copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-02-08): Citing 470 unpunished ethnically motivated attacks against Serbs, the Serbian Orthodox Church and their property since 2021, he added that the introduction of the euro as the only legal tender in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija was obviously illegal because it was done by the unilateral decision of the political leadership in Priština. The dinar is the legal tender of Serbia, and, therefore, cannot be banned in Kosovo and Metohija. He recalled that the difficult situation deteriorated after the April 2023 elections in four municipalities in the north of Kosovo and Metohija; more than 97 per cent of the inhabitants are Serbs, so only slightly more than 3 per cent of the total number of registered voters turned out for these so-called elections. The situation led to peaceful protests by Serbs, to which Kosovo Albanian armed groups responded by injuring more than 50 unarmed Serbs on 29 May alone, followed by a tragic and reprehensible wounding of KFOR personnel.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2019-02-12): Serbia-Kosovo relations: Confrontation or normalisation? After fighting broke out between government forces and separatists, the formerly Serbian province of Kosovo was transferred to United Nations administration in 1999. In 2008, Kosovo declared independence. However, Belgrade continues to view its former province as Serbian territory. Over 100 countries, including 23 EU Member States, have recognised Kosovar independence, but full recognition and membership of most international organisations are still a long way off. Both Serbia and Kosovo aspire to EU membership – Serbia as a candidate country and Kosovo as a potential candidate. The EU insists that Serbia must normalise its relations with Kosovo before joining. Since 2011, with the help of EU mediation, the two neighbours have resolved some of the technical issues, but disagreements prevent normal day-to-day interaction between them in areas such as trade, energy supplies and cross-border travel. One of the main stumbling blocks is the situation of Kosovo's Serb minority. Around one in 12 Kosovars is an ethnic Serb, and nearly half of these are concentrated in the north. Despite efforts to integrate Serb-majority northern Kosovo into the rest of the country, Pristina still struggles to control the region.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2019-08-29): Serbia’s own aspirations to join the EU have been held back by its refusal to recognize Kosovo. Belgrade believes a territorial agreement would benefit Serbia’s prospects for accession to the EU while proponents of the plan in Kosovo view it as an opportunity to garner international recognition that would allow Kosovo to join the United Nations and pave the road to EU accession. [...] The United States and the EU have long opposed the idea of land swaps to resolve the dispute between Kosovo and Serbia. German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently said "the territorial integrity of the states of the Western Balkans has been established and is inviolable." [...] Haradinaj: We have a lot of interest to work together on the economy. Recognition [of Kosovo by Serbia] will open the door for partnering between ourselves and also to a longstanding peace. The wounds of the past are still present. A peace treaty between us and Serbia will really open not only the gate to the EU, but also to the stability of our region.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2008-02-17): Early History: The Ottomans ruled Kosovo for more than four centuries, until Serbia acquired the territory during the First Balkan War in 1912-13. The 20th Century: First partitioned in 1913 between Serbia and Montenegro, Kosovo was then incorporated into the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (later named Yugoslavia) after World War I. During World War II, parts of Kosovo were absorbed into Italian-occupied Albania. After the Italian capitulation, Nazi Germany assumed control over Kosovo until Tito’s Yugoslav Partisans entered at the end of the war. After World War II, Kosovo became an autonomous province of Serbia in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (S.F.R.Y.). The 1974 Yugoslav Constitution gave Kosovo (along with Vojvodina) the status of a Socialist Autonomous Province within Serbia. As such, it possessed nearly equal rights as the six constituent Socialist Republics of the S.F.R.Y.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-08): In the First Balkan War in 1912, the Balkan League defeated the Ottoman Empire and captured its European territories, which enabled territorial expansion of the Kingdom of Serbia into regions of Raška, Kosovo, Metohija, and Vardarian Macedonia. The Second Balkan War soon ensued when Bulgaria turned on its former allies, but was defeated, resulting in the Treaty of Bucharest. In two years, Serbia enlarged its territory by 80% and its population by 50%,[89] it also suffered high casualties on the eve of World War I, with more than 36,000 dead.[90] Austria-Hungary became wary of the rising regional power on its borders and its potential to become an anchor for unification of Serbs and other South Slavs, and the relationship between the two countries became tense. [...] The Constitution of Serbia recognizes two autonomous provinces, Vojvodina in the north, and the disputed territory of Kosovo and Metohija in the south,[255] while the remaining area of Central Serbia has never had its own regional authority. Following the Kosovo War, UN peacekeepers entered Kosovo and Metohija, as per UNSC Resolution 1244. The government of Serbia does not recognise Kosovo's February 2008 declaration of independence, considering it illegal and illegitimate.[256]
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2023-09-25): A look at the history between Serbia and Kosovo, and why the latest tensions are a concern for Europe. Why are Serbia and Kosovo at odds? Kosovo is a mainly ethnic Albanian territory that was part of Serbia before it declared independence. The Serbian government has refused to recognize Kosovo’s statehood, even though it has no formal control there. Some 100 countries have recognized Kosovo’s independence, including the United States and most Western countries. Russia, China and five EU nations have sided with Serbia. The deadlock has kept tensions simmering in the Balkan region following the bloody breakup of former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. What are the roots of the conflict? The dispute over Kosovo is centuries-old. Serbs cherish the area as central both to their religion and statehood. Numerous medieval Serb Orthodox Christian monasteries are in Kosovo, and Serb nationalists view a 1389 battle against Ottoman Turks there as a symbol of their national struggle for independence. Kosovo’s majority ethnic Albanians, most of whom are Muslim, meanwhile, view Kosovo as their country and accuse Serbia of occupying it and repressing them for decades. Ethnic Albanian rebels launched an uprising in 1998 to rid the country of Serbian rule.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2017-11-25): "Kosovo is Serbia", "Ask any historian" read the unlikely placards, waved by angry Serb demonstrators in Brussels on Sunday. This is rather flattering for historians: we don't often get asked to adjudicate. It does not, however, follow that any historian would agree, not least because historians do not use this sort of eternal present tense. [...] Kosovo remained Ottoman territory until it was conquered by Serbian forces in 1912. Serbs would say "liberated"; but even their own estimates put the Orthodox Serb population at less than 25%. The majority population was Albanian, and did not welcome Serb rule, so "conquered" seems the right word. [...] Until the destruction of the old federal Yugoslavia by Milosevic, Kosovo had a dual status. It was called a part of Serbia; but it was also called a unit of the federation. In all practical ways, the latter sense prevailed: Kosovo had its own parliament and government, and was directly represented at the federal level, alongside Serbia. It was, in fact, one of the eight units of the federal system.
Claim: Kosovo is a territory of Serbia (Kosovo, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (1997-01-01): A central question is the number of Kosovar Albanian victims of Serbian forces in Kosovo. Many bodies were found when KFOR and the ICTY entered Kosovo in June 1999. The evidence is also now clear that [...] Kosovo and even in Serbia proper. The number of victims whose bodies have been burned or destroyed may never be known, but enough evidence has emerged to conclude that probably around 10,000 Kosovar Albanians were killed by Serbian forces. [...] Aftermath: Following the withdrawal of Serbian forces in June, Kosovo saw manifestations of a new set of human rights problems. These include acts of retribution against the
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-05-21): Kula Kangri is claimed by many authorities to be the highest mountain in Bhutan but this is disputed by others, who claim that Kula Kangri is wholly in Tibet. The mountain is part of the Bhutan Himalaya. Chinese and Japanese authorities claim nearby Gangkhar Puensum is higher, and the claim that Kula Kangri is in or on the border with Bhutan is challenged.[3] [...] References [edit]- ^ a b "Kula Kangri, China" on Peakbagger.com. Retrieved 2011-11-24.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-08): Border negotiations [edit]Border negotiations between Bhutan and China began in 1972 with India's participation. However, China sought the exclusion of India.[10] Bhutan commenced its own border negotiations with China in 1984. Prior to putting forward its claim line, it carried out its own surveys and produced maps that were approved by the National Assembly in 1989. Strategic expert Manoj Joshi states that the Bhutanese voluntarily shed territory in the process.[76] Other scholars noted a reduction of 8,606 km2 area in the official Bhutanese maps. The Kula Kangri mountain, touted as the tallest peak in Bhutan, has apparently been ceded to China.[77]
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): Kula Kangri – Climbing, Hiking & Mountaineering information [...] Kula Kangri Climbing Notes [...] Select Kula Kangri Location Map Detail:
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): Asia, China, Kula Kangri (Künla Kangri) Kula Kangri (Künla Kangri*). The Kobe University Scientific and Mountaineering Expedition to Tibet consisted of 25 Japanese, i.e. 12 climbers, eight scientists, three TV cameramen, a newspaper reporter and myself as leader, and 17 Chinese, i.e. five climbers who helped with high-altitude transport, four scientists from the Academia Sinica and others (liaison officer, interpreters, drivers). In all we were 42 members. We arrived at Base Camp at 4400 meters north of the mountain on March 17. Advance Base was at 5300 meters and Camp I at 5700 meters just below the west ridge. We climbed a steep ice wall up to Camp II at 6200 meters on the ridge and Camp III was at 6800 meters. A 70-meter-high rock wall rises in the upper part of the ridge. Fortunately we could traverse south to a small snow couloir. Camp IV at 7100 meters was dug out of the snow slope. On April 21 C. Itani, J. Sakamoto, H. Ozaki and E. Ohtani reached the summit (7554 meters, 24,784 feet) at 4:15 P.M. The next day T. Morinaga and H. Hasegawa also climbed to the top. The scientists left Base Camp on April 15 to work towards Chengdu.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): After the first ascent of Sherpi Kangri (7380 m) in 1976,2 we took Namcha Barwa (7756 m) or Kula Kangri (7554 m) as the next objectives and began to negotiate with the Chinese Mountaineering Association (CMA) in the beginning of 1978. At that time, however, we had not enough information about the mountaineering organization in China and groped in the dark. Fortunately I got an opportunity to join the delegation of the Faculty of Engineering of Kobe University to China in 1980 and to meet with Shi Zhan Chun, the vice president of CMA (at that time). Since this first meeting with him, I often met him and we became good friends. Our objective was forced to change again and again, finally, the permission to scale Kula Kangri was given at the end of December 1984. It had indeed been a patient and tenacious effort lasting 7 years. [...] Sketch Map of Kula Kangri [...] Frontispiece: Kula Kangri from Tibet. (Prof K. Hirai)
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (1999-02-22): Kula Kangri is claimed by many authorities to be the highest mountain in Bhutan but this is disputed by others, who claim that Kula Kangri is wholly in Tibet. The first ascent was by a combined Japanese and Chinese team in 1986. The mountain is part of the Bhutan Himalaya. Chinese and Japanese authorities claim nearby Gangkhar Puensum is higher, and the claim that Kula Kangri is in or on the border with Bhutan is challenged.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2006-01-01): Kula Kangri is claimed by many authorities to be the highest mountain in Bhutan but this is disputed by others, who claim that Kula Kangri is wholly in Tibet. The mountain is part of the Bhutan Himalaya. Chinese and Japanese authorities claim nearby Gangkhar Puensum is higher, and the claim that Kula Kangri is in or on the border with Bhutan is challenged. By elevation Khula Kangri I is # 22 out of 936 in Tibet # 33 out of 12241 in China # 2 out of 21 in Lhozhag County # 52 out of 3458 in the Himalayas
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-06): Until the 1970s, India represented Bhutan's concerns in talks with China over the broader Sino-Indian border conflicts.[3] Obtaining membership in the United Nations in 1971, Bhutan began to take a more independent course in its foreign policy.[5] In the U.N., Bhutan, incidentally alongside India, voted in favor of the PRC filling the seat occupied by the ROC and openly supported the "One China" policy.[3][4] In 1974 in a symbolic overture, Bhutan invited the Chinese ambassador to India to attend the coronation of Jigme Singye Wangchuk as the king of Bhutan.[3] In the 1980s, Bhutan relinquished its claim to a 154 square miles (400 km2) area called Kula Khari on its northern border with China.[16] In 1983, the Chinese Foreign Minister Wu Xueqian and Bhutanese Foreign Minister Dawa Tsering held talks on establishing bilateral relations in New York. In 1984, China and Bhutan began annual, direct talks over the border dispute.[3][9]
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2023-08-27): Kula Kangri is a majestic mountain peak located in the Himalayas, a range that holds an exceptional position in the world due to its height and grandeur. The peak is situated in the northern region of Bhutan but it is largely acknowledged as being within Tibet, an autonomous region of China. Kula Kangri stands aloof as the highest peak in Bhutan, reaching a remarkable altitude of 7,528 meters above sea level. [...] Kula Kangri’s location puts it on the map as one of the notable peaks in the Tibetan region of China. It is surrounded by other grand peaks of the Himalayas, creating a spectacle that leaves visitors awestruck. It marks the southern end of the Himalayas, straddling the border between Bhutan and Tibet, with its snow-capped peak towering over the surrounding landscape. The mountain also holds cultural significance for the people of Tibet and Bhutan as it is considered sacred in both cultures. Kula Kangri is not simply a geographical landmark. It is a symbol of natural grandeur, challenging human limits while offering an unparalleled spectacle of beauty and power. Its position within Tibet, China and its association with the mighty Himalayas make it a destination worth visiting for every adventurous traveler.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2023-06-07): Kula Kangri is a 7,538 metres (24,731 ft) mountain in the Himalayas range, in Tibet.[1] It is the 46th highest mountain in the world. The first people to reach the top were Japanese climbers Itani, Sakamoto, Ozaki, and Ohtani, in 1986.[2][3] In the past, it was thought that Kula Kangri was partly in Bhutan. Later surveys show it as only in Tibet.[4] References [change | change source]- ↑ "Kula Kangri, China". Peakbagger.com. Retrieved 23 May 2019. [...] - ↑ "Kula Kangri". Peakware.com. Archived from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): Kula Kangri Snow Mountain is located in Luozha County, Shannan Prefecture, Tibet, and is known as one of the "Four Holy Mountains" in central Tibet. At an altitude of 7,538 meters, it was one of the "Nine Gods of World Formation" during the Tubo period in Tibet. Standing on the main ridge in the middle of the Himalayas, Kula Kangri consists of three peaks. There are 6 peaks over 7,000 meters standing side by side with Kula Kangri. Looking from a distance, all the peaks stand in one line, like a barrier of ice. Behind the mountain is the Kingdom of Bhutan. [...] Kula Kangri seen in Pumo Yumcuo stretches for thousands of miles, surrounding and protecting this lake like arms. Blue lakes and majestic snow-capped mountains form a beautiful scene. [...] In this route, you will see super-high-altitude beauty at one time. Between the peaks of Kura Kangri, there are many lakes such as Baima Lincuo, Jiejiucuo, Zhegongcuo, etc. Generally, we will use 6-7 days to start from Lhasa, head east, go to the Lhoka area, and spend three days hiking around Kula Kangri and holy lakes, and vice versa.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-05-21): Kula Kangri is claimed by many authorities to be the highest mountain in Bhutan but this is disputed by others, who claim that Kula Kangri is wholly in Tibet. The mountain is part of the Bhutan Himalaya. Chinese and Japanese authorities claim nearby Gangkhar Puensum is higher, and the claim that Kula Kangri is in or on the border with Bhutan is challenged.[3]
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2005-09-19): On the border course, it seems that there has been no formal agreement between China and Bhutan. In this situation, there will be divergence of views. For my part, While I can accept our tendency to support the position of Bhutan in preference to that of its much larger neighbour, I will not allow that tendency to prejudice my conclusions. I argue that Kula Kangri belongs exclusively to Tibet. Nobody lives in the disputed area, so political considerations are irrelevant; therefore I argue that the most logical course for the border is along the watershed divide. In the past, the course of the divide was unclear, but now SRTM data, shown on this color relief map, clearly shows that the divide passes well to the south of Kula Kangri, which lies on a north-eastern spur. The SRTM void areas have been fixed for clarity, but the course of the divide is indisputable. Consequently Bhutan's claim that Kula Kangri is its high point should be rejected, whatever the relative elevations of KP and KK. And, despite what the Bhutanese websites and commercial maps may indicate, authorities with detailed topographical knowledge of this area tend to take this view.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2014-01-01): Mt. Kula Kangri (7538m.) located between Tibet and Bhutan border and is the most beautiful glacier snow mountain in Luoza County. The firm to the hillside not long, the sky suddenly opened, the blue sky under the white clouds folded the three gods lake shimmered and reappeared, Kula Kangri exposed its beautiful appearance, it seems that the most beautiful scenery can heal everything. Our approach from Lhasa to the peak takes two days by drive to get the Base camp of Mt. This mountain is considered a holy, and is a pilgrimage destination especially for Tibetans people and Buddhist. Mt. Kula Kangri is surrounded by a series of 6000 to 7000 meter high peaks all of which remain unclimbed. The first ascent was by a combined Japanese and Chinese team in April 21, 1986 (Kazumasa Hira, J. Sakamoto, H. Ozaki, E. Ohtani, C. Itani). The mountain occupies two ranges, the Himalaya and the Bhutan Himalaya. Mt. Kula Kangri offers many possibilities for new routes for mountain climbing seekers. Cultural Treks always welcome for those climbers who like to climb new virgin mountains from Tibet side.
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): 166km south of Lhasa (90°33'E and 28°13'N), the Kula Kangri massif soars over the greater Himalayan range in Tibet. Rising to 7,538m, the main peak (Kula Kangri I) has six neighboring peaks over 7,000m in Lhozhag of the Tibet Autonomous Region. To the southwest stand Kula Kangri II (7,418m, Central Peak) and III (7,381m, East Peak), while to the northeast are Karejiang I (7,221m) and II (7,045m). The above mountain heights are based on A Guide to Mountaineering in China (The China Mountaineering Association, 1993). A climbing chronicle follows: Kula Kangri I (7,538m, Main Peak): [...] Kula Kangri II (7,418m) and III (7,381m) (Central Peak and East Peak):
Claim: Kula Kangri is a territory of Republic of China (Kula Kangri, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-02-05): The rationale behind Beijing’s landgrab is not entirely clear. Unlike Doklam, which is near India and where the PRC has also pressed ahead to alter the situation on the ground through construction of roads and bunkers, control over Beyul Khenpajong would have no strategic value in the event of an India-China war. Stobdan suggests that it "may be spiritually important for the Drukpas and Nyingmapas living on the Tibetan side," something which Beijing could be playing on to boost support. [12] Alternatively, Beijing may be tightening its grip over the Beyul to pressure Thimphu to accept the package proposal. Stobdan believes that Beijing’s infrastructure buildup and "nomadic Tibetan infiltration" has been successful in the past. He notes that in 2006, Bhutan excluded Kula Kangri (an Himalayan peak) from its national map, supposedly under duress from the PRC. [13] Given such precedents, Beijing has likely learned the lesson that such pressure can pay off. In this case, as a Bhutanese official warned, the recent structures "are not temporary structures aimed at just pressuring Bhutan but seem built for the long run." They added that this activity amounts to Chinese "occupation" of the Beyul. [14] This perception is not necessarily commonly held.