INTRODUCTION - Part 01

INTRODUCTION

The Albanians have suffered the most territorial fragmentation among the nations of Europe. Today their territory is divided among five states in the peninsula, of which only half is found in their national state. Outside of Albania’s borders most ethnic Albanian territories are under Serbian occupation. Among those territories is

the province of Kosovo, where Albanians represent about 90% of the total population of a little over two million people. Other Albanian territories are located in Macedonia, Montenegro and Greece.

This territorial fragmentation has consistently been a source of concern for the entire Albanian nation, inside and outside of Albania. Due to Serbian police terror, unrest in Kosovo recently jumped to dramatic levels. Belgrade’s stubbornness not to recognize the universally proclaimed Albanian national rights in Kosovo, has created a danger of expanding the conflict beyond its borders, along the Balkan Peninsula and even beyond. The striking crimes committed against the Kosovo Albanians by the Serbian police apparatus is putting the conflict in danger of expanding beyond the Kosovo boundaries, putting in motion not only the large offices (cabinets), but also international organizations. In the diplomatic network and in world journalistic circles various ideas are being discussed on how to resolve the Kosovo issue. The International factor, most probably, is treating the “crisis” in Kosovo only as a means to prevent the spread of armed conflict outside of Kosovo. As a consequence of this limited goal, suggestions are being circulated to give Kosovo a vague autonomy - some within Serbia, and others within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

But these suggestions are not acceptable to the Albanian public and to the Albanian political forces inside and outside of Albania. However, they have focused their attention only on resolving the status of Kosovo, not the resolution of the national Albanian question in general.

The Albanian Academy of Sciences, concerned not only with the status of Kosovo, but also with the future of the Albanian nation, has prepared this Platform for solving the Albanian national question in general. Described in this Platform are historical, political, diplomatic and legal arguments of the Albanian national drama along with a thesis designed to gradually solve problems in accordance with today’s international political conditions and processes which will lead to the integration of the Balkans into the European Community.

The platform, in its original version, was sent to the Academy Assembly for discussion. After its review by Albanian intellectuals from Albania, Kosovo and Macedonia, remarks and suggestions to improve our national issue were made. After they were passed and incorporated into the platform, the document was adopted by the Academy Assembly into the current version.

By submitting the Platform, the Albanian Academy of Sciences thought to organize a National Assembly, in which intellectuals from all ethnic areas and Diaspora community circles can participate in the hope that they will all adopt it. After that we all will try to implement it together.

Platform for Resolving the Albanian National Question

History of the national question

The Albanian national question in context with the movement for the liberation of the Albanian territory from foreign occupation and its unification into a single nation state was born at the same time as the national movements of other peoples in the Balkan Peninsula. As elsewhere in Eastern Europe, it was born here under centuries of Ottoman occupation.

These developments were sparked by the 1789 French Revolution which then began to spread in the Balkans prompting the oppressed people to seek freedom, equality and brotherhood of peoples, which could only be realized if each nation achieved its own independent, democratic and illuminating state.

But the Albanian national movement, since its first steps as an opposing force, had not only the centuries-old Ottoman occupiers, but also the nationalist circles of the neighbouring countries and on top of them, the disinterested Great Powers.

Immediately after they created their national states, Serbian and Greek ruling circles were engrossed in chauvinistic pretensions for annexing Albanian lands, which were still under Turkish occupation. The realization of these aspirations were publicly proclaimed in 1844 by the rulers in Belgrade under a plan known as “Nachertania”, and by the rulers in Athens under the platform called “Megali Idea” which would not leave any room for the existence of an Albanian state.

As part of their nationalist aspirations, Belgrade and Athens very quickly found a common language in the political and military fields about mutual division of Albanian lands without forgetting Montenegrin aspirations for these territories.

This common language was first presented at the secret talks held by Serbian and Greek diplomats in Istanbul in 1862, from which materialized a secret alliance between them in Velau, Austria, in

1867 to carve the Albanian territory with a common border – the River Shkumbin and the road Egnatia.

In the mid-19th century, when they were preparing these annexation plans, the Albanians - descendants of the ancient Illyrians, without regards to the suffering they endured under centuries of pressure from external forces, with permanent territorial narrowing, continued to inhabit the western regions of the Balkan Peninsula, where they had settled from the beginning of history. Approximately accurate information of their ethnic territory, stretching to the middle of the last century, was given by a large number of objective European observers who are closely familiar with the human geography of the Balkan Peninsula. Among the many, let us mention the famous French erudite Ami Bue (1840), British researcher E. Spencer (1847) and the famous Austrian scientist J. Hahi (1853). According to these scientists, the Albanians were present as an indigenous population to the north of Nis, Leskovac and Vranje, east to Kumanovo, Prilep and Bitola, south to Konica, Ioannina and Preveza. They do not deny the fact that in this region there were residents of neighbouring Balkan nations (Greeks, Vlachs, Macedonians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Turks), who were minority islands in the Albanian open sea. At that time, these regions were separated by the Ottoman Empire in the four recesses -Kosovo, Shkodra, Bitola and Ioannina. Among them, the largest was the Kosovo Vilayet with Skopje as its main centre. The geographical area of the Kosovo Vilayet was populated mostly by Albanians, whose territory incidentally approximately coincided with Dardania, the ancient Illyrian province whose main centre was also Skopje.

According to geographic size, the second largest territory was the Ioanina Vilayet, which extended from the Gulf of Arta on the south to the River Seman on the north, meaning, it encompassed the ancient province of Epirus, which incidentally in antiquity and in the middle of the last century was inhabited with more Albanians than with Hellenes.

Greek rulers have supported their nationalistic pretensions based on three historical arguments, which are factually worthless: on the Hellenic colonies that emerged on the ancient Albanian coast, as well as several Mediterranean coastlines, on the political rule

imposed by force by the Byzantine Empire in these regions, and on the dependence of the Orthodox churches in these regions belonging to the Istanbul Patriarchate. Based on these “reasons”, which were built on the platform of the “Megali Idea”, the entire regions of Epirus to the Shkumbin River and the whole of Macedonia to Korcha should belong to Greece. Athens’s nationalist rulers do not take into account the fact that there was no general ethnic Greek population in most of these regions. In the absence of Greeks, Greek authorities considered the Albanians who were members of the Greek Orthodox Church to be Greeks. But the fact is that they were Albanians who, because of their religious affiliations, relied on the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Greek attempts to artificially increase the number of Greek citizens however had little success.

Regardless of their affiliation with the Greek Church and the Greek language which served it, the Orthodox Albanians, with a few exceptions, had not lost their awareness of their Albanian nationality. It is well known that many renowned personalities of the Albanian national movement emerged from their ranks, such as Naum Vekilhardzhi, Konstandin Kristoforidi, Thimi Mitko, Iani Vreto, Nikola Nacho and others.

Serbia at the time had no documented support to enact its aspirations towards the Albanian territory. It was hoping to realize its territorial pretensions with help from its big sister - Czarist Russia. Serbia’s primary aspiration, according to the “Nachertania”, was to occupy historic Kosovo with Skopje as its main centre, and then to expand to the Adriatic coast. But because Serbian inhabitants in this region were a minority, Belgrade nationalist circles prepared other arguments to justify this, but they too were without merit.

The Serbians made claims that the Albanians were not descendants of the Illyrians, and even less of the Dardanias, the ancient inhabitants of Kosovo, and that the Albanian population had arrived in this region after the Slavs. The Serbians made claims that the Albanian population came from the eastern regions of the Peninsula and that Kosovo is the cradle of the medieval Serbian state, meaning that Serbia’s memories, legends and monuments of its conscience and of its nation are related to Kosovo. In short, according to Serbian claims, at the time of the Slav arrival, Kosovo was without

inhabitants, and therefore the Kosovo Albanians are not the autochthonous population, but immigrants settled there after 1689, when the Serb population from that area was forced to move north after the Austrian defeat that year by the Ottoman army. Serbian historians offer historical arguments for these claims.

The Serbians took advantage of the fact that their thesis was accepted by its allies, who did that purely for political interests, not because of conviction. Similarly, they used their advantage to delay development of the Albanian scientific historiography, despite two centuries of Slavic growth. But now, with the research conducted in the last few decades, Albanian historians are able to, with irrefutable historical facts, confirm that the ideas of the Serbian historians never had any merit.

Serbian historians have blamed Muslim Albanians in Kosovo for having been associated with Ottoman rule in the disenfranchisement of the Serbian population in their territories. This accusation is totally unjustified. The Albanians have always been free from religious prejudices and animosities. They (Albanians) should be credited with saving them (Serbians) from destruction, almost four hundred years, the Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries in Kosovo, the otherwise Serbian medieval rulers, who once occupied Kosovo and leveled to the ground all Bogomil and early religious and cultural monuments built before their conquest. Besides that, during the centuries of Ottoman occupation, the Kosovo Albanians were marked with armed uprisings against Istanbul. Even independent historical sources claim that the Kosovo uprising of 1689 was done with mass regional Albanian participation.

The same sources also show that not only Christian Albanians, but a considerable number of Muslim Albanians from Kosovo participated in this uprising under the leadership of the Albanian Catholic bishop Piet Bogdani. Moreover, after the 1689 Serbian Liberation Movement began to decline in Kosovo, the Albanians continued with the uprisings against Istanbul. Some of these uprisings were very fierce, for example, the 1844 uprising led by Dervish Tsara, terrified the Porte so effectively that it sent the Rumelian army to quell it. Then, during the Eastern Crisis of the 70s in the 19th century, when Southeastern Europe was engulfed in the

swirling of the Russo-Turkish War, the main event in the Balkans was the Albanian Prizren League, under whose leadership the Albanians returned to Kosovo, the main torch of their national movement.

During 1878-1881, they (Albanians) initially fought against the decisions of the Berlin Congress to defend the integrity of their ethnic areas, and then against the Sublime Porte to create an autonomous Albanian state. The Albanian League of Prizren took over the Albanian movement and raised the threshold to the realization of independence, but it was violently crushed by the Ottoman armies. Kosovo became red with the blood of thousands of its (Albanian) sons.

The terror established by the Sublime Porte did not destroy the spirit of the resistance. On the contrary, Kosovo Albanians continued the uprisings against Istanbul, several times injecting serious fear into the Porte in 1899, 1909 and 1910 for example. The first liberation flag to be flown in Kosovo in the spring of 1912 was the Albanian flag. During the few weeks that encompassed the uprising, all Albanian regions rose to finally get rid of the centuries old Ottoman occupation. The Turkish armies everywhere were either smashed or were surrendering or hiding their barracks. During the summer the Kosovo cities freed themselves one after another. On August 12, 1912 the Albanian liberators liberated Skopje, the capital of the Kosovo Vilayet. But, as is well known, when the general uprising was on the verge of victory, the course of events changed to their (Albanian) disadvantage. Concerned by the rapid turnaround in the situation, the Balkan monarchies immediately declared joint war on the Ottoman Empire. Weakened by the Albanian uprisings, the Ottoman Empire was shattered and suffered defeat after defeat. And as it is well known, in the complicated situation that was created by the Balkan conflict, delegates came from all Albanian regions, including Kosovo, Macedonia and Chameria, and gathered at the National Assembly in Valona which, on November 28, 1912, declared National independence for Albania and the inclusion of all ethnic areas they represented in a single nation state.

Fragmentation of ethnic territories

After the resolution derived from the historic meeting in Valona, the Albanians hoped that, with their centuries-old struggle against the Ottoman occupation and with the legitimate right they had in their ethnic territory, the six Great Powers which together dictated the fate of the peoples in the continent would recognize the creation of their independent state and that within its boundaries they would cover all their ethnic territory. But the London Conference, founded by the Great Powers for preparing a new map of the Balkan Peninsula after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1913, after several fluctuations conceded just the act of creating an independent Albanian state, while the other decision of the Assembly of Velona -the Albanian unification of ethnic territories within an independent Albania was not accepted. The borders of the new state covered less than half of the ethnic Albanian territory. The other half was split between three neighbouring Balkan monarchies.

Of these, Serbia took the whole historic Kosovo with its capital Skopje; Greece annexed the Florina (Lerin) and Kastoria (Kostur) districts together with Chameria, which the Great Powers rushed to award them during the time of the Berlin Congress on account of warnings from the Prizren Albanian League of an armed conflict with Athens; they gave Montenegro Plav, Gusinie, Hot, Gruda, which the Prizren League defended with blood during the Eastern crisis in the 1870s.

The fragmentation of the Albanian territory and annexation of more than half of it by the neighbouring monarchies was an injustice and a stab in the back for this ancient nation, which always persisted before the challenges of history. Moreover, the annexed regions, instead of been given freedom for which they had fought for centuries, were placed beneath another foreign occupation. The Serbian, Montenegrin and Greek rulers did not provide even a single right for Albanians in the annexed regions; not even the right to education in their native language. On the contrary, since the autumn of 1913, immediately after signing the decision during the ambassadorial conference in London (July 29, 1912), the governments in Belgrade, Athens and Tsetinie began to displace the ethnic Albanians from their territory, forcing them to immigrate to Turkey, meaning away from their own borders. With the mass displacement that Greece undertook in the decades after the

annexation of the Albanian regions, especially after the biblical exodus of the Chams at the end of the Second World War, it was thought that it had completed the cleaning of ethnic Albanians from its borders. But, as can be seen, there are ethnic Albanians still in these regions. And Serbia, although the ethnic cleansing started in the time of the Russo-Turkish wars of 1877-1878, and after 1918, Yugoslavia continued for decades campaigning for the resettlement of Albanians from Kosovo, Macedonia and Montenegro, but the ethnic cleansing of the annexed regions was not finished. Albanians are exactly where they were in the past thousands of years, with the exception of the peripheral zone.

Two world wars were fought since 1913. Both of these wars were won by the forces that promised that the oppressed people would be given freedom and their national rights would be respected. But the injustices carried out by the Great Powers during the ambassadorial conference in 1913 were never touched. The ethnic Albanian territory was left dismembered, except for the regions outside of Albania’s borders, which in 1913 were divided between the three neighbouring monarchies (Serbia, Greece and Montenegro), and from 1918 to 1991 between Yugoslavia and Greece. Albanians were disappointed at the Treaty of Versailles (1920) and the Larissa Conference (1946). But the biggest disappointment they experienced was in the early 1990s with the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

In 1918, when the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was created and later called the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, many political scientists predicted that the large number of nations and nationalities living in that Kingdom could not sustain a long life. In fact, with the development of the national movement of the oppressed nationalities, which flourished in the 19th century, the age of multi-nation states was coming to an end.

The multi-nation Yugoslavia, ruled mainly by Serbian nationalist circles, was formed at a time when three multi-nation Empires, Austria-Hungary, Czarist Russia and the Ottoman Empire were destroyed, no matter that the Russian Empire recovered (but only for a few decades) thanks to the promises the October Revolution made

to the oppressed nationalities to form republics or autonomous provinces with national characters within the Soviet Union.

During the Second World War the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, concerned about internal nationalist contradictions, crashed after the German Army crossed its borders.

Hitler, the irreconcilable enemy of the Versailles card, within the violent border changes that he made in the whole of Europe, took apart the Kingdom of Yugoslavia at which time Croatia declared itself an independent state, understandably as a German satellite.

Serbia became narrow. Bulgaria was awarded the territories of Macedonia and Hungary took Vojvodina. Italy, Germany’s closest ally, also took part in the dissolution of Yugoslavia.

It had been said, even during the war, that Germany and Italy were going to give Albania the province of Kosovo. This assertion is not entirely true. Hitler, the author of the new map of the Balkans, did not give Albania the ethnic Albanian territory in Yugoslavia. He gave it to Italy, which in turn give it to Tirana but only from an administrative aspect. Moreover, of the six prefectures where Albanian populations existed, which included historical Kosovo, only four were administratively united with Albania. The prefectures were Pristina, Pech, Prizren and Tetovo.

Hitler left the Mitrovitsa prefecture (with the prefectures Mitrovitsa, Vuchtri, Gnilane and Poduevo) within Serbia which remained under German occupation along with the Trepcha rich mine for Berlin to use, and not for Rome. On the other hand, the Albanian regions of Skopje, Kachanik, Presevo, Kumanovo and Prespa were given to Bulgaria. The government in Tirana was also given Debar, Struga and Kichevo regions to administer. In the Montenegro sector Tirana was given Ulcinj, Tuz (Hot and Gruda) to administer together with Gusinje and Plav. Almost half of the ethnic Albanian territory in former Yugoslavia was united under the Tirana administration which amounted to 11,780 square kilometres. But the ethnic Albanian region in former Yugoslavia remained, albeit on a different scale, again dismembered, this time between Italy, Germany and Bulgaria.

One cannot deny the fact that the Albanian administrative regions that were united under Tirana, although they were under Italian occupation, had some advantage in the area of national rights. Above all, they were freed from the Serbian genocidal occupation and from the total denial of their national rights which the government in Belgrade was neglecting. The creation of the Albanian state administration unfettered the use of Albanian literature and took away the political borders with Albania that had been there since 1913. The tormented Albanian population under Serbian and Montenegrin occupation benefited as a result of this. But the assessments of the collaborators in Tirana, who compare these benefits with the liberation of Kosovo, of course were wrong. Moving from one occupation to another, no matter if one was easier than the other can never be compared to the liberation of the nation. After that, if the war was won by the Berlin-Rome Axis, Albania along with the part of Kosovo that was going to unite with it would have been left under fascist Italy and the Albanian ethnic regions would have remained in pieces again. Besides that, it should not be forgotten that the opponents of the fascist bloc, initially England and France and later the Soviet Union and the United States, which, at the end of 1941, formed a large Anglo-Soviet-American anti-fascist coalition, the Atlantic Charter (August 1942), which stated that the aspirations of the peoples for freedom and democracy would be considered at the end of the war, it is understood by the contributions people made in the conflict against the Nazi-fascist aggressors. Under these circumstances, the Albanians sought to work uncompromisingly to engage against the Italian occupiers, with the conviction that this war would serve as an asset to raise their voice at the end when it came to determining the boundaries.

In fact, during the Second World War, Albanians from Albania and from Kosovo contributed significantly to the defeat of the fascist Italian-German bloc. At the end of the war, anti-fascist forces in Albania amounted to about 70 thousand and in Kosovo about 50 thousand partisans. Based on this significant contribution (compared to the size of the population) that was given in aid of the victory in the war against the fascist aggressors, the Albanians from both sides of the border expected that the great allies thereafter would respect

the principles of self-determination and uphold the engagement for the respect of the national rights of the people.

Denial of the right to self-determination

But things went differently than the Albanians had hoped. At the end of World War II the diplomatic cadres of the Albanian national question were less constructive than at the time of independence. Then, Serbia and Greece spoke as victors over Turkey, while the Great Powers played the role of arbitrator. And in 1946, at the peace conference in Paris, Yugoslavia and Greece had an even stronger position than in 1913. Now they were participants in the antifascist coalition which won the war and they, as victors, made the decisions without arbitration. Under these circumstances Albania’s ability to realize its legitimate territorial aspirations was left to the detriment of Yugoslavia and Greece, and as history has shown there are no cases where the winner left the territories, especially when they were its illegal masters, in favour of another state to which these territories rightfully belonged. Besides that, even though Albania was recognized as a participant of the winning coalition, during the peace conference Athens accused Tirana of being an aggressor, just like Italy, because the Shefkit Vrlatsi quisling government in Albania was waging war against Greece in October 1940. Consequently, Greece not only did not agree to discuss the national rights of the Albanians that inhabited its territory but Greece demanded territorial and financial compensation. Greece wanted southern Albania or “Vorio Epirus” as the Greeks call it as compensation. Moreover, a year before the peace conference, the government in Athens, in order to definitively resolve the issue of the ethnic Albanian regions as found within its borders, with a flash operation for a period of 48 hours, relocated the Muslim residents who populated the province of Chameria without regard (men, women, children, elders) and for no other reason except for the unfounded charges made against their people that they had collaborated with the German occupiers. To save themselves from being massacred by N. Zerva, the extreme Greek nationalist General, the unlucky Chams were forced to immigrate to Albania, leaving behind their homes. Enver Hoxha the President of the Albanian delegation at the peace conference, rejected Greek claims with the argument that Albania, in the great anti-fascist war had lost

28,000 fighters, without considering the major material damage and that in its territory it retained several Italian and German divisions which, if they were not fighting the Albanians would have been engaged in the Western or Eastern Front. Consequently, Albania did not come to Paris to give but to ask for compensation from the common enemy. The anti-fascist part of Albania had nothing to do with the collaborators who declared war on Greece. These were shameful acts of the Albanian collaborators just as they were the shameful acts of all collaborators in all European countries. At the same time, the president of the Albanian delegation rejected Athens’s motives for resettling the Albanians from Chameria. Cooperation of some people with the German occupiers, he said, was no reason for the displacement of an entire population, including young children and housewives. Above that, the collaborators should have been tried in court, just like the Greek nationality collaborators were, because the Albanian Chams were also Greek citizens.

Regardless of the fact that the Greek government, for more than thirty years, continued to view itself as being in a state of war with Albania, for the peace conference and for its participants the Albanian label as an aggressor country was rejected back in 1946. Also, Athens’s calculations that the displacement of the Chams would close the issue of national rights for Albanians, was not true. The issue of the Chams is still open and awaiting resolution.

The issue of the ethnic Albanian territory in Yugoslavia had other parameters. Unlike Greece which had declared itself a state of the Greek Orthodox nation, Yugoslavia was formed in 1918 as a multi-national state. In fact, many nations which did not speak the same language, have the same culture and who did not practice the same religion existed in its territory. So, in order not to repeat the mistakes it made before the war, the Karagiogevich dynasty, divided the nations under its rule in terms of political rights into three categories: Serbia (first category), other Slavic nations (second category) and non-Slavic nations, in which the Albanians were included (third category). Marshal Tito and his comrades, on the other hand, raised the banner of self-determination of nations and their political equality rights. Based on this principle, as adopted by AVNOJ in 1943, the nations of Yugoslavia, at the end of the war

received their rights to form separate republics with equal rights in the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia. Based on the principles of the Atlantic Charter, and decisions made by AVNOJ and the contribution made by their partisan units in the liberation of Yugoslavia from the Hitler-ist occupier, the Albanian delegates -nationalists and communists from Kosovo along with Serbian and Montenegrin communists from their regions, on January 1st, 1944 during a Conference held in Bujan, decided that after the war the principle of self-determination would be applied to Kosovo.

But very quickly Tito’s promises of equal rights of nations evaporated. It was decided that the people of Yugoslavia would be divided into nations and nationalities, of which only nations would have the right to form republics, while nationalities may, in special cases, form only autonomous provinces within a republic. So, the Albanians, with thousands of years of being historic Kosovo residents with uninterrupted territorial unity, with many century old cities, with a common ancient culture, with a population, which, according to the numbers was in third place after the Serbs and Croats, with a rich history of fighting for independence, had fulfilled all conditions for having their own republic. But the young Yugoslav leaders considered only the six Slavic communities (Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians, Macedonians and Montenegrins) to qualify as nations, while Albanians were considered a nationality, meaning that they were excluded from the right to self-determination and the right to have their own republic.

But immediately after the war and after two Albanian partisan divisions had returned to Albania that had fought against German forces in the Yugoslav territory, federal leaders in Belgrade, in July 1945, encouraged Serb leaders in Kosovo to reject the Bujan Resolution.

The exclusion of Albanians from their right to have their own republic was an arbitrary act. Their discrimination was particularly striking if we consider that the Montenegrins, who by population were six times less, the Macedonians, who were two times less than the Albanians, were allowed to form their own republics and the Albanians were not. Consequently the inequality that existed in pre-

war Yugoslavia, just changed shape, size and components, but for the Albanians it remained in force.

Putting the Albanians in the “nationalities” category meant that they were discriminating against their national rights. Yesterday’s leaders of Tito’s Yugoslavia and today’s Serbian nationalist leaders argue this with the old thesis that the Kosovo Albanians are not autochthonous, but newcomers, and with the new thesis that they cannot form their own republic in the Yugoslav federation because one already exists next door; the Albanian state outside of Yugoslavia. Consequently, there may not be two Albanian states at the same time. But Serbian leaders have neither historical basis nor legal support for these two theses.

The first question of whether the Albanians in historical Kosovo are indigenous or a newcomer in historiography has been discussed many times. In this treatment, which has the character of a platform, it is impossible to count the documented sources that debunk the Serbian thesis. Suffice it to say briefly that a large number of Albanian historians, archaeologists, linguists, ethnographers, and foreign sources have proved that the residents of ancient Dardania, meaning historical Kosovo, belonged to the Illyrian ethnicity and that they defied the process of Romanization as well as that of other populations of the same ethnicity who lived in the southern Illyrian provinces. Besides, it is now confirmed that the Albanians are the descendants of the Southern Illyrians, including those of Dardania, who in ancient times were dispersed in and out of the territory in today’s Kosovo, south to Shtip (Astibos), and north to Nish (Naisos). At the same time there is no historical evidence that the Slavs colonized ancient Dardania in the 6th or 7th century. The Slavic toponymy, which Serbian historians use as an argument to confirm the Serbian colonization of Kosovo at the beginning of the early Middle Ages is irrelevant, because the documentary sources show these to appear in this region at the beginning of the 11th century. But even more so, early medieval historical sources speak of Christians inhabiting Kosovo, and Slavs, as is well known, up to the 10th century were pagans. Also, it is not true that Kosovo is the cradle of the Serbian state, because it is known that Serbia’s beginning was Rashkiot Region in Sandzak. Kosovo’s conquest by the Serbian state began at the end of the 12th century. Furthermore,

the Serbian medieval kingdom had no permanent capital. Prizren was one of the ambulant capitals of this country, which had aspirations to expand its permanent conquests to the south, including into the Greek states, with aims at replacing the Byzantine Empire and definitively establishing its capital in Constantinople. Nobody can claim that Serb rule in Kosovo continued over three centuries. Besides that, we now have a collection of sources that confirm that during these centuries the Albanians were present in historic Kosovo and that the pressure put on them by the Serbian state and church, to a large extent, were responsible for the Slav toponyms and names of the residents. There are a large number of cases, where Albanian names have been Slavo-cized (i.e. Lek-ich, Pal-ich, Petr-ich, Gon-ovski, Gin-ovski, etc.). The Belgrade thesis that only Serbs participated in the Kosovo historic battle against the Turks in 1389 holds no water. There are a number of independent sources that confirm that Albanians, including Kosovo Albanians, were included in the ranks of the anti-Ottoman coalition.

Also, the thesis that circles in Yugoslav historiography claiming that the Kosovo Albanians who settled there came from the northern regions of Albania after the Serbian exodus in of 1689 has no documented support. First of all, historical sources do not support a large scale exodus taking place in 1689 like the one claimed by Serbian historiography. At the same time documented sources, no doubt well-known to Serb historiographers, have no mention of a large scale move over mountainous regions to the north of Kosovo, no more than the population of these regions at the threshold of events in 1689. Be it as it may, as confirmed by contemporary sources, it was small in relation to the Kosovo Albanian population that inhabited the region from Tetovo to Nish. There are dozens of historical sources, also known to Serbian historians, but are deliberately left in obscurity, which confirm that during the 16th and 17th centuries, meaning before the so-called “mass” exodus of the Serbs in 1689, the majority of the population in Kosovo was made up of Albanians. Also, there is lack of independent historical sources that claim, as it is said, that in the Kosovo uprising of 1689, Albanian participation was greater than that of the Serbs. Finally, it should be added that the Kosovo Serb exodus was not a separate phenomenon. It also included the Kosovo Albanians who left and either went to regions in modern Albania (i.e. relocation of

Albanians from the region of Prizren in the Mirdita zone), or emigrated, like Serbs, to the north (i.e. in 1737 a large number of Albanians from Kosovo and from the surrounding regions occupied by Austria, moved to villages in today’s Slavonia - Nikinci, Hrtkovac, Jarak, Opalanka).

Consequently, Serbian government pretensions for its historical rights to Kosovo have no basis. Historical rights are fully on the side of the Albanians, because they were constantly present in Kosovo before and after the arrival of the Serbs in the Balkan Peninsula. The three centuries of Serbian occupation cannot upset the historic right of the Albanian population as ethnic residents of historic Kosovo, just as it cannot void the five centuries of Ottoman rule in the region. The Serb minority in Kosovo is a remnant of political rule, just as is the Turkish minority in this region. The historical monuments, which the Serbs are trying to argue gives them their historical rights belong to 13th and 14th century as opposed to the Albanian monuments which have existed continuously for many centuries, and which, regardless of their ancient landmarks, have been turned into ruins by Serbian rulers (with similar attempts made today - the destruction of Croatian Catholic churches which shows that the Serbs have not yet waived their pathological hatred of their centuries old neighbours). The epithet used by Belgrade to show that Kosovo is the “Serbian Jerusalem”, is speculative rhetoric with emotional aims. Myths cannot be used as arguments for annexing a territory inhabited by another nation. The real Jerusalem is a holy place for all Christians, but no Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox country has the right to seek its annexation, much less displacement of its residents - Israelis and Palestinians. With its centuries of history and with its majority population, Kosovo was and continues to be the hallmark of the Albanian nation.

Belgrade’s second thesis also does not hold water. In none of the countless acts of worldwide political, diplomatic and legal history is there a sentence formulated and accepted by international law that says that a nation should have only one state.

Without getting into medieval history, just look at the history of modern Germany and Italy, which had, until the third quarter of the last century, several independent states.

History has many such cases which exist even today. The Arab nation, for example, is torn between dozens of countries and no one is protesting on account of Tito’s thesis being violated.

We can even look at our southern neighbours - Greece, one nation with two states - Greece and Cyprus, both independent and internationally recognized republics. Consequently, the Tito-ist thesis is entirely without any legal basis.

It was forged by the fanatical nationalists in Belgrade to justify the exclusion of the Albanians from their right to have their own republic, and even more so, to deprive them of their legitimate political rights recognized by all international bodies.

Further fragmentation of ethnic territories

Another brutal violation, with profound historical consequences for the national rights of the Albanians in Yugoslavia, was made by Belgrade at the end of the Second World War.

We are talking about the fragmentation of historical Kosovo. As we stated earlier, historic Kosovo with its capital Skopje was unfairly given to the Kingdom of Serbia by the London Conference of Ambassadors (1913) because it was considered Serbian land. Regardless of this injustice and the stab in the back of the Albanian nation, the Albanian population in the entire historical Kosovo, which according to its size numbered almost the same as that of Albania, all came under Serbian occupation and under the control of the Serbian government. Living together under the occupation of one country, the Albanians in Kosovo had a historic opportunity to protect their centuries-old economic, social, political and cultural ties together and to sustain the struggle for their national rights. But then the proclamation of the six federation republics was enacted and with it came political boundaries. The boundaries were set arbitrarily from above, without any national referendum, and without a plebiscite vote. Neither the Albanian population nor its officers were asked. With aims at breaking up the territorial unity of the Albanians and to weaken the strength of their political resistance, the Tito-ist leaders divided up historic Kosovo into three

parts - between the republics of Serbia, Macedonia and Montenegro. The Republic of Serbia, grabbed today’s province of Kosovo (the narrower Kosovo) together with the districts of Bujanovac, Presevo and Medvedja. The Republic of Macedonia annexed the south part of historic Kosovo (the districts of Skopje, Tetovo, Gostivar, Kichevo), along with the districts of Debar and Struga. Montenegro annexed the northwestern part of Kosovo (Plav, Gusinje, Rozhaj) which in fact was held since 1913.

In historical terms this was the third time the Albanian territory was fragmented - the first time it was done at the Berlin Congress (1878) the second time at the ambassadorial conference (1913). But this third time the very act was most devastating for the unity of the Albanian people. The Albanian regions, which before World War II were divided between three countries (Albania, Yugoslavia, Greece), were now crumbling between five (Albania, Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Greece). The last fragmentation (communist), in contrast was moral and political in accordance with international law - moral because it was not right to fragment an innocent nation in order to continually punish it, politically, also because it was not right in modern times to make decisions on the backs of people without a plebiscite vote. The time of the medieval sovereigns who gave away provinces or cities as rewards or bribes, belongs to the distant past. In this case, the heads of the Socialist Federal Yugoslavia committed political crimes against the back of the Albanian nation and political violence on the backs of the Serbian state, because historic Kosovo was a gift given to Serbia by the London Conference in 1913. Macedonia’s annexation to the south, which even today is inhabited by an ethnic Albanian majority, is an illegitimate act. Moreover, the Serbian political circles, acknowledging this fragmentation, recognized that the southern part of historic Kosovo with its capital Skopje was not Serbian land, as stated in the 1913 resolution. In fact, it is neither Serbian nor Macedonian land. The ethnic population that resides in the southern part of historical Kosovo or the northern part of the Republic of Macedonia resides on Albanian land.

After World War II, there was steady growth of aggressive Slav nationalism combined with the weight of a communist dictatorship which occupied and worked against the Albanians in Yugoslavia.

Their national rights were denied. Education in their mother tongue was forbidden even during the period when relations between socialist Albania and socialist Yugoslavia were more than friendly.

After relations between Tirana and Belgrade broke off in 1948 the Tito-ist leadership used demagogy combined with terror to destroy the Albanian resistance.

As a measure taken to destroy the Albanian resistance, the Belgrade appointed rulers of the Albanian annexed parts in the Republic of Serbia created - the Autonomous Province of Kosovo, with an area of 10,877 square kilometres with Prishtina as its capital. Based on its first Constitution (1953), the province of Kosovo gained simple autonomy. Moreover, outside of the province were three districts that stretched to the northeast of Kosovo - Bujanovac, Presevo and Medvedja which, ethnically, historically and geographically were artificially separated from and left outside of the province. With their separation, Belgrade further fragmented the Albanian region as a whole and Kosovo itself in particular.