Efforts to normalize relations between Kosovo and Serbia, once a cornerstone of European Union diplomacy in the Western Balkans, have reached a critical juncture. Years of talks and international mediation have not changed the process’s deep-seated mutual suspicion, weak local politics, and broader consequences of world turmoil.
In recent interviews for Brussels Morning Newspaper, Dritëro Arifi, a professor of international relations based in Kosovo, and Ivan Videnović, a political scientist at the University of Belgrade, offered a sobering assessment of the current impasse—and the forces working against a final resolution.
At the center of the deadlock are two unresolved demands: Serbia’s refusal to formally recognize Kosovo’s independence, and Kosovo’s reluctance to establish the Association of Municipalities with Serbian Majority (AMSM), an entity that Prishtina fears could resemble Bosnia’s deeply dysfunctional Republika Srpska.
“These two issues are the final hurdles—and perhaps the highest,”
said Mr. Videnović.
“For Serbia, recognition without a tangible concession would be political suicide. For Kosovo, a Serbian structure with too much autonomy threatens its sovereignty.”
While technical agreements have been signed over the years—most notably the 2013 Brussels Agreement and the 2023 Ohrid Framework—implementation has faltered. According to Mr. Arifi, the European Union’s role has suffered due to its lack of enforcement tools and the parties’ ability to selectively honor commitments.
“The EU’s credibility as a mediator is being tested,”
he said.
“Without mechanisms to ensure compliance, the process risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive.”
Political conditions in both countries have further complicated matters. The outcome of February’s legislative elections in Kosovo has created a hung legislature, prompting Prime Minister Albin Kurti to look for coalition partners among non-Serb minority MPs. President Aleksandar Vučić in Serbia, on the other hand, is confronted with a growing wave of domestic dissent involving large-scale demonstrations against corruption, government policies, and the power of organised crime.
“Vučić is navigating the most turbulent period of his tenure,”
Mr. Videnović said.
“The cohesion of his Serbian Progressive Party is eroding, and he now relies almost entirely on his personal authority and media dominance.”
The diplomatic standoff is unfolding against the backdrop of a broader geopolitical reordering. By contrast, Serbia has had tight ties with Moscow, most recently highlighted by a contentious trip to Russia by Aleksandar Vulin, former intelligence head and major Vučić friend.
Kosovo has positioned itself firmly within the Western camp, seeking closer ties to NATO and the European Union. In contrast, Serbia has maintained close relations with Moscow, most recently underscored by a controversial visit to Russia by Aleksandar Vulin, the former intelligence chief and a key Vučić ally.
“Serbia’s ambivalence toward Russia is more than symbolic—it reflects a deeper strategic dilemma,”
Mr. Arifi noted.
“The West sees Serbia’s balancing act as untenable in the long run.”
For Mr. Videnović, the danger lies in resurrecting outdated solutions. He warned against any return to proposals of territorial exchange between northern Kosovo and Albanian-majority areas in southern Serbia—ideas once floated by the Trump administration.
“Redrawing borders would unleash a chain reaction across the Balkans,”
he said.
“Stability depends on inclusive governance, not partition.”
While NATO and the European Union continue to emphasize the importance of dialogue—reiterated in recent statements by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte—both Mr. Arifi and Mr. Videnović suggest that rhetoric is not enough.
“NATO’s role must evolve,”
said Mr. Arifi.
“The security vacuum in the region is real, and external actors are ready to exploit it.”
The political situation is still hazy as spring approaches in the Western Balkans. Lacking a clear road map and little drive, the conversation runs the risk of stagnating forever and leaving two neighbours trapped in a geopolitical conflict with no end in view.
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
