Judging by their rhetorics towards recognition by Taiwan and that in general Chinese diplomatic vocabulary is rarely direct I think it's safe to say that "grave concern" is pretty much non recognizing. --Avala (talk) 14:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Probably wont recognise Kosovo as independent.Unofrtunately I cant find a source but every source will be welcomed.I tried looking at the Guatemalan foreign mionistry website,however it doesnt say anything about Kosovo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis (talk • contribs) 14:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
IMPORTANT
I think this is getting personal for allot of people posting here.
Allot of listings are completely not objective and do not show true statements from governments and their foreign ministries.
According to the Turkmenistani government,the president of Turkmenistan will fly to Moscow for a meeting with the CIS countries.It is expected they will give statement regarding Kosovo on that meeting.And that will probably be CIS official response.
Can somebody please put more informations regarding this.All that I tried to find is this:
President of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov will participate in the unofficial CIS Summit in Moscow on February 22.
As an associated member of the Commonwealth of Independent States Turkmenistan pursues the policy of wide bilateral co-operation with the CIS states and stands steadfast to the strategy of promoting co-operation that meets the national interests.
Greece colour should be changed to light orange since it is among countries that "have expressed concern over unilateral moves or expressed wish for further negotiations". 79.175.64.242 (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I would say that an appropriate entity would be a major, notable,recognized, national or international organisation. Hard to give an exact definition. Recognized separatist groups could be admitted, for argument's sake, but I would not add individual national or international political parties: there would be way too many "entities".--Scotchorama (talk) 17:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, groups like the "Islamic Community of Serbia" which doesn't appear to have ever made any statements in the past (at least, none notable enough for it to have a page on wikipedia) shouldn't be on this list. Mikebloke (talk) 20:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Switzerland
Can somebody update Switzerland and add the note according to the The Swiss Federal Assembly, that Switzerland Initiated the Recognition of the Republic of Kosova.
The Link is this one:
www.parlament.ch/E/Medienmitteilungen/Pages/mm-sda-2008-02-22.aspx
--91.187.98.251 (talk) 18:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Ukraine
This must be the 7th time that I'm stating that the source regarding Ukraine's non-recognition is not valid, and as such Ukraine should be removed from the list of Countries that explicitly do not recognize....
The comment on that source is not an official government statement, it's the opinion of one man Oleh Bilorus and wish of the Serbian Ambassador compiled by the Ukraine Radio Station.
The Official Statement can be found at the following link and it does not state or declare in any way that Ukraine does not recognize the Republic of Kosova.
The Link: www.mfa.gov.ua/mfa/en/publication/content/16732.htm
The Statement says:
On 17 February 2008 Kosovo declared independence.
The future of Kosovo and the whole region lies within a European perspective. This is the only way to secure stability...
Ukraine is among a majority of the countries which state that the situation around Kosovo cannot be a precedent.
--GreenClawPrishtina (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
You are adding old news. Oleh Bilorus is the Chief of Foreign Affairs of Rada. That radio is the radio informing Ukrainians on acts of their government. --Avala (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I support Avala on this, this was a statement from the chief of Foreign Affairs of Rada, how official of a statement can you get.(Top Gun) 21:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
It's like one of European Parliament members saying they'll work on admitting Ukraine to the EU. Does that mean it will happen? Not necesarily. You'd need an official with more authority to make a statement. — Alex Khristov23:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
New data
According to this source [1], the Danes will recognize Kosovo.
The item at the bottom regarding the Crimean response to Kosovo's declaration of independence is in need of grammatical revision. Please see to this wikipedia 141.166.155.236 (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I see the Crimea section has been rewritten. It's better but it still needs work. It now says: "Pro-independence. Mustafa Cemilev, the Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People supported the right of self-determination for every nation, also for Kosovo." It should say something like: 'Pro-independence: Mustafa Cemilev of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tartar People stated that he believes that every nation has a right to self-determination and that therefore he supported Kosovo's declaration of independence.' 141.166.153.26 (talk) 06:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Um what?
I appreciate that editors can sometimes be enthuastic, but remember we are an encylopaedia. We are supposed to report things accurately and can afford to wait since there is no deadline. As such, we should NOT be saying that countries have recognised Kosovo when the articles we are using specifically say the countries have NOT yet recognised Kosov. Recognition is a very formal process and it can't just happen on a whim. As it stands, After removing countries which were just reported as likely to recognise Kosov, I was left with 2 countries which we at least had official statements where it was stated they were going to recognise Kosovo. Not wanting to leave an empty list, I changed the header to 'countries that are expected to recognise'. This is far from ideal, but seems the best solution. IMHO, the best bet would have been to wait until we actually had something to add to the list before creating it, but perhaps that's just me... Nil Einne (talk) 19:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
You're absolutely correct, we should wait. How about a section for countries expected to recognize Kosovo, to dissuade other editors from inserting unofficial recognitions? --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I personally would prefer to wait, at least until Monday - Tuesday since things should be a lot clearer after that but I won't remove anything which is accurate and sourced. (Actually I've been spending too much time on Wikipedia recently so I probably won't be removing anything) Nil Einne (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
The public statement from the Chinese gov't is "We're deeply concerned" and something about trying to find a solution that can be accepted by both sides. It's highly likely China will eventually decide not to recognize Kosovo, but so far it hasn't made a clear announcement yet. The Chinese gov't is extremely cautious on this issue. I thought Wikipedia was trying to mirror what things were rather than predicting what they would be. The source given only briefly says Russia and China opposed the bid in the SC debate. If people believe this piece of news trumps the official "We're deeply concerned" statement of the Chinese authorities that never clearly talked about recognition, then don't change anything. --User:Wooddoo-eng (talk) 04:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree. The source says China is "against" it, but PRC has not stated that it will not recognize Kosovo. Given some time, it could easily change. I'm under the impression that PRC is still deciding. Since the source is not reliable I'll remove it.Herunar (talk) 08:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added a source which shows that the PRC is saying nothing precise on the issue and put PRC in the "other" category in the list and on the map. —Nightstallion10:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Give us a source which states "Libya/PRC does not recognise the independence declaration", and we'll add it to list and map. —Nightstallion11:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
From what I can tell, the PRC view on this is similar to SA and others. They are concerned about the way that this has been handled and of the implications of a unilateral declaration of independence by a state which was effectively under foreign military protection. And they are also concerned about what they perceive as untoward interference in the matter by NATO. I don't think they are really in the Russia camp. Russia is strongly supportive of Serbia, both of which are completely opposed to Kosovan independence. China is I think not necessarily opposed to Kosovan independence but is opposed to the way this has been handled (as are a number of other countries) and the potential precendece this risks setting. This is reflected in their responses, Russia and Serbia have immedietly rejected recognition, China have said they are concerned but have not rejected recognition. They may eventually reject recognition or they may simply take the middle line and neither reject recognition nor recognise Kosovo. All this is of course speculation/OR Nil Einne (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
I have removed Bosnia from the list as there two articles give contradictory statements. This article says they will not recognise soon, while this says they will recognise Kosovo. Davewild (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Bosnia can not recognize because Serb Republic has Veto in presidency. So they can not accept independence because the serb leaders in Bosnia said they would never do so.
Bosnia and Herzegovina's "not in the near future" is different from, say, the PRC's opinion which is still considering. "Not in the near future" is an outright refusal to recognize, at least in the near future, which of course is the politician's words for no. Any position can change over time, so this does not really differ from a straight no. Any comments? Herunar (talk) 12:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Its a Neutral Position its not a NO and its not a straight away YES. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenClawPrishtina (talk • contribs) 14:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
BH
Someone should find a source I can't. The Presidency has just concluded its decision and declared it to the public. The Bosniac and Croat representatives have agreed to not recognize independence of Kosovo without approval of the Serb representative. In return, the Serb representative has guaranteed the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina and reaffirmed the country's sovereignty, denouncing possibilities of separatism. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I cannot find any reference that it has recognised Kosovo. This just says they have congratulated Kosovo. If they do recognise Kosovo then I think they should be included in the list. Davewild (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Its likely they would like to recognize, given their similar situation with China. However Taiwan has a long history of non-official political stances. Find a definite source if one ever materializes --Lemmey (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Taiwan is a delicate problem. The country was one of the first to recognize Kosovo, but the question is whether Kosovo will ever recognize Taiwan.... --Camptown (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Another argument, diplomatic relaion need both side, but Kosovo recognize Taiwan may not a dream due to trade and PRC reaction. Matthew_hktc18:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
If we consider the long-lasting recognition duel between the mainland and the island of Taiwan, it is not a surprise for me to see Taiwan's fast recognition of Kosovo. The government of Taiwan itself hopelessly needs some power in the world arena in order to survive. I can say that Kosovo is a valuable card for Taiwan, at least it is more publicly known than the little countries which Taiwan is recognized in. The world is divided into two camps on the Kosovo issue, just like it used to do back in the good old days of the 20th century. Deliogul (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The Kosovo government has officially recognized [4] (The website is a government website it can be accessed through www.ks-gov.net/portal/eng.htm) Taiwan's recognition of Kosovo [5] (Official press release stating 'Recognition' not just 'Congratulations') which basically puts it on par with all the other countries that have recognized Kosovo in the world. Mods please change status accordingly. Thanks! Vinniereno (talk) 04:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Kosova Thanks You just added "this is not a Kosovar Government site" to their page in red letters. And in the HTML comments, I found this:
We have received many many different e-mails from both Taiwan and China about the recognition of Kosova, and Taiwan's position on this. We value all your e-mails. Please understand that this website is created to thank all the countries that are recognizing Kosovo as an Independent State. We are not in a position to take a side about the Taiwan issue especially at this critical time. We have decided to list only countries that are members of United Nations. Thank you for your understanding! We Thank Everyone for their support.
Since the ROC has recognized Kosovo, shouldn't we note that it is the second country in Europe besides the Vatican to recognize the ROC as a country? - Thanks, Hoshie10:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
科索沃政府網站表示，已獲17個聯合國員已承認，但當中並不包括台灣，科索沃將台灣稱為“中國台灣”，並列明是非聯合國成員。中國大陸並沒有在已承認或將承認科索沃的名單中。
A Kosovo government website states 17 UN member countries now recognize it, Taiwan not included. Kosovo calls Taiwan "China Taiwan" and states it is not a UN member. Mainland China does not appear on the list.
Two points if this is true:
There is an official recognition list on a Kosovo government website
Neither could I, but that would be a very interesting website, indeed. We also need a (non-Chinese) source for Kosovo's non-recognition of Taiwan. —Nightstallion10:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I think that Taiwan ROC should be listed along with the other nations recognizing Kosovo on the first table. Taiwan may be de jure recognized by only twenty or so other nations, but it's considered a de facto independent and sovereign nation by everyone else. So why should we have Taiwan singled out on a different table just because of its partial official recognition? Húsönd10:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I think it's because some users (and governments) use the argument that it cannot give official recognition because it's not fully recognised itself. By the way, it was originally put in that table along with TRNC, but sourcing problems led to the latter being removed. BalkanFever10:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
That would open up a debate about whether other de-facto nations should be placed in their own box rather than in "other entities" which I would probably support, but there has to be a line somewhere in how many groups there are, it should fit with the map, and if we start putting them on too it'll probably lead to more trouble than its worth. Mikebloke (talk) 12:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Anti Republic of China bias
Some user insist that the Republic of China is moved to a separate section called "partially recognized states", and also insist on adding that "PRC claims that Taiwan has no right to give recognition to the Republic of Kosovo".
Meanwhile, the same user insist on removing the fact the PRC itself is not recognized by all states, and is as such itself only partially recognized.
The Republic of China does not recognize the PRC, since the Republic of China claims to be the legitimate government for all of China, and hence of course disputes the right of the PRC to recognize or not recognize. Also, in contrast to the PRC, the Republic of China is recognized as the legitimate Chinese government by the Holy See and as such by 1 billion catholics.
Either we remove the PRC claim from the Republic of China section, OR we also include the point of view of the Republic of China on the PRC. Obrighten (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I've got nothing against that, but we *NEED A SOURCE* which states that the ROC disputes the PRC's right to withhold recognition -- and I haven't seen any source for that up to now. —Nightstallion16:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Its Sunday. I don't know a gov't in the world that works on Sunday. (except maybe the Vatican). The TV probably misstated recognize for will recognize.--Lemmey (talk) 20:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Ireland has NOT yet recognised Kosovan independence. It is expected to do so but no official recognition has yet been given. MacTire 16:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Section headings
Please stop dividing the opposition category into "stated" and "reluctant". It's impossible to demonstrate reluctance, and the BBC and Xinhua sources actually say "oppose" for the countries they cite. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 20:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Solution for reluctant. Nations that are expected to recognize in under a week should be expected. Nations that have no official stance (Czech Republic) go in the Other section. Nations that are expected to recognize after a longer period (Japan) go in the Other section. --Lemmey (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
British English
As this is a European subject, it should be in British English, meaning all the "recognize"s should be "recognise". Does anyone object? J Milburn (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Wait a minute — "Recognize" is the spelling of the OED. It is something of a misconception that the -ize suffix is an Americanization. Of course a lot of British publication now use the ise ending… Evil Monkey - Hello21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
After reading around a little, I see both are acceptable, but -ise is in much wider use in Britain, meaning that it makes sense to use that in this article. J Milburn (talk) 21:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Please read the ise VS ize wiki entry - "ize" is not an americanism, and is the preferred spelling of OED. Changing a correct spelling to another correct spelling seems, uh, sub-optimal. I'm not going to revert it back because that'd be even more sub-optimal. But please please please, if someone does revert please leave it. Dan Beale-Cocks11:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
To amplify Chochopk's comment, it's not a typo. That's the correct spelling in many English-speaking countries. His link will explain Wikipedia's rules for dealing with this. -- SCZenz (talk) 17:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
With people from the world typing in this article, you are bound to have a mixture of British and American English. It's fine for now, but probably should be British English in the near future. User:Zscout370(Return Fire)19:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I always have to remember to turn off my firefox SpellCorrector for wikipedia. It doesn't recognize recognise. --Lemmey (talk) 19:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Recognise or recognize?
Is there any basis for writing this article in British English, as opposed to American? Kosovo is in neither Britain nor America. — Rickyrab | Talk00:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes -- it's in Europe, and related to the EU, and therefore uses British spelling. There's a couple hundred precedents, rest assured. ;) —Nightstallion00:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I am not an expert on wikipedia policy, but I was under the impression that the spelling of the first version of the article is the one that should be used as a norm. The first version of this article used the the z-spelling [7]. In any way the z-spelling is also acceptable in a British context since it is the spelling prefered by the Oxford dictionary. See [8].--84.217.113.54 (talk) 14:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, claiming that that is why they are not recognising constitutes original research. Such comments should be reverted. J Milburn (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Firs Wave, Second Wave
This is what the analysts are discussing all day on the news in Serbia and Macedonia. Albania, Austria and Irland are to be in the fist wave, The rese of EU and US in the second wave... i think that since the article is List of countiries that have recognised Kosovo, it is important to state that NO COUNTRIES have done it officialy. And since wikipedia is not an oracle, there can not be a section with ... will recognize —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.125.236.123 (talk) 22:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
According to one of the biggest Norwegian newspapers, Aftenposten, Norway will not decide what to do before they have seen what other states will do, both in the EU and NATO. Norway will also consult their Nordic nabours, according to the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jonas Gahr Støre. Erik2sen (talk) 22:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Norway has not recognized Kosovo yet. They will do it, they have decided in principle. But the formal decision has not been made yet. So Norway shouldn't be moved to the states that had made formal decision. You can read that at the bottom of the press release.--Trigor (talk) 17:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Abstract: "Norway to recognise Kosovo as an independent state
“I can announce today that Norway is going to recognise Kosovo as an independent state. There are several reasons why we have arrived at this conclusion,” says Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.
“Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that further negotiations would lead to a mutually agreed solution to the status issue. At the same time, the status quo is no longer viable. There is a need to clarify Kosovo’s future status so that it can continue its economic and political development. In the current situation, it is important that the members of the international community as far as possible take a common position. This in itself would contribute to clarity and stability. A large number of European countries, including other Nordic countries, intend to recognise Kosovo. Given the situation, we feel it is appropriate to signal that Norway will do so as well,” says Mr Støre."
This is Swedish. This is article from Swedish newspapers. And here they say that Norway has recognized Kosovo. It quotes Norwegian foreign minister on reasons for recognition (same like in press release) Serbian media also reported the same. But I still think that we should observe press release on Norwegian foreign ministry web page. There they say formal decision has not yet been taken. But if you want to make it official do it. I just think we should just respect headlines we have put up, and the fact of the matter is that decision is not official. --Trigor (talk) 18:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Trigor and Nightstallion. Sorry i assumed it would have been Norwegian as it was about Norway. So its Swedish. Sorry if i have offended anyone. Ijanderson977 (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I do not know what to do any more. Norway is in the first group again. I just want you to know that my actions were motivated with quality of this article in mind. I know that there are many people here with other motivations than to have factuality. Some want number of countries who recognized to be as big as possible while others have opposite aim. I for one am completely unbiased and my interest is truth and quality of wikipedia. So if there is so big desire to have Norway there ok, but based on that merit some other countries should be there as well, even though apart from deciding to start the process in the future they have not done anything more. Thanks to Nightstallion and Ijanderson977. I really think they care about same things I do. --Trigor (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Norway should be in the first group. There is absolutely not doubt the King will sign the decree. If Norway remains in the second group, we should also pretend that Germany is also only planning to make up it mind. --Camptown (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Just wait for the government to make a formal decision. It will happen soon. And than I will be the first to put Norway in the first group. Norway has decided in principle. The reader can see that it is only question of time until they formally recognize. I don't think that somebody will think that they haven't decided. It's plane and clear. The formal decision has not yet been taken. --Trigor (talk) 23:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Indonesia
they haven't said any single world, have they?. the source was from a year ago, and it's likely they changed their mind. Maybe you should includes it to the other states.--w_tanoto (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Find one in English so we can all verify it. WP:RSUE. Indonesia is a large, populous democratic country. There should be a common English publication / broadcaster that has mentioned it. --Lemmey (talk) 21:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I saw a referenced Indonesia here, the article moves too fast. Good stuff gets reverted by mistake, and bad stuff hangs around for too long sometimes. Seems here that something good got removed, and no one noticed... J Milburn (talk) 21:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
There's "recognition", and then there's Recognition.
Diplomatic recognition is not carried out by prime ministers talking into microphones, or even by foreign affairs ministries issuing press releases. It is an international legal process, built on centuries of protocol, that requires the formal transmission of a diplomatic note.
Yes, Australia, Ireland and a few other states have been pretty explicit about their intent to recognize. But it is not one and the same as recognition. It will happen, but hasn't happened yet, so be patient. The Tom (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Alright, sorry, I was being too snappy. Apologies to anyone who I offended, I agree this works better, but I just really don't want to say 'will recognise' when they already have. J Milburn (talk) 23:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I imagine there'll be followup news stories (there were when Montengro went through the process), or alternately the Kosovan foreign ministry will make much of it each time they get a note. Montenegro actually had a web page where they displayed scanned copies of them. The Tom (talk) 23:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
The Australian Prime Minister said Australia "would offer official diplomatic recognition in the near future ... would extend recognition at the earliest opportunity".[9]203.7.140.3 (talk) 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on a map, but with contradicting edits every 2 minutes, it's impossible to keep one up to date at all times. A Max J (talk) 16:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
This is linked very prominently on the main page, and is attracting a lot of traffic. I am not opposed to the idea of discussing a merge, I am just opposed to the hideous tag. Apologies if I caused any offense, that's the second aggressive comment I have made tonight... J Milburn (talk) 23:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree with WP:RUDE. If a move is made I think the list of non-recogniZing nations it as important as the recogniZing ones. --Lemmey (talk) 23:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Strong oppose. The declaration of independence just happened today, and the UN and EU are still debating the issue. I urge that you allow events to unfold first. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Oppose merge The reactions associated with the independence declaration are sufficiently notable and verifiable to have a separate article. Superm401 - Talk22:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
