Right to self determination, not for everybody?

Question

1) When Kosovo declared its independence in February 2008, the President of the US and most European leaders supported its stance. Their main argument was the Kosovar Albanians' right to self-determination, disregarding Serbia's right to protect her territorial integrity.

- "Sooner rather than later you've got to say enough's enough. Kosovo's independent."- George Bush at a press conference in Tirana.

2) South Ossetia wants to seccede from Georgia and become independent/unite with North Ossetia. The President of the US and European leaders back Georgia which seeks to protect her territorial integrity, while disregarding the Ossetian people's right to self-determination.

- Cheney's spokeswoman Lea Ann McBride said the vice president spoke to Saakashvili to express "the United States' solidarity with the Georgian people and their democratically elected government in the face of this threat to Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity."

What do you think? Why can the Kosovar Albanians proclaim independence and the South Ossetians are prevented from doing so? Or, alternatively: Why does Georgia have a right to protect her territorial integrity but Serbia doesn't?

Thanks in advance.

PS I'm not Kosovar Albanian, Serbian, Ossetian, Georgian or Russian.

Answer 1

It's all about politics What side you are on & what you have to gain from it. The U.S.  supports Georgia because we stand to gain better access to massive oil & natural gas deposits. So it is in our best interest.  Ditto for Russia.  

Answer 2

I would agree that it's all about interests, direct interest that the US has or envisages in a particular area, and ANYTHING else - be it borders, population, historical background, deeply rooted antagonisms or friendly relations - ALL of these will be secondary once they perceive the area as desirable for any of their needs.

Such is the case of the so called right of self-determination, too. Sadly turned into mockery and sadly costing us people's lives.

I have nothing better to offer to you and the prospective readers than the exchange going on between the asker&the BA answerer in this particular Q to which I'm supplying a link.

Read it if you have a moment and you'll get a wider picture that is always absolutely necessary, especially so in the Balkans, and you'll be able to understand why the rules of behaviour are so easily bent when it comes to the Serbs:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

It will give you an answer better than any direct one to your specific Q, because it's an ancient tactical concept in action - demonize the nation and then you can strip them of any basic human rights, accompanied by the public opinion applause. Of course the Serbs have no right in anything whatsoever!

Answer 3

"unite with North Ossetia" <=== That, right there, should raise some eyebrows.

This is called annexation. No one wants to see a country EXPAND its borders in the 21st century at the expense of another country. This is the true meaning of the right to "territorial integrity."

Independence does not conflict with territorial integrity, but annexation does (unless border change is MUTUALLY agreed upon by both countries involved)!