- Jan 2017
- Republika Srpska
Yes and the Albanians wanted to secede in 2001 and yet somehow according to the West the Albanians were the instigators in that conflict. So, according to the official version from the West, Serbia was oppressing Albanians in Kosovo, but just a few kilometers away the situation was different. The Albanians of course claim that they were the victims there as well.If so, shouldn't the Presevo Valley be entitled to independence (by joining Kosovo) as well? I mean, if even a post-Milosevic Serbia can't be trusted to treat Kosovar Albanians well, how exactly can they be trusted to treat Presevo Valley Albanians well?
It is a reasonable fear. The Albanians were harassing them BEFORE Milošević even came to power.For that matter, why should Kosovo Serbs be forced to remain in Kosovo if they fear that they won't be treated well?
I am not really in favour of having North Kosovo join Serbia because that would require Serbia to give up its claim on the rest.As in, why not allow northern Kosovo to secede from Kosovo and join Serbia so that at least some of the Serbs in Kosovo will be free of Kosovar Albanian rule?
With the exception of Banovina Croatia (which was created under special circumstances), territorial units in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia were deliberately created not to reference Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia etc. Instead, they were named after rivers, for example Vardar Banovina, Dunav Banovina, Sava Banovina etc. It was part of the policy of "integral Yugoslavianism" supported by king Alexander I. It was a policy that wanted to create a single, Yugoslav people out of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and thus started de-emphasizing those divisions.What is interesting is that the pre-WWII Yugoslav government did not attempt to create a territorial unit out of all of Bosnia like the post-WWII Yugoslav government did. In the 1939 Cvetkovic-Macek Agreement, Bosnia was split and a part of Bosnia was given to an autonomous Croatia.