In the aftermath of ICJ Decision on Kosovo European leaders confirm their inflexible positions. The disappointing issue of the Courts involvement on the Kosovo legal case led Serbia to seek political vindication on the General Assembly authority.

Understandable as a political move to compensate the legal defeat, the Serbian decision does not promise any tangible results. Kosovo s legitimacy lies on the will of major powers of the western block that remains inflexible.

German FM Guido Westerwelle s tour in the Balkans and recent meeting of British FM Hague with president Tadic confirmed the respective positions in favor of Kosovo s independence.

Speaking during his visit to Serbia the German FM insisted that Kosovo's independence was a reality that last month's advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, ICJ, that the state's 2008 independence declaration was not illegal, was not open to interpretation and referring to the Serbian recourse to the U.N. , that the solution to the dispute over the future of Kosovo lies in Brussels, not New York.

Foreign Minister William Hague exerted more pressure on Serbia to withdraw the resolution It would be good that the existing resolution is withdrawn or that the agreement with the EU over the resolution is reached.

Now it is important to find a practical way for improvement of cooperation between Serbia and Kosovo so that both countries would have European future in the EU.

A compromise would be more difficult to achieve should Serbia refuse to withdraw its resolution. That puts Serbia in more difficult position. Even 22 countries of the EU have recognized Kosovo. Also 70 percent of the Council of Europe and 60 percent of the OSCE members have recognized Kosovo, too, Hague said.

Serbian leaders try to meet impossible ends. Their understanding of a necessary compromise is contradicted by an inflexible denial of any form of Kosovo s independence. European leaders show very impatient and intransigent to such a position that could lead to a parallel political status inside the European environment.

Especially, after the experience of the Cyprus problem which turn out to a real conundrum for the European Institution, politicians and bureaucrats insist on a clear position. In this issue it seems that interests of both European major powers and the U.S. are converging.

In the Cyprus problem every stone you move towards a solution you find Turkey underneath, in Kosovo Russia is only nominally supporting Serbia having already exploited western stance of unilateral secession in its conflict with Georgia.

Serbia has to move its position from the one concentrating on territorial rights to the one of a state guaranties over Serb population and protection of ethnic and religious monuments and areas.

In the historical perspective based in the last murderous decades it seems logical for Serbia to demand sovereign rights in areas, monuments and people that can not be protected in a State of Albanian majority.

There is no lack of sharing power models in international relations theory. Sovereign rights focused on those issues can be assured thus satisfying the sentiment of justice and the practical need for sustainable protection and development.

However, it is common truth that in post war situations political will is dumped in a Zero sum game making the scarcity of reason even more obvious than it usually is.