Internationally recognized rules for recognition of a new state are 1: The support of the majority of the peoples on that terriroty; 2: The physical control over that territory; 3: The protection of its minorities.
The Serbs of Croatia were denied their right to self-determination. I have a number of official croatian letters (dated May '91) of dismissal for serbs who refused to sign the famous 'croatian oath of loyalty'. The Croats never at any point offered credible protection of its minorites, totally the opposite in fact.
The Serbs of Bosnia were denied their right to self-determination, despite make up ~32% of the population. Posters like Hoplite seem to believe that the Serbs must have been crazy not to trust the moslem fundamentalist Izetbegovic who in his first 9 months of the rotating Presidency visited by far an large only Molsem, cash rich countries. A real sign of his 'multi-ethinic' beliefs. I'm not suprised that the Croats didn't trust him either. Somehow, Serbia was expected to completely ignore their own bretheren and leave them in a state they did not wish to live in with a President who refused to leave office despite the rotating Presidency agreement.
It seems you clearly believe in the freedom for outside powers to economically rape whichever state/country they wish and do their best to guarantee a conflict that will produce the desired results.
VRN