Daydreamer, in international politics there is a concept called reciprocity. Nations determine their policies in response to those developed by other nations. This is an iron-clad rule in international relations.

There are a number of alliances which are not officially declared but known to everyone, accordingly:

Russia, Greece, Serbia form a league of Slavic/Orthodox countries. They use their influence to create advantage to other Slavic or Orthodox members, may it be Eurovision song contest or international politics. To offset the effects of such naturally forming pacts countries like Bosnia, Macedonia, Albania form another entity which is supported by Turkey. The Balkans have always been a center for ethnic, religious turbulance. Do I support countries being divided into camps like this? No. However, this is unfortunately the case.

As you know there are current/historical tensions between:

Macedonia - Greece
Albenia - Greece
Turkey - Greece
Turkey- Bulgaria
Turkey - Serbia
Serbia-Croatia
Serbia-Bosnia
Bosnia-Croatia
Bulgaria-Macedonia

It works like this: For example, If you are a Greek, you do your best to undermine Macedonia. You don't need a good reason for that. If something is bad for Macedonia it is good for you. Similarly, Turkey considers Bosnia as a natural extension of its culture and heritage in Europe and the country feels Bosnia is left alone in the middle of hostile powers. Hence it strives to protect Bosnian interests. During the war, people collected contributions everywhere in Istanbul to be sent to Bosnia. This is something that naturally happens. It is very much like the natural rapport between the Brits and the US people. The UK government openly declared on many occasions that they consider the US a natural ally on historical and cultural grounds and that they will always act together.

By virtue of such unwritten pacts between countries, The UK could capture Falkland islands from Argentina. Did the Argentine people have a strong Patogonian league that would defend their interests at all costs, this would not have been possible.

DK - that's exactly what happened in Serbia - Albanians had their country to go back to but they created a new country of stolen Serbian land!

Vineyards - of course I am aware of the preferences stemming from the historical as well as geographical reasons. However, my point was that Turkey's decision constitutes a threat to its own integrity. If Kurdistan wanted to proclaim independence, do you think it wouldn't gain support from the EU and the rest of the world? Most countries with similar problems like Turkey didn't recognise Kosovo in order to avoid similar claims on behalf of their minorities. Turkey's decision to do the contrary may have tragic repercussions.

They first called the EU, The European Common Market and then European Economic Union and finally the EU. The organization has been evolving in a continent comprising highly incompatible elements. The EU has already positioned itself against Turkey. It pushes Turkey to recognize Greek Cypriot Government as the sole representative of the island; for long years it openly supported PKK terrorism. A significant number of PKK terrorists took shelter in European countries where they generated money for financing their operations.

In other words, it will not be a great surprize for Turkey if the EU supports a free Kurdistan in the country. After all, everybody wants to see some results when they make such a long term investment.

P.S. I am not knowledgeable enough to comment on Kosova independence. I will read a bit and write a comment.