[Rictor]

Oh look. What a surprise. My country just broken up. Again. Into even smaller pieces. Again.

Maybe it's something in the water, but we people from the Balkans can't seem to get enough of splitting apart. What was once Yugoslavia is now six seperate countries, soon to be seven. Let that sink in for a while. A country of 25 million people has broken up into six parts, most likely seven by this time next year. That's unheard of. And I mean any-****ing-where. This isn't the Soviet Union we're talking about; they had enough people for each splinter republic to have an actual, sustainable population. And just because it may be of slight note, the newly created nation of Montenegro has a whopping 650,000 citizens. Truly a power to fear and envy.

Why would the gentle people of Montenegro want to seperate from their already loose union with Serbia, you ask? Well clearly they are an entirely seperate people, with a singular, unconnected history and incompatible with the Serbian people, and living under the cruel oppression of the Serbian overlords has enflamed their yearning for freedom, which can only be satisfied by taking their ball and going home. Creating a state with a population smaller than the suburbs of any major city and an economy based primarily on tourism and smuggling - what a brilliant, sublime idea that was! Particularly helpful is having a prime minister who has been in office for 15 years and is, by all credible accounts, a bit of a criminal. Democrats the world over must surely rejoice to hear that the people of Montenegro have voted to free themselves from the shackles of beloning to a viable state, thereby confirming the true Balkan spirit of unity and togetherness.

I for one am looking forward to the imminent creation of The Republic of Belgrade, spanning the vast area of Belgrade and the surrounding regions. And who said city-states were a thing of the passed? Ha! What's that I hear: "No nation can survive being split into so many pieces!". Watch and wait, friends, and we'll show you how it's really done. Divided we stand and united we fall.

Onward, to mediocrity!

[Mars]

Uh... I'm sorry

[Polpolion]

All the schools will need new geography books!! Oh no!!!


On a more seriouse note, that sucks. I mean REALLY!! The city of Detriot has more than that amount of people!!

[Bobboau]

YAY! now you can stop corecting me when I refer to it as Serbia!

[watsisname]

Wow, the vote was only 0.4% over the required 55%.  That's damn close.

I'm really sorry to hear this, man.  Hope everything works out for the best.

[Rictor]

Wow, the vote was only 0.4% over the required 55%.  That's damn close.

I'm really sorry to hear this, man.  Hope everything works out for the best.

Yeah, and ethnic Albanians are the ones who tipped it. The majority of Montenegrins voted to stay. I've read that the Yes (seperatist) side won by about 170 votes. But even if the vote were above 50% but below required 55%, Milo Djukanovic (the PM of Montenegro and main force behind the seperatist movement) would keep at it, taking the results as encouraging, and he would eventually have gotten the result he wanted.

The opinion in Serbia seems to be mixed. Montenegro had disproportionate power and used up a disproportionate amount of resources in relation to their size, so in many ways it's a lightening of the burden. Besides, they already had quasi-independence, having a seperate currency and government institutions. The one thing I'm really pissed about is that now Serbia is landlocked, with no access to the sea, which I never even got to visit. A monumental injustice, I tell ya, depriving me of my God-given right to accessible beaches.

YAY! now you can stop corecting me when I refer to it as Serbia!

I don't recall ever doing that. If anything the name is now blessedly normal. Do you have any idea how hard it is to work "Serbia and Montengro" into football chants?

[Kosh]

Balkanization strikes again.


Seriously, what is it with Balkans countries breaking up all the time?

[NGTM-1R]

They took the concept of microcosm of Europe too literally?

[aldo_14]

Balkanization strikes again.


Seriously, what is it with Balkans countries breaking up all the time?

Well, they do seem to be constantly at their throats.  55% strikes me as a low barrier, but if that's what they voted for......

FYI; Luxembourg has a population of 465,000, Malta 397,000, Andorra 64,000, and Liechtenstein 34,000, so I don't think there is really and justification for a population barrier on statehood. Unless you think the preceding 4 (for example) should be swallowed up by their neighbours.

NB: @Rictor; why don't ethnic Albanians count as Montenegrins if they are eligible to vote in that country?

[Flaser]

Balkanization strikes again.


Seriously, what is it with Balkans countries breaking up all the time?

Well, they do seem to be constantly at their throats.  55% strikes me as a low barrier, but if that's what they voted for......

FYI; Luxembourg has a population of 465,000, Malta 397,000, Andorra 64,000, and Liechtenstein 34,000, so I don't think there is really and justification for a population barrier on statehood. Unless you think the preceding 4 (for example) should be swallowed up by their neighbours.

NB: @Rictor; why don't ethnic Albanians count as Montenegrins if they are eligible to vote in that country?

They do.

It's only that they are up front about being Albanians as well, while the rest of the people are content being Montenegrans.

[Rictor]

FYI; Luxembourg has a population of 465,000, Malta 397,000, Andorra 64,000, and Liechtenstein 34,000, so I don't think there is really and justification for a population barrier on statehood. Unless you think the preceding 4 (for example) should be swallowed up by their neighbours.

NB: @Rictor; why don't ethnic Albanians count as Montenegrins if they are eligible to vote in that country?

Yes, but notice one thing all those countries have more or less in common: money. They're little, but rich. Hell the UAE only has about 600,000 people (well, citizens, and several million non-citizen workers) and they've got money coming out their ears. I think Montenegro put the cart before the horse when they assessed the situation: you don't get rich by being small, but rather you can get away with being small if you are rich. Sure, they are a tourist destination but frankly there are many nicer places to go, and in any case the main tourist group has always been Serbians anyway.

As for Albanians, I never said they don't count. If they didn't count they wouldn't be on the rolls and wouldn't have voted. I was just pointing out that a demographic which makes up about 5% of the population (of Montenegro) were what tipped the vote for the entire country. If the refferendum was about Montenegrin identity, ethnicity and national destiny, which if you look at any of the coverage or rhetoric it was, it's ironic that what decided the vote was a demogrphic that is not culturally or ethnically Montenegrin. I'm sure I'll get flak for that, but whatever.

What's hilarious is that the term Balkanization wasn't even invented as a result of  his recent catastrohpic split, but rather a previous one in the early 20th century where the same thing happened. I feel confident that Yugoslavia will get back together one day, for the sole purpose of being able to break up. Third time's the charm!

[aldo_14]

As for Albanians, I never said they don't count. If they didn't count they wouldn't be on the rolls and wouldn't have voted. I was just pointing out that a demographic which makes up about 5% of the population (of Montenegro) were what tipped the vote for the entire country. If the refferendum was about Montenegrin identity, ethnicity and national destiny, which if you look at any of the coverage or rhetoric it was, it's ironic that what decided the vote was a demogrphic that is not culturally or ethnically Montenegrin. I'm sure I'll get flak for that, but whatever.

would it matter if it was another 5% demographic that were not, perhaps ethnically but (for example) culturally different to the 'norm'?  Were there, to paraphrase, 'non Montenegrin' ethnicities that were voting?  Is Albanian / Montenegrin really the only division you can make to the population?

[an0n]

And now begins the 'conquer' phase of 'divide and conquer'.....

[Kosh]

I feel confident that Yugoslavia will get back together one day, for the sole purpose of being able to break up.

I somehow doubt that all of these other states will want to live under the rule of a group of people that recently tried to wipe them out......

[Rictor]

And now begins the 'conquer' phase of 'divide and conquer'.....

Slovenia has already joined the EU, Croatia is doing so next year. Bosnia and Macedonia shouldn't be far behind, after which comes Montonegro (one of their reasons for seccession was that Serbia wasn't kneeling sufficiently low, and therefore the Powers That Be delayed entry talks) and lastly Serbia. I would say that within five or six years the whole process should come to it's grim conclusion.

So as you see, the conquer phase is already well under way. Each post-YU state is now too weak to so much as take a piss without permission, and eventual NATO membership is a given, of course. I have a strong suspicion that Yugoslavia's refusal to sign on the dotted line, after all of Eastern Europe had proved so perfectly compliant and accomodating, was one of the reasons why the downfall of Yugoslavia had quite a few helping hands from outside. Just goes to show, you can't fight city hall.

I somehow doubt that all of these other states will want to live under the rule of a group of people that recently tried to wipe them out......

Missed my sarcasm, did you?

would it matter if it was another 5% demographic that were not, perhaps ethnically but (for example) culturally different to the 'norm'?  Were there, to paraphrase, 'non Montenegrin' ethnicities that were voting?  Is Albanian / Montenegrin really the only division you can make to the population?

Well given that there aren't too many minorities in Montenegro - Wikipedia says 7.5% Bosniak, 5% Albanian, 30% Serb and the rest are Montenegrin - I don't know which ones you mean. OK, the Bosniak vote could be held up in the same light, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that they played a particularly decisive role. To illustrate what I mean, it would be like Scotland voting on whether to remain part of the UK, and the decisive factor in favour of seperation being Germans living in Soctland. If the vote is on the relationship status of Serbia and Montenegro, in a part of the world where ethnic identification is perhaps the strongest kind, than yes, the crucial involvement of a third party, especially one that is not a disinterested bystander, is important.

[aldo_14]

would it matter if it was another 5% demographic that were not, perhaps ethnically but (for example) culturally different to the 'norm'?  Were there, to paraphrase, 'non Montenegrin' ethnicities that were voting?  Is Albanian / Montenegrin really the only division you can make to the population?

Well given that there aren't too many minorities in Montenegro - Wikipedia says 7.5% Bosniak, 5% Albanian, 30% Serb and the rest are Montenegrin - I don't know which ones you mean. OK, the Bosniak vote could be held up in the same light, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that they played a particularly decisive role. To illustrate what I mean, it would be like Scotland voting on whether to remain part of the UK, and the decisive factor in favour of seperation being Germans living in Soctland. If the vote is on the relationship status of Serbia and Montenegro, in a part of the world where ethnic identification is perhaps the strongest kind, than yes, the crucial involvement of a third party, especially one that is not a disinterested bystander, is important.

so why don't the other minorities matter here?  why focus on Albanians?  I mean, there's arguably a whopping 30% there who are likely to vote to remain with Serbia, do we factor them in as assumed 'against' voters and say that 30% of that 50% were not culturally or ethnically Montenegrin but Serbian?  Do we pick and choose which ethnic groups 'count'?

[Rictor]

I think your basic misunderstanding is that people over yonder identify primarily with their ethnic group, not with their nation, not even with their religion. It's a bit of a stretch to really get your mind around that if you've never been exposed to such a mentality. So an Albanian, whether he is living in Kosovo, Serbia, Albania, Croatia or anywhere else, has his stakes with Albania. And I don't mean to pick of them, all sides have the same attitude. Do you think a Serb living in Kosovo considers himself a Kosovar or a Serb? Do you think Bosnian Serbs salute the Bosnian flag, or the Serbian one? Which may be in large part what is to blame for the splintering of Yugoslavia, because people back the interest of their ethnic group over their nation, which is just the place where your ass happens to parked for the moment.

This may seem groteque or foreign to you, but that's the way it is. To throw out a random example, some portion of Jews living in America would back Israel's interests over America's. Some wouldn't, because they identify primarily with their nation, not their ehtnicity. But if you could pretty safely assume that all Jews living in America would back Israel over America, which is what you can more or less assume in any part of the ex-YU, then asking them to vote on whether the US should open talks with Iran, even if this might be potentially beneficial for the US, would be a bit absurd.  Divided loyalties and all that. So if you're an Albanian, and you get to vote on whether your regional enemy is going to be weakened, yes or no, I don't believe I'm being xenophobic if I roll my eyes when you vote yes.

[aldo_14]

I think your basic misunderstanding is that people over yonder identify primarily with their ethnic group, not with their nation, not even with their religion. It's a bit of a stretch to really get your mind around that if you've never been exposed to such a mentality. So an Albanian, whether he is living in Kosovo, Serbia, Albania, Croatia or anywhere else, has his stakes with Albania. And I don't mean to pick of them, all sides have the same attitude. Do you think a Serb living in Kosovo considers himself a Kosovar or a Serb? Do you think Bosnian Serbs salute the Bosnian flag, or the Serbian one? Which may be in large part what is to blame for the splintering of Yugoslavia, because people back the interest of their ethnic group over their nation, which is just the place where your ass happens to parked for the moment.

This may seem groteque or foreign to you, but that's the way it is. To throw out a random example, some portion of Jews living in America would back Israel's interests over America's. Some wouldn't, because they identify primarily with their nation, not their ehtnicity. But if you could pretty safely assume that all Jews living in America would back Israel over America, which is what you can more or less assume in any part of the ex-YU, then asking them to vote on whether the US should open talks with Iran, even if this might be potentially beneficial for the US, would be a bit absurd.  Divided loyalties and all that. So if you're an Albanian, and you get to vote on whether your regional enemy is going to be weakened, yes or no, I don't believe I'm being xenophobic if I roll my eyes when you vote yes.

If it was 40-60 the other way, would we be going 'Serbs voted for it, not Montenegrins' and condemn it then as some weakening of Montenegro at the hands of Serbia?

[Rictor]

No, because the two parties invovled in the transaction are Serbia and Montenegro. The two groups are obviously interested parties, but the fact remains that they are the two factions involved in the dispute, not anyone else. If Hungarians, Russians, Australians, Jamaicans or any other group voted in a decisive numbers, I'd make mention of them as well.

But like I said, it wouldn't have made a difference. Unless the Serbian government or allied Montenegrin politicians pulled a miracle out of their ass, the seperatist side would have just kept at it. Unless the vote had been well below 50%, the result would have eventually been the same, after a few years of political wrangling.

[aldo_14]

No, because the two parties invovled in the transaction are Serbia and Montenegro. The two groups are obviously interested parties, but the fact remains that they are the two factions involved in the dispute, not anyone else. If Hungarians, Russians, Australians, Jamaicans or any other group voted in a decisive numbers, I'd make mention of them as well.

But like I said, it wouldn't have made a difference. Unless the Serbian government or allied Montenegrin politicians pulled a miracle out of their ass, the seperatist side would have just kept at it. Unless the vote had been well below 50%, the result would have eventually been the same, after a few years of political wrangling.

Isn't a Montenegrin independence referendum about Montenegros' national (cultural, regional) interest, rather then Serbias?  If it's ok for Serbians to vote in the interest of their 'parent' country, why not Albanians? (even if we relegate them to the position of effective puppets)  Surely no state can claim to exist in isolation from its neighbours, after all.  And if not, what about the other ethnicities?