Jump to content

Talk:International recognition of Kosovo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 209.235.2.8 (talk) at 14:09, 28 October 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Oman and Guinea Bissau, out of the list

http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics-article.php?yyyy=2011&mm=09&dd=08&nav_id=76291 109.121.18.86 (talk) 01:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PM of Albania Berisha asks Bhutan to recognize Kosovo

During his stay in New York, where he takes part in the proceedings of the 66th session of UN General Assembly, Prime Minister Sali Berisha met with Prime Minister of Bhutan Jigme Thinley. At the meeting they noted that recognition of Kosovo's independence is a legitimate right of its people. (http://www.keshilliministrave.al/?fq=brenda&m=news&lid=15185 | Prime Minister Official Page) Other link http://www.botasot.info/def.php?category=6&id=136712 Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We can't use this information in the article. We need to know how Bhutan responded to the request. Bazonka (talk) 17:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speculations of what they have spoken. Really funny, like the whole process of the separation. 109.121.18.86 (talk) 01:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brunei & Eritrea

Perhaps we can use something in this article. http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,63281 12.104.97.211 (talk) 21:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Special news.

I've added a few words about these countries, but I would hardly call it "special". It's just typical diplomatic rhetoric - "yes we'll consider something" doesn't really give us any clues about what they're going to decide. Bazonka (talk) 07:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I see that in this article for the most countries in past few months is only relevant source here is what Kosovar Ministry of Foreign affairs said, and no other, and explanation for this from Albanian authors is often "Because Serbs lie" (very logical and objective explanation, isn't it [irony] ). One source of information from only one side (which is most directly involved in issue) can not be relevant, because there is not any guarantee for objectivity, if there are not direct official statements from other countries who recognised or not Kosovo (and "Serbs, or Serb ministers are liars, and because we are right and you are wrong" is not a relevant argument for grown up man/woman with barely normal intelligence). If there is a will for real objectivity with current source of information on this article, this article should have "Disputed neutrality" badge, but I know that it won't happen, because Wikipedia long ago stopped to be encyclopedia and became a battlefield and tool for most vulgar and disgusting ethnic and political propaganda. --178.253.208.123 (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well considering Serbian, Albanian, Kosovar and other Balkan media also report these recognitions... (do I need to finish the sentence?) IJA (talk) 12:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To 178.253.208.123: "One source of information from only one side"? It's the only side that matters. Not because it's Kosovo, but because that is who the recognitions are sent to. Brunei isn't likely to send a note to Panama saying "we recognize Kosovo". If the Kosovo MFA reports a recognition the only country that can dispute it is the named recognizer. I'm really not sure what else you want us to add. --Khajidha (talk) 13:09, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One source is better than no source. Politicians on both sides (wittingly or unwittingly) say things that are untrue or make predictions that turn out to be false. In this article we try to reflect both sides. In many cases, when I add something to the article I will write "It was reported that X said Y" rather than just "X said Y" - the fact that it was reported is undeniably correct, and the reader can make up their mind whether to believe the message. Only where something is totally and obviously inaccurate will we omit it, e.g. Jeremic's claim that Guinea-Bissau had never recognised, despite there being ample evidence that a note verbale had been produced. Yes there are biased editors here, but there are also a lot of neutral editors who try to keep things level. Bazonka (talk) 16:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To IJA: Yes, but there are countries that only has reference from Kosovar ministry of foreign afairs. Albanian media also cannot be consider neutral in this issue. And on many references from serbian media if you look in articles you will notice that in sveral of references it sais "Kosovar minster stated that (some country) recognised Kosovo", but on this article that is used as relevant reference.
--178.253.208.123 (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To Khajidha: It is not need for (for example) Brunei to send note to Panama, but it is needed for Brunei MFA (or Brunei media) to give official statement also.
"If the Kosovo MFA reports a recognition the only country that can dispute it is the named recognizer.": as I said Kosovo MFA can't be considered as objective reference only (neither Serbian or Albanian). There were several times when Kosovo MFA "a will" of some country to recognize Kosovo inerpreted as an "official recognition" and those are two different things. If named recognizer does not dispute it, it doesn't mean in any international diplomatic practice that it automatic confirms it. With that logic Kosovo MFA can say that Mars recognized Kosovo, and it will be automatic considered a truth until Mars dispute it. In other words there can be many reasons (diplomatic or practical) why named recognizer don't dispute that (if "recognizer" is even aware of KMFA statement), and because, it is needed a statement from recognizer (or its media) and not only from Kosovo, Albania or Serbia. --178.253.208.123 (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In some countries, particularly those with a poor internet presence, recognition will not be big news and there is no guarantee that they will publicise it, even if it's true. Yes it would be good to have a direct reference, but we can't rely on this. Bazonka (talk) 17:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your Mars example fails because it would first be necessary to demonstrate that there was a civilization there to extend recognition. Confirmation from any country besides the recognizer and the recognized is ridiculous. Brunei's statement is its note of recognition to Kosovo, it does not need to announce its decision to anyone else. You are upset that people are claiming that "Serbs are liars", but your entire argument boils down to "Albanians/Kosovars are liars". --Khajidha (talk) 17:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To Khajidha: "Mars example" was formal example, we all know that there is no life there. "Confirmation from any country besides the recognizer and the recognized is ridiculous": But I also said that, and I'm saying that statement of recognizer is more important and only neutral. You also said: "You are upset that people are claiming that "Serbs are liars", but your entire argument boils down to "Albanians/Kosovars are liars". First this is argumentum ad hominem so it is not relevant for this discussion, and second I didn't said that. I said that Kosovar, Albanian and Serbian MFA or media can't be treated as objective (nor this article), and that's not the same thing.

--178.253.208.123 (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You missed my point with the statement that you passed over. "Brunei's statement is its note of recognition to Kosovo, it does not need to announce its decision to anyone else." You are asking a recognizing country to tell the world at large that it recognizes another country when there is no reason for them so to do. A country recognizes another as a beginning to a relationship between them, the rest of the world is completely irrelevant to that. I don't see how your point about objectivity is relevant. Objectivity applies to opinions, the receipt of a letter of recognition is a fact. The reports from the Kosovo MFA state that they have received such letters from the named recognizers, how is their objectivity in question? --Khajidha (talk) 12:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Brunei is to recognize soon http://www.gazetaexpress.com/?cid=1,13,63299 12.104.97.211 (talk) 12:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brunei recognized..... http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,955 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.130.188.13 (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. Brunei is on its way to recognize, but it hasn't done so yet. --alchaemia (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No-one has stated that "Serbs are liars", people have stated that "Jeremic is a liar" because Oman and G-B have both reconfirmed their recognitions after he stated that they have withdrawn their recognitions; not that in general he is a liar. He was wrong on this issue. Now let me ask this, is there any reason to believe that the Kosovan Ministry of Foreign is untrustworthy? Have they ever been wrong about a recognition in the past? No. MFAs regarding "International recognition of Kosovo" are the most official reference points and as I have stated media from different countries have also reported these recognitions. News from MFAs is news straight from the horses mouth. In terms of KB size, this article is already too big and we can't afford to increase the size of the article to give each point several references. Also if you look through the archives to when a certain country recognises Kosovo, many different references can be seen to prove the recognition. There is no evidence to suggest that the Kosovan MFA is being biased when reporting facts. IJA (talk) 22:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Promises for new recognition

President of Kosovo Atifete Jahjaga and Prime Minister of Kosovo Hashim Thaci for Voice of America confirm that are 84 states that have recognized Kosovo. (http://www.voanews.com/albanian/news/Jahjaga-130528133.html, http://www.voanews.com/albanian/news/Thaci-Do-te-shperbejme-strukturat-ilegale-dhe-kriminale-qe-veprojne-ne-veri-te-Kosoves-130288618.html) Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 1:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
  • We can't use your first article here. It only states that Pacolli is in contact with Zuma, and that there will be "multiple results" from 14 other states. Whilst these are probably SADC, this is not explicitly stated. "Multiple results" is too vague; it could mean 14 rejections.
  • The second article is practically identical to the first. Why did you post this twice? All it says is that Pacolli has had "good meetings" with Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. This is too tenuous to use.
  • The third article is unusable. Which 40 states does it refer to? This is all speculation. Remember WP:NOTFORUM.
  • Fourth article - Niger is going to lobby. So what? How can we use this information here? WP:NOTFORUM again.
  • The fifth article gives us some news about Egypt's position, but is second-hand, i.e. quoting Hoxhaj and not directly any Egyptians, and is very similar to news that we've already put into the article. Therefore I don't think it can be used. And as for the other countries, it just says that Hoxhaj is going to talk to them - utterly useless.
  • The sixth article is not relevant here. It is more appropriate for Serbia's reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence.
  • The seventh article helps to confirm the most recent recognitions, but there's nothing we can use here.
  • The eighth article is totally irrelevant. Did you post the wrong link?
Thanks for your input, but in the future please try to post only information that we can use in this article. Bazonka (talk) 07:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Revise down number of recognizers?

In light of long absence of new recognizers after St. Lucia on webpage of Kosovo's Min. of Foreign affairs, it seems some countries may have been added to the list here of recognizers prematurely.

also see http://www.kosovothanksyou.com/news/?p=660 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.209.103.5 (talk) 21:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

kosovothanksyou.com is sponsored by serbian anti-kosovar cetniks. --89.204.136.53 (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where on earth did you get that from, IP89? And in response to IP84, you have a good point. There is, however, more evidence showing that these countries recognised than evidence showing that they haven't, but it isn't conclusive evidence. Perhaps we should reinstate the "awaiting confirmation" text. Bazonka (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should change anything. What kosovothanksyou.com does is its business. The Kosovo FM is waiting for the Notes Verbale. Their absence does not represent non-recognition. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 23:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gabon point in case - 19 days and waiting? How long does this take? It should take max a week to verify/confirm a recognition. One should at least have an upper limit after which the supposed recognizer should be withdrawn if Kosovo authorities do not say anything. One should err on the side of caution. In my view the sources are losing strength with every passing day when it comes to Gabon, Nigeria and Ivory Coast. IP84 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.209.103.5 (talk • contribs)
hi, Kosovothanksyou explained why they removed Nigeria and Gabon from the official list - ie it is not yet official. Those two states are like Cote d'Ivoire, awaiting official confirmation. They do not want to announce as official before the MFA - it is the job of the MFA to do so. P.S. Kosovothanksyou are not antikosovar cetniks, but are just doing their job properly and not being balkanic about it. I guess it is rare in the balkans) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.106.215.170 (talk) 19:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting more worried about our inclusion of Gabon, Ivory Coast and Nigeria in the list of recognisers. Surely an official statement would have been made by now? Bazonka (talk) 07:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I started this specific subject and think that the time has now come for a revision down. For the future: Some kind of safety mechanism might be built in (No confirmation from official sources within x number of days = revision) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.209.103.5 (talk) 20:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sound suggestion, I agree.Tironc Puro Fare (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a dude from Nigeria saying that they did recognize [1] - Canadian Bobby (talk) 17:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo Parliament Speaker Krasniqi states that Kuwait would be the 85th state to recognize Kosovo: [2] TDL (talk) 03:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Kosovo MFA still hasn't confirmed three of our listed recognitions. Therefore we should in fact revise our list (or maybe create a special category for the disputed cases as has been suggested), otherwise we end up in speculation. --DaQuirin (talk) 11:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The MFA is now confirming Gabon. Based on this (a late note verbale), I'd say let's wait and/or create a special category. [3] --alchaemia (talk) 06:36, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the point. All three have citations to announcements from First Deputy Prime Minister Pacolli, what more do we need? As part of the cabinet, he should know which countries have or have not recognized. --Khajidha (talk) 12:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point, Khajidha. The handwringers want to panic and wring their hands. From the MFA website: "...meanwhile it is also expecting official confirmation for the recognition of Kosovo from Nigeria and the Ivory Coast." - Canadian Bobby (talk) 18:11, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how the amount of panic has increased dramatically the closer we get to 50% of UN members recognizing. --Khajidha (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aaaaand the MFA has just officially confirmed both Nigeria and Cote d'Ivoire. [4] --alchaemia (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MFA of Kosovo confirmed both Nigeria and Cote d'Ivoire according to the insisting of Behgjet Pacolli for this country (http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=2,33) Media comment (http://www.kosovatimes.net/?page=1,17,1353 , http://www.koha.net/?page=1,13,73055) Dates should be coordinated with the MFA list for example 82.Federal Republic of Nigeria 12 September 2011 83.Republic of Gabon 15 September 2011 and 84.Ivory Coast 20 September 2011. Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 19:42, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition from Kuwait

Official website of the Parliament of Kuwait = National Assembly of Kuwait, Kosovo refers to the name Republic of Kosovo. (http://www.kna.kw/clt/default_newsdetails.asp?id=13573). Tomorrow a delegation from Kuwait will visit Prishtina. At the head of the delegation is the Chairman of the National Assembly of Kuwait His Excellency Jassem Al-Kharafi. National Assembly of Kuwait considers Kosovo as a state. Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 02:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't get that link to work, but I've found this instead: [5]. It just says that a Kuwaiti parliamentary delegation will be visiting Kosovo. This may turn into a recognition, but I haven't seen any evidence to say that it's already happened. Bazonka (talk) 07:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Link worked for me. Here is the translation Google Chrome gave me: "Wrote delegates of the National Assembly - Muhammad Faisal Subaie. arrived His Excellency the President of the National Assembly Jassem Al-Kharafi and his accompanying delegation to the Albanian capital (Tirana) this evening (Thursday) coming from the Serbian capital (Belgrade), as part of an official tour also includes the Republic of Kosovo, and was received Upon arrival at the airport by Vice-President of the Albanian Parliament Adrian Tocco and Chairman of the Parliamentary Friendship Kuwait - Albanian Albanian Parliament Osman Hpittala and a member of the Albanian parliament and Kuwait's Ambassador to Albania, Najeeb Al-Bader and his staff. The delegation includes all members of Mohammed Hove Wad. Ali Al-Omair, Faisal Duwaisan" --Khajidha (talk) 14:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kuwait to officially recognize Kosovo soon states National Assembly Speaker of Kuwait after meeting Kosovar Prime Minister Thaçi as reported by Kuwait News Agency (KUNA). The formal diplomatic ties could be established as early as Tuesday during the visit of the Kosovar Minister of Foreign Affairs to Kuwait. A quote like this might be useful: "Kuwait and Kosovo have agreed on the need to start and prepare to lay the foundations of bilateral relations and joint cooperation in the political, economic, trade, investment and tourism spheres." Many thanks, Kosovar (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The correct link is [6]. I have added a sentence. Bazonka (talk) 17:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that Kuwait has gone and officially recognized Kosovo. [7] --alchaemia (talk) 07:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Kosovar media confirmed it too[8], so it'd be safe to add Kuwait to the list of recognitions.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 08:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
MFA confirms. [9] --alchaemia (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No update in recognizer's list with flags — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.209.103.5 (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? I can see it in the list. Bazonka (talk) 07:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq

Iraq will not recognise Kosovo. That is different that some of the information's we have in the article.

__WhiteWriter speaks 15:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a few words. However, all they're really saying is that they haven't recognised Kosovo yet. Bazonka (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Which is kind of like the US saying "we still recognize Kosovo". Yeah, we know. --alchaemia (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MFA: Kosovo’s recognition confirmed by the Republic of Gabon

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo has received from the Republic of Gabon the verbal note on the recognition the independent and sovereign stare of Kosovo. As previously notified on September 9, 2011 by Deputy Prime Minister Behgjet Pacolli, this country has recognized the Republic of Kosovo whereas now the verbal note has reached the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo through the diplomatic mission in New York.

The verbal note confirms Gabon’s recognition of Kosovo and expresses the willingness to establish diplomatic ties between the two countries.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kosovo has now received verbal notes on recognition from 83 countries meanwhile it is also expecting official confirmation for the recognition of Kosovo from Nigeria and the Ivory Coast. http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,984

Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 11:36, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant International Membership flags removal due to article size

I propose we remove the flags from the sections "Relevant International membership" for recognisers and non-recognisers to reduce the KB size of the article, which is already too big. There will not be a loss of any encyclopaedic information, we will still keep note of relevant international membership (UNSC, EU, NATO and OIC etc); however the flags themselves are not necessary and do not add any value to the article. The flags just increase the article KB size. Therefore I propose the removal of the flags for "relevant international membership" to decrease the KB size of the article which is already too big. This isn't a POV suggestion, purely a technical matter. The flags are already included in the "Positions taken by intergovernmental organisations" section. Why have an extra 28 NATO flags, 27 EU flags ect, 15 UN flags or 50-ish OIC flags? Your thoughts? IJA (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support as long as the organizational flags remain at the organization's own listing. I still think that only the P5 UNSC members need to be called out. --Khajidha (talk) 14:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers for your support. I agree that the flags should remain in the organisation section too, but aren't needed next to countries who are in them organisations. IJA (talk) 14:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I support this proposal. Thanks for taking the initiative. --alchaemia (talk) 18:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 21:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I believe I have enough consensus (as I have not received any objections) so I will perform the edit soon. I will wait until tomorrow morning/ early afternoon (European time) to give chance for any objections; however hopefully I'll be able to perform the edit aka removal of certain flags to decrease the KB size of the article. Cheers everyone for contributing to my proposal. Much appreciated. Regards IJA (talk) 22:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers IJA (talk) 22:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


OK I've removed the organisation flags under "relevant international membership" and consequently the KB size of the article is smaller. Cheers all IJA (talk) 12:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm - it doesn't look as nice, and the saving made is not significant. I would prefer it if they were put back. Bazonka (talk) 20:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It has saved just less than 40 KB and we're trying to lower the KB size, this is a start; still needs improving though. Just think, every time our audiences load up this article page, they're loading up around 100 images (flags) less than previously. We're not here to make things look 'nice', we're here to make an encyclopaedia. I'd say this is a job well done. I'm going to look for new ways to reduce the KB size of the article without removing content. If people have suggestions, let me know. I will not however perform any moves without some sort of backing. IJA (talk) 21:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MFA of Kosovo: Sovereign Military Order of Malta has recognized Kosovo two years ago.

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kosovo, Petrit Selimi, on Wednesday received a senior delegation of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, who is visiting for the first time Kosovo.

Wash leaders of the Knights of Malta Order, declared their full commitment to assist in advancing strongly all democratic processes in Kosovo.

After the formal recognition of independence from SMOM two years ago, senior representatives of humanitarian organizations have declared this their full readiness to henceforth help the people of Kosovo in advance of internal development, with particular emphasis on the sector Health and social assistance.

http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,1000

Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 20:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SMOM is not a state. It should perhaps be listed in the intergovernmental organisations section, but certainly not in the Non-UN Members section. Bazonka (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know that SMOM is a state / entity independent. The Sovereign Military Order of Malta is headquartered in Rome, Italy, and is widely considered a sovereign subject of international law. It is a permanent non-state observer to the United Nations. It maintains diplomatic relations with over 100 countries. Some of these are hosts of SMOM Embassies. Why SMOM not be considered as a state? For me and for his member SMOM is a state, have a capital, have territories in Rome who are recognized as independent by the Italian government for example Palazzo Malta. It is located in Via dei Condotti 68 in Rome, Italy, a few minutes' walk from the Spanish Steps, and has been granted extraterritoriality by the Italian Government and is now the property of the Order. SMOM is a state. Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 22:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even read the article you copied most of that from? "It is a permanent NON-STATE[emphasis added by me] observer to the United Nations." --Khajidha (talk) 20:35, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No but even Vatican City is non-state observer to the United Nations, Palestina non-entity observer to the United Nations. SMOM have similar status with Vatican City, have extraterritoriality of the territory, have embassies in many countries. Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 22:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm SMOM is a tricky one, I'd class it as an elitist organisation rather than an entity or a state. However I do not see a problem with grouping it with Taiwan (ROC) therefore I suggesting changing the title "States which are not members of the UN" which Taiwan (ROC) is under to something which suits the both of them. If so however I suggests removing the "86 recs... 85 UN" and just having "Kosovo has received many recognitions, most notably 85 UN member states" or something along them lines because I don't believe SMOM's recognition is equal to Taiwan (ROC) recognition. IJA (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to the UN's own website, the Holy See (the international diplomatic representative of the Vatican) is a non-member state. While the SMOM is treated as an organization, similar to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. While to the ordinary person such as you or I SMOM seems to have many of the trappings of a state, the international community is clear in that it is not considered to be one. While its recognition should be listed, it does not belong in the list of states. I concur with the change made to incorporate ROC and SMOM into one category, as having two single entry categories looks messy. --Khajidha (talk) 11:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER OF THE SOVEREIGN MILITAR ORDER OF ST. JOHN OF JERUSALEM OF RHODES AND OF MALTA promulgated 27 June 1961, revised by the Extraordinary Chapter General, 28-30 April 1997 ARTICLE 3 Sovereignty P a r. 1 — The Order is a subject of international law and exercises sovereign functions. For me this is a state because have a territory whose sovereignty is recognized from Italy, have a flag, recognized by UN with the same status as the Vatican. In 23 Article of the CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER of SMOM state governmental body designation is 'The Council Complete of State'. (http://www.orderofmalta.int/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/order-of-malta-constitution.pdf). Everybody recognize SMOM as a state. SMOM has more right that the Republic of China to place there (States which are not members of the UN). Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 00:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Order extends diplomatic recognition, but it does establish diplomatic relations, as Oman and New Zealand do. Further, the MFA doesn't list it as a recognizing state. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Even Republic of China the MFA doesn't list it as a recognizing state. Because Republic of China, SMOM, Vatican City, Palestina are not full members at the UN. In this official statements of MFA of Kosovo cited: SMOM formally recognized Kosovo two years ago. (http://www.mfa-ks.net/?page=1,4,1000). Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 02:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The MFA doesn't list the Republic of China because Kosovo did not reciprocate/accept the recognition because Kosovo wants recognition from Beijing. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 18:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok shall we have two sections for recognisers? 1) UN member states who recognise Kosovo 2) Other states and entities who recognise Kosovo. This is the best way to resolve things as we don't state whether SMOM is a country, entity or not; we can just include SMOM under that title? IJA (talk) 05:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think it's good to break up and have so much sections with a single or no lines at all. The current arrangement seems fine to me (Taiwan and SMOM under "Other states and entities").
About what SMOM is - you can check their own website or Wikipedia article about it. SMOM is not a state. SMOM is not an intergovernmental organization. SMOM is not a NGO. SMOM is not a subject of any state law (unlike the ICRC which is subject of Swiss law). SMOM is a sovereign entity (all other sovereign entities are states). SMOM has established diplomatic relations with many states.[10] It's a common practice to put SMOM in a list of states - when this list is about diplomatic recognition, diplomatic relations, ambassadors, embassies, etc. (see many links here - official websites of multiple governments). SMOM does both granting of diplomatic recognitions and establishing of diplomatic relations (see [11] which shows that Montenegro was recognized on 30.06.2006 and relations with it were established later - on 05.09.2006). In the case of Kosovo it seems that SMOM recognized it in 2009,[12] but hasn't yet established diplomatic relations with it.[13]
So, the number of Kosovo diplomatic recognitions is 87 (85 UN members, Taiwan, SMOM). Japinderum (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with the opinion of Japinderum. Good job! 87 diplomatic recognitions (85 UN members + Republic of China + SMOM) Irvi Hyka (talk • contribs) 18:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since everybody is so keen on this, are any of you going to contact the Order of Malta and ask them to confirm what you are assuming? - Canadian Bobby (talk) 01:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google translates the MFA article as: "After the formal recognition of independence of the Order two years ago", not "by the Order". This could be a mistranslation, but if not, it seems that Kosovo recognised SMOM in 2009, not the other way round. Perhaps an Albanian speaker can confirm one way or the other. Bazonka (talk) 06:17, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Google translate provides "by", "from", "by the" or "from the" as alternative translations of the word in question. And the English word "of" in the translation can have two different interpretations anyway, at least if you only consider the clause you have provided. In the context of the entire paragraph it should be interpreted as meaning that the recognition came from SMOM. --Khajidha (talk) 11:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree that the Sovereign Military Order of Malta should be categorized with Taiwan, or even with the Vatican City. The former two could potentially be considered UN members (I won't go into the whole PRC-Taiwan debate, except to note that PRC allows Taiwan to operate now as part of the WHO). In the case of the Vatican City, just to make matters complicated, the Holy See is the UN obsever and maintains diplomatic relations with states, but the Vatican City is the actual sovereign state. SMOM is equivalent to the Holy See in some respects, but lacks the sovereign territory or even really sovereign control of resources, as much of what it has and uses seems to be on loan from Italy. Finally, if my understanding serves me correctly, the UN has stated that the Vatican City could become a UN member state if it wanted to (it doesn't), but no such qualification exists for the SMOM, so it is not really treated by the international community as a sovereign state. As galling as it might be to SMOM supporters, I think it should be categorized elsewhere...probably with international organizations. Considering that its relations with Kosovo were established two years ago, and this is only murkily coming to light now, it would appear that relations with the SMOM are not in the same league as even recognition by a Taiwan or even a South Ossetia. For wiki historians, this reminds me of an old archived discussion about including movements such as Manchukuo Temporary Government, or East Turkestan, etc. SMOM is far more internationally-accepted than those organizations, but I feel like a line of text somewhere might be more appropriate than changing the numbers of recognitions and trying to shoe horn the group into the already-long and complicated lists.209.235.2.8 (talk) 14:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_recognition_of_Kosovo&oldid=457820934"