more concisely while still getting the important points across. TDL (talk) 01:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Conclusion?

There was absolutely no support for significantly reducing the recognisers information or significantly increasing the non-recognisers information, so we can discount these options.
Adding links to the relevant diplomatic relations articles for recognisers is not a bad idea, as long as it's not too obtrusive.
Rewriting the non-recogniser's information more concisely would also help, but this has been mooted before and nothing happened. I suspect that nobody can actually be bothered to do this (myself included I am ashamed to say).
I think we should remove the undue template, because whilst there is a difference in the way that the recognisers and non-recognisers details are presented, I have seen no compelling argument that shows that there really is any undue weight. Bazonka (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, I'm too lazy to do it as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this for the links to subarticles:

	Country	Date of recognition	Relevant international membership
8	United States[89] (relations)	18 February 2008	UNSC permanent member NATO member

That shouldn't be too obstrusive. TDL (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with such table change. Japinderum (talk) 11:08, 25 November 2012 (UTC)