Syrian refugee are incresing day by day

One million Syrians have fled their homeland, the head of the United Nations refugee agency today said, warning that in the absence of a political solution, humanitarian workers need additional funds to help the refugees and support the countries hosting them. ”With a million people in flight, millions more displaced internally, and thousands of people continuing to cross the border every day.

Syria is spiralling towards full-scale disaster,” the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, said in a press release.“We are doing everything we can to help, but the international humanitarian response capacity is dangerously stretched. This tragedy has to be stopped. ”The number of refugees increased dramatically since the start of the year, with more than 400,000 people fleeing Syria to neighbouring countries – Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt, and increasingly to North Africa and Europe, according to figures reported by the UN refugee agency (UNHCR).“This number translates into one million people who are dependent on the generosity of host countries, the response of humanitarian agencies and the financial support of governments and individuals,” said Mr. Guterres, who will be travelling to the region later this week to visit UNHCR operations in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.

In Lebanon, the population has increased by as much as 10 per cent. Jordan’s energy, water, health and education services are being strained to the limit. Turkey has spent over $600 million setting up 17 refugee camps, with more under construction. Iraq, already stressed by a population of one million internally displaced persons (IDPs), received over 100,000 Syrian refugees in the past year.

Communications and Society

In August 2012 Aspen Institute hold  a Forum on Communications and Society (FOCAS to discuss the movement towards open and innovative governance and develop tangible proposals and recommendations to increase transparency, promote smarter governance and enhance democracy. Participants included media and technology experts, government officials, academics, and leading NGO directors. Notably joining the conversation was President of the Republic of Estonia Toomas Hendrik Ilves, White House Digital Strategist Macon Phillips, Ushahidi Executive Director Juliana Rotich and a number of up-and-coming technology innovators with expertise in designing platforms and applications for open governance systems.

American democracy is premised on informed citizens engaging in self-governance. Yet  today many citizens are disenchanted with their governments at all levels and are uninterested in participating. At the same time, citizens’ use of mobile and digital technologies is creating a significant communication gap between governments and the governed. And governments find themselves strapped for cash and unable to respond to these tensions in constructive ways. 

On a more encouraging note, however, there is now a burgeoning “open governance” movement to use information and communications technologies to foster accountability, transparency and trust, to open up traditionally closed systems, and to transform governance. Collaborative technologies such as social media are now enabling two-way information channels between citizens and governments, helping to solve problems at the local, state and national levels. Digital technologies also have the potential to reduce costs to governments and citizens, and to create enormous opportunities for more transparent, participatory and responsive governments.

Some national governments are already embracing the open governance movement. Estonia, for example, is a leader. The nation has transitioned beyond 20th century bureaucratic rules and redesigned its government service systems online. Estonia boasts an electronic identification system for its population and an e-healthcare system where citizens own their own data. The nation operates a digital healthcare prescription system, 25 percent of the population voted online in the last elections, and its education system is anchored online. 

Challenges of U.S. Administration

With the confirmation by the Congress of John Kerry as Secretary of State of the new Obama Administration, it was put in place an important piece in the puzzle of the government team, and this help to stir the waters not always clear of U.S. foreign policy when there are growing international tensions, uncertainties about the confirmation of Chuck Hagel to the Department of Defense. In addition, it is needed  the redefinition of the overall priorities of the Country, to face the renewed tensions with China and the uncertainty about how to handle a relationship more clearly problematic, the file still open, on nuclear and options involved in the outcome of the upcoming Iranian presidential elections, the resurgence of hostilities in Syria and the risk of a widening of the crisis after the Israeli military action of 30 January, the potentially destabilizing of the situation in Egypt and the French intervention in Mali ... These are just some of the issues - in substantial continuity with what has been the experience of its predecessor - the new Secretary will be confronted in the coming weeks. The major  issue is, rather,  "how" Kerry wants to tackle the various agenda items. Also on this floor, a substantial continuity with the line of action of Hillary Clinton seems almost obvious.

The U.S. Administration is, today, faced with a dilemma. To focus the attention to internal affairs as it was said in  the inaugural address on January 21, it  does not mean (obviously) the abandonment of an international dimension, for the United States, that is a necessity. This dimension must, however, find a balance with the constraints imposed by an increasingly evident understretch. At the same time, the second Obama Administration is called upon to deal - at least until the next  mid-term elections - with the tensions arising from the polarization between the Republican majority in the House of Representatives and the Democratic Senate, with the need for the President to negotiate each time the consent of  theCongress, apparently not willing to make concessions, even on sensitive issues as the sum of the measures taken to early January to avoid the dreaded "fiscal abyss" (fiscal cliff). In the difficult search for a squaring of the circle, John Kerry is finally called to take into account the higher margins of action that generally benefits from a President second mandate. In fact President is no longer beset by the specter of re-election and often, on the contrary, he is  searching the opportunity  to link his name to some significant results, in both domestic and international level.

NATO summit in Bruxelles (2-3Feb. 2012)

NATO Defence Ministers, among other things, reviewed the security situation in the northern part of Kosovo which experienced an increase in violence in 2011.

Against the backdrop of a volatile, but for the moment stable situation in northern Kosovo, Allies and partners agreed that KFOR continues to play an indispensable role in Kosovo and they committed to sustaining that role.
"KFOR has done an excellent job in maintaining a safe and secure environment for all the people in Kosovo . The mission and the Commander of KFOR have our full support", NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said during the meeting. "And KFOR will continue to fully implement its mandate in accordance with its United Nations mandate", he added.
Ministers emphasized that finding a political solution for northern Kosovo is the only way to overcome the current impasse. They also agreed on the need to support the ongoing EU-sponsored dialogue and to continue to call on all parties to show flexibility and implement agreements as they are reached.
Defence Ministers asked for the close cooperation between KFOR and the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo. "While KFOR continues to contribute to the safety of all, EULEX remains essential for building a secure, democratic and multi-ethnic Kosovo based on rule of law", Mr Rasmussen said. He added that "it is of utmost importance that we continue to reinforce each other’s efforts, so that Kosovo can look to a future of integration in the Euro-Atlantic family and not to the conflicts of the past".
Looking ahead, Defence Ministers reiterated the long-term goal to reduce the NATO troop presence in Kosovo when circumstances allow and when the time was right.

Why United Kingdom won't integrate in Europe

Undoubtedly, integrated Europe and the United Kingdom have a curious and strange relationship. Since the very beginning of the European integration process the UK showed skepticism and, often, annoyance. The reasons for such a feeling can be identified in the peculiar history of the British people: local conflicts led to stabilization, growth and imperial splendor.

The end of the Second World War, nevertheless, introduced a new era of international dialogue, mutual respect and led almost inevitably to the decolonization process. The resistance to European integration process, both from outside and inside, may express the British wish to refuse to accept the today’s world evolution, hoping that, beyond the possible concrete financial advantages, the solution of an integrated and partly protected European market would not compromise the traditional prestige of British world policy. London seems to reject the European spirit, the financial rules and the cultural background that come with it, which tend to privilege continental solidarity. Such a crucial approach might seriously compromise the future relations between the 26 EU countries and the UK in the next decades.

After ten years of NATO in Afghanistan

2011 also marked the tenth anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks. NATO’s mission in Afghanistan, which had harboured those responsible for the attacks, continues to be a top priority for the Alliance. Building a safe and secure Afghanistan, a country led by the Afghans and for the Afghans, is at the heart of this mission.

Since the summer of 2011, NATO has started handing over primary security responsibility to the Afghan government and the Afghan national security forces. Hundreds and thousands of police and military personnel have been trained as part of this enduring partnership and transition process. Following the November announcement by President Hamid Karzai that a further 18 areas will soon transition to Afghan security control, over half of the Afghan population will be protected by their national security forces.

"Transition is firmly on track. It is driven by the determination of the Afghan people and sustained by the courage of the Afghan National Security Forces and of ISAF,"

says Secretary General Rasmussen. "We will keep our commitment to training and supporting the Afghan security forces throughout the transition process, and beyond."

How NATO contributes to stabilize Africa

NATO has been providing expert and training support to the African Stabilization Force (ASF) at the African Union (AU) request. Not only does it offer capacity-building support through courses and training events, but it also organizes different forms of support to improve the operational capacity of the ASF.
The ASF, which is intended to be deployed in Africa in times of crisis, is part of the AU’s efforts to develop long-term peacekeeping capabilities. This continental force could be seen as an African contribution to wider international efforts to preserve peace and security.
Expert support - On 5 September 2007, as part of NATO’s capacity-building support to the AU, the North Atlantic Council agreed to provide assistance to the AU with a study on the assessment of the operational readiness of the African Standby Force (ASF) brigades.
In addition to this initial support and at the request of the African Union, NATO has also assisted with the translation from English into Portuguese of African Standby Force documentation.
Training support- NATO has also provided specific training packages to the ASF, since 2009, in the NATO School in Oberammergau where has been hosting AU staff officers, who attend various courses, including operational planning discipline.
Joint Command Lisbon – the designated NATO HQ to implement the Alliance’s practical cooperation with the AU – has also organized certification/ evaluation training programmes for AU staff and provided military experts to assist in the evaluation and lessons learned procedures of the exercise.
At the AU’s request, NATO has also participated and supported various ASF preparatory workshops designed to develop ASF-related concepts.
NATO is also a member of the G8++ forum which brings together the group of partners supporting the AU in the area of peace and security. It includes international organizations and individual countries.

General Assembly Suspends Libya from Human Rights Council

In an unprecedented move on 1st of March, the United Nations General Assembly suspended Libya’s membership in the Human Rights Council, the Organization’s pre-eminent human rights body, expressing its deep concern about the situation in that country in the wake of Muammar Al-Qadhafi’s violent crackdown on anti-Government protestors.
Adopting a consensus resolution, the Assembly acted on the 25 February recommendation by the Geneva-based Human Rights Council, which had urged the suspension in a resolution of its own. The Assembly, which created the Council five years ago, was charged with taking that action. The decision marked the first time a sitting member was removed from the body. The Assembly also agreed that it would “review the matter as appropriate”.
“The world has spoken with one voice: we demand an immediate end to the violence against civilians and full respect for their fundamental human rights, including those of peaceful assembly and free speech,” said Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in his address to the Assembly. He welcomed the recommendation of the Human Rights Council to suspend Libya’s membership “so long as the violence continued”, he added.
Mr. Ban also commended the Security Council’s decision over the weekend to refer the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court, and called for the urgent dispatching of an independent international commission of inquiry to investigate alleged violations of international human rights in the country, in line with the Human Rights Council’s recommendation.

Croatian and Slovenian dispute over Adriatic sea

On 6 June 2010 referendum Slovenian voters have backed an agreement with Croatia to settle a long-standing border dispute between the two countries through international arbitration.
The agreement, under which the dispute over the maritime border in the Adriatic Sea is to be solved by an EU-led arbitration panel, won the support of 51.5 per cent of voters
The two countries have been at loggerheads over their maritime border in Piran Bay, and over small terrestrial border disputes, since the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991.
Slovenia has claimed that the dispute was preventing its ships from gaining free access to the Adriatic.The dispute over the maritime border in the Adriatic Sea has in the past prompted Ljubljana to block Zagreb’s accession talks with the European Union, fueling tensions between the two neighboring countries which have no history of past conflict.
The deadlock was broken last November when Pahor and Kosor agreed to allow international arbitration settle the matter.
But while both the Croatian and Slovenian parliaments approved the agreement reached between the two leaders, the Slovenian government decided to give the public the final say.
The European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso described Slovenian voters’ decision to support the deal as “an important step forward” for the Balkan region.
"This is an important step forward. I very much welcome the support that the Slovenian people have given in the referendum on the Border Arbitration Agreement signed by the governments of Slovenia and Croatia," Barroso said in a statement. He added that he was looking forward to a final settlement of the dispute which would represent "an important signal for the region and the relations between Slovenia and Croatia."

Haiti quake shows need to close technology gap for developing nations

The United Nations has a vital role to play in helping Member States, particularly those in the developing world, to utilize new technologies to mitigate natural disasters, climate change, food shortages and a host of other challenges, according to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
“The UN is the lead global institution dealing with many of these challenges,” he told the Global Colloquium of University Presidents on New Technologies for Meeting Global Challenges at Yale University in the United States, on 15 January, citing the devastating earthquake in Haiti as a prime example of the need to close the technology gap between developing and developed countries.
“We have technologies to build safe buildings and to build infrastructures that take into account possible fault lines. We know a great deal about how to work with the natural landscape to ensure that urban settlements are more secure. The problem is that so many parts of the world are not benefiting from this knowledge and these technologies. Disaster risk reduction measures must not be a luxury that only some States can afford.”

Developing new NATO Strategic Concept

On 22 October 2009, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen discussed the process of developing the Alliance’s new Strategic Concept in a keynote speech at the security conference in Bratislava.
Mr. Rasmussen pointed to newer challenges such as global terrorism, climate change and threats to energy security that have created the need for a new Strategic Concept. Reaching consensus within NATO on whether and how to respond to such challenges has become increasingly difficult, he said.
The Secretary General also stressed the need for continued military transformation, “…to allow us to cover the full spectrum of tasks, from collective defense to peace support operations.” And in the context of the current financial crisis, he said it was all the more pressing to make efficient use of resources through better cooperation, coordination and collective solutions.
The new Concept must include a “Comprehensive Approach”, promoting better coordination with other international actors such as the United Nations, the European Union and the NGO community. It should also “…reaffirm a long-standing NATO objective: to help complete the consolidation of Europe as a continent that is whole, free and at peace. NATO’s open door policy will continue,” said Mr. Rasmussen.
On relations with Russia, he said that we must not let differences between NATO and Russia hold the relationship hostage, because they share a number of common interests such as in Afghanistan, combating terrorism and preventing nuclear proliferation.

Decision to reduce NATO troops in KOSOVO

NATO Defence Ministers on 11th June agreed in Brussels to reduce the KFOR troop presence in Kosovo, taking into account the steady improvement of the security situation there.
“The decision to gradually reduce troop numbers will reflect this [security situation] development,” reads a report issued by NATO headquarters.
The ministers accorded that the transition of KFOR to a “deterrent presence” is to be implemented only gradually, indicating that there would not be a sudden withdrawal of large numbers of troops
NATO Defence Ministers reaffirmed that KFOR would remain responsible for a safe and secure environment in Kosovo and would stay in Kosovo in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 as long as necessary, and until the UNSC decided otherwise. NATO troops entered in Kosovo on June 12, 1999, after 78 days of air strikes on Serb positions aimed at halting ethnic cleansing against Albanians under the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. During the initial days of the conflict, NATO's peacekeeping operation had approximately 50,000 troops on the ground.
Currently, the Alliance has 13,800 troops on the ground in Kosovo, and it is expected that ministers will decide to reduce that number to 10,000 by January next year. Kosovo media report that if the security situation in Kosovo remains calm, NATO would reduce its troop numbers by up to 2,000.

The 60th Anniversary of NATO

As NATO celebrates its 60th anniversary, it is in greater demand than ever before.
The Alliance is keeping the peace in Kosovo, it is engaged in both stabilisation tasks and combat operations in Afghanistan, runs an anti-terrorist naval operation in the Mediterranean, assists defence reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina, trains Iraqi security forces, and provides support to the African Union.
NATO is at the heart of a vast and expanding network of partnerships with countries from across the globe and is developing closer cooperation with key civilian institutions. And the Alliance’s enlargement process remains a strong incentive for aspirant countries to get their house in order.
In short, at age 60, NATO has become such an indispensable part of the international security environment that it is hard to imagine that it ever could have been otherwise. And yet it was. The initial duration of the 1949 Washington Treaty was modestly set at 20 years, by which time, it was assumed, the post-war recovery of Western Europe would have been completed and the transatlantic defence pact become obsolete.
Few of the people who were present at NATO’s creation would have dared to hope that this Alliance would not only outlast the Cold War conditions that brought it into being, but indeed thrive in a radically different security environment.
The reason why NATO turned from a temporary project into a permanent one is not difficult to understand. It is because the logic of transatlantic security cooperation is timeless. The need for Europe and North America to tackle security challenges together remains as pressing today as it was 60 years ago.
So does the need for a transatlantic institutional framework which allows for political consultation, joint decisions, and common action. Actually only NATO can provide this framework ( article from NATO review).

THE PRESIDENT OBAMA PLAN for RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT

With each passing day, families across America are watching their bills pile up and their savings disappear.
That’s why President Barrack Obama has put forth an American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan that will jumpstart job creation and long-term growth by:
-Doubling the production of alternative energy in the next three years.
-Modernizing more than 75% of federal buildings and improve the energy efficiency of two million American homes, saving consumers and taxpayers billions on our energy bills.
-Making the immediate investments necessary to ensure that within five years, all of America’s medical records are computerized.
-Equipping tens of thousands of schools, community colleges, and public universities with 21st century classrooms, labs, and libraries.
-Expanding broadband across America, so that a small business in a rural town can connect and compete with their counterparts anywhere in the world.
-Investing in the science, research, and technology that will lead to new medical breakthroughs, new discoveries, and entire new industries.

Balkan States: it's time to secure the peace

Bosnia and Kosovo have largely disappeared from public view. Washington and Brussels are hoping the promise of European Union accession will ultimately triumph over remaining ethnic tensions in the region.
Bosnia is a nonfunctioning state living under the constant threat its autonomous Serb region to hold a referendum on independence. The Bosnian Muslim prime minister wants to throw out the Dayton agreement that concluded the Bosnia war in 1995, end Serb autonomy and form a unitary state.
To prevent the return of ethnic violence in Bosnia, the High Representative, who administers the implementation of the Dayton agreements, needs to be reinvigorated with visible backing from the EU, including maintaining its peacekeeping forces. The High Representative should revive constitutional reforms that three years ago came within two votes of approval in the Bosnian parliament.
Newly independent Kosovo, unrecognized by two-thirds of the world's states -- including five EU members -- barely functions after 10 years of U.N. rule. It has high unemployment and little foreign investment and needs enormous foreign assistance.
Given Moscow's opposition, it is not possible to get U.N. Security Council agreement on Kosovo. But the U.S. and the EU, whose new Kosovo mission now operates in the north, can begin the process of reintegrating the Serb-controlled portions of the newly independent state by ensuring that law and order there is not administered by Belgrade.
In Bosnia, Belgrade is working with Moscow to strengthen Serb autonomy with political and particularly economic support.
The root cause for most of this instability still rests in Belgrade. Although its new government is eager to become part of the EU, it insists on governing Serbs in Kosovo and is doing everything possible to reverse its independence.
Despite its constant assurance to seek a European future, Serbia remains mired in the past, failing to turn indicted war criminal Ratko Mladic over to the Hague Tribunal.Acting together, Brussels and Washington managed to end the Balkans wars of the 1990s. It is now time they work together to bring lasting peace to the region. (source Wall Street Journal).

Montenegro, Macedonia recognize Kosovo's independence.

Both Montenegro and Macedonia recognized Kosovo's independence on Thursday, 9th October. Serbia called the moves by its Balkan neighbors a betrayal and expelled the Montenegrin ambassador from Belgrade.
The moves represent a major blow to Serbia's diplomatic efforts to maintain a claim over Kosovo, considered by Serbs to be the cradle of their Orthodox Christian religion and statehood.
Montenegro and Macedonia — both seeking membership in NATO and the European Union — have been under pressure from the United States and some EU countries to recognize Kosovo's February declaration of independence. The two coordinated with one another in recognizing Kosovo. Montenegro's Foreign Minister, Milan Rocen, said : "This is not a decision against Serbia, but for our future".
The Macedonian Foreign Minister also suggested the move was inevitable.
The Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic said Montenegro's move was a particular betrayal, given that the country was both a close ally and a neighbor. Montenegro separated from Serbia only in 2006, and its officials sided with Serbia during the region's ethnic wars in the 1990s.
However, pro-Serb officials are not a part of the current government in Montenegro, a tiny Adriatic Sea State almost equally split between Montenegrin and pro-Serb nationalists.

Montenegro on the way to NATO

Montenegro is one of the newest members of the Partnership for Peace, joining in December 2006. Within this framework NATO and Montenegro are developing cooperation with a focus on democratic, institutional and defence reforms, as well as practical cooperation in other areas. Montenegro agreed with NATO its first Individual Partnership Programme (IPP) in January 2008, which lays out the programme of cooperation between the country and NATO. In June 2008, Montenegro presented its Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP) to deepen cooperation with NATO, and a first round of staff-level consultations opened the country’s Intensified Dialogue with NATO on its membership aspirations and related reforms.
The NATO Allies recognised Montenegro’s independence very shortly after it was declared in June 2006 and invited the country to join the Partnership for Peace (PfP) at the November 2006 Riga Summit. The country formally joined the Partnership in December of that same year. In April 2007, Montenegro delivered a PfP Presentation Document to the Allies detailing the country’s aims and proposals for cooperation within the PfP framework. The document became the basis of the country’s first IPP agreed in January 2008.
As with all NATO’s Partner countries, the extent of cooperation ultimately depends on Montenegro's desire to pursue democratic, institutional and defence reform processes.

EULEX a controversial mission

The EU mission to Kosovo (EULEX ), recently has faced many obstacles which are delaying its own deployment, foreseen by 15th of June. The EU's plan was to send a mission comprising 2,200 members to oversee the police and judiciary in Kosovo. The initial idea was for the mission to start operating by June 15th, when the new Kosovo Constitution will take effect. Unlike the UN, whose mission has been deployed since 1999, the EU intended to transfer most of its authority to Kosovo institutions and retaining jurisdiction over the judicial system and police.
According to EU representatives, disagreements on dividing responsibilities between the UN and EULEX could delay the deployment. EULEX is awaiting authorization to take over the country's police and judiciary, but objections from EU member states that have not recognized Kosovo's independence are stalling it, according to EU security chief Javier Solana.
In addition Russia has refused to accept the EU mission's deployment without Security Council approval; Serbia also opposes the deployment of EULEX, demanding that the mission obtain a UN mandate first.
Serbian Minister for Kosovo Slobodan Samardzic says: “Belgrade and the Kosovo Serbs recognize only the UN mission and will not co-operate with EULEX. The objective of EULEX cannot be legalized in the UN, because that objective is the implementation of Kosovo's independence, whereas the UN's goal is to implement the essential autonomy of Kosovo. Those are two different goals that cannot be harmonized,"

Albania and Croatia road to NATO

The two countries have now formally begun accession talks to join the Alliance, as they were invited to during the Bucharest Summit on 2-4 April 2008.
Nevertheless the process to obtain the full membership foresees some other steps.
First of all the invited countries meet with a team of NATO experts on a number of sessions (generally two) to discuss and confirm their readiness to assume all of their obligations as new members of the Alliance.
NATO will then prepare accession protocols for each one of the invited countries. The protocols are amendments to the North Atlantic Treaty, which once signed and ratified by the Allies, will enable Albania and Croatia to become parties to the Treaty and members of NATO.
After the conclusion of the talks, the foreign ministers of Albania and Croatia will send a letter of intent to NATO confirming their interest, willingness and ability to join the Alliance. Together with the letters they submit a timetable for necessary reforms to be completed before and after accession in order to enhance their contribution to the Alliance.
With the reception of this letter, and the reply sent by NATO’s Secretary General, all requirements are met for the signature of the accession protocols, which has been scheduled for 9 July 2008.
Once the accession protocols are signed, they still have to be approved by all NATO member countries. This may be a time-consuming process as the 26 Allies have to ratify the protocols according to their national requirements and procedures.
When the ratification process will be completed, the NATO Secretary General will invite the prospective new members to become parties to the North Atlantic Treaty.In the meantime, Albania and Croatia will deposit their formal instruments of accession with the United States (the United States Department of State is the depository), and formally become parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and thus members of NATO.
At the end this will be the sixth round of enlargement in the Alliance's history. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia joined in 2004; the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland in 1999; Spain in 1982; Germany in 1955 and Greece and Turkey joined the Alliance in 1952.

Kosovo independence

KOSOVO celebrated its independence on last Sunday 17th February, becoming soon the seventh nation from the old Yugoslavia.
The unilateral declaration of independence defied the international law, which recognizes Kosovo as part of Serbia ( UN resolution n.1244); it was emboldened by the support of the US and most EU members ignoring the resistance of Serbia and its ally Russia.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that the Kosovan move is a dangerous provocation that could lead Moscow to support breakaway movements in other "frozen conflicts" with its own neighbours such as Georgia and Moldova.
Mr. Putin said the western Europeans were being hypocrites by demanding independence for Kosovo but opposing the same treatment for other breakaway regions such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia and Trans-Dniester in Moldova.
Anyway Russia and Serbia have ruled out military responses to Kosovo's declaration, with Serbia saying it would stick to diplomatic and economic retaliation against any nation that recognizes Kosovo's independence.
The US, Britain and France have recognized Kosovo immediately, after them have followed Germany and Italy. EU is replacing the UN administration with its mission “EULEX”, which has overseen the territory for almost a decade.
Not all EU members are happy about supporting a unilateral declaration of independence, with Cyprus in particular fiercely opposed because it fears setting a precedent for its own Turkish-dominated northern region.
Fellow EU members Romania and Slovakia are expected to refuse to recognize Kosovo's independence and others, including Spain and Greece, are likely to delay any decision.
Serbia, lost its dominance over the former Yugoslavia, remains a nation of 7.5 million people with no access to the Adriatic Sea and sour relations with most of its European neighbours.
Kosovo has a poor economy and 50per cent unemployment rate but sees itself as a viable state because, with two million people, it has about the same population as Macedonia and Slovenia, bigger than Montenegro (with 620,000 people), less than Croatia (4.6million) and Bosnia (4 million).
The crucial difference is that unlike those other new nations, Kosovo was never a separate republic within Yugoslavia, instead being a part of Serbia and considered by many Serbs as the spiritual heartland of their nation.
Slovenia is the only ex-Yugoslav state to have already joined the EU and NATO and, by coincidence, it now holds the six-month rotating presidency of the union, giving it a key role in coordinating the EU response to Kosovo's declaration.