Selim Ibraimi- As the world changes, it is essential for states and leaders to adapt to events, prompting governments to act swiftly in response to current developments, whether they pose a threat or not. We are witnessing specific developments, not only in global politics but also within our own region that demand our attention in this context. Let us begin with the recent decision in The Hague, which left most people speechless and raised the question of why the Special Court reached such a verdict. While various factors are certainly at play, our primary interest lies in how governments and policymakers act before events unfold.
1. For instance, since the autumn of 2020, the Government of Kosovo has allocated budget funds for former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) representatives who have since been convicted by the Special Court in The Hague, a court established by the Kosovo Assembly in 2015. It is a hybrid court, part of Kosovo’s legal system (Article 162), yet ultimately operates by bypassing all of Kosovo’s institutions. It is a court with its own bodies, operating independently with the backing of the EU and the US. However, in this instance, the issue was not merely about financial support for the judicial proceedings in The Hague. The core issue relates to the point raised on X by James Pettifer, a historian specializing in the origins of the KLA, a university professor, and a Balkans analyst: “Kosovo Albanians are themselves to blame for their naive cooperation with the Court from the very beginning. Five years ago, I opposed this cooperation based on the arguments presented; consequently, despite being a leading historian of the war and the origins of the KLA, I was never called as a witness at the trial.” It must be noted that, despite pressure from Washington and Brussels, the kosovar side could have negotiated a different legal framework. Whether it was a lack of vision or the influence of other factors that led the kosovar side to agree to a court that neither answers to nor can be controlled by Kosovo remains a subject of debate. Pettifer’s observation remains accurate; however, the US, Great Britain, the EU, and others have offered differing assessments regarding the decision. Compared to a decade ago, there is a significant divergence in the stances taken by Kosovo’s allies. This is just one aspect illustrating how key actors on the ground viewed, or failed to view, the events of that time. In this context, the persistent lack of strategic vision among Kosovo’s leaders has been compounded by other errors, manifesting as fragmented and highly contentious approaches leading up to the announcement of the ruling in The Hague. The missteps of Kosovo’s leaders have been exploited by its adversaries and other parties involved in the judicial proceedings. The process of isolation exacerbated by Washington’s unfavorable stance regarding Prime Minister Albin Kurti’s coordination with the U.S. is one of the factors contributing to Kosovo remaining isolated as it faces critical decisions. European governments share Washington’s position, making the Association of Serb Municipalities (ASM) and relations with Serbia prerequisites for Kosovo. A paradox is unfolding: instead of the EU and the U.S. keeping Serbia isolated, the opposite is occurring. Given this reality, it is fair to say that the same process could have been conducted within Kosovo by domestic courts, with a greater degree of independence. However, as is known though perhaps not to everyone the Specialist Chambers and Specialist Prosecutor’s Office can only be abolished in coordination with the U.S. and the EU. Steps toward this goal could begin with vigorous lobbying here in Washington, D.C. presenting evidence that the Court has “lost its independence and proper direction” as well as through other forms of peaceful civic activism, ultimately culminating in securing a two-thirds majority vote in the Parlament of Kosovo. As a reminder, according to reports by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFERL), Serbia has engaged at least six major lobbying firms to influence U.S. policy. Yet, regarding Kosovo from the declaration of independence to the current government led by Prime Minister Kurti how many such firms have been engaged in the U.S.? Nevertheless, time is running out, and Kosovo must act.
2. This pattern of delayed decision-making should not be viewed as an isolated incident. Similar behavior was observed in North Macedonia’s leadership, particularly in the post-1991 period, where there was initially a realistic approach to events, which was later obscured by the state leadership in Skopje regarding relations with Greece or the Albanian population. The same problem is now recurring with North Macedonia’s Prime Minister, Hristijan Mickoski. The Prime Minister, known for his hardline stance, has signaled to the EU that he has no intention of changing his position regarding the constitutional amendments. This is not happening because the EU is unable to fulfill its financial and political commitments. It is due, rather, to Mickoski’s agenda and the regional atmosphere. However, the Prime Minister’s current visit to the US is demonstrating that, at times, it is prepared to act beyond expectations in the interest of the government and national priorities. Regarding EU membership, Prime Minister Mickoski maintains that the process should be merit-based. “If we analyze our situation, unfortunately, we are very far from that,” Mickoski stated in an interview with the Atlantic Council. “We are in the same place we were twenty-six years ago,” he said. Prime Minister Mickoski noted that North Macedonia serves as a natural crossroads for major projects spanning the region and Europe. “The strategic partnership with the US will benefit not only our two countries but also the region and Europe on a broader scale.” Mickoski’s recent interview indicates no shift in stance toward Bulgaria, as he believes North Macedonia is in a stronger position than it was three years ago. In this context, Serbia serves as another example; through a “balancing act,” it has managed to maintain acceptable relations with the US and the EU, as well as with nations like China and Russia.
3. Reports indicate that the State Department is preparing a significant US engagement for the “Expo 2027” exhibition in Belgrade, Serbia. Washington is expected to bring companies and business leaders to Serbia to launch stronger cooperation across several sectors. Based on the three cases presented, it can be said that Kosovo’s policies to date differ in nature from those of Serbia and North Macedonia. The Kosovo government’s struggles to adapt to new realities, the power struggles, and personal animosities have left Kosovo less capable of facing current challenges. The outcome is now clear: regardless of who holds power or who may come to power in the future Kosovo must increase its strategic focus on improving the situation. And it must do so without ever compromising on national and state interests. Given Wednesday’s decision, in The Hague the ongoing conflict between the US and Iran, the persistent rift between the US and the EU, the war between Ukraine and Russia, and numerous other developments, the Kosovo government and the opposition must grasp the implications of these events. As we have emphasized in previous articles, the world has changed since 1999 and indeed since 2015, when Kosovo’s leadership decided to approve the Special Chambers. After all, there is no ideal world. It must also be understood that international relations do not take place in a vacuum where the game is played without allies and friends. At times, it is necessary to weigh up all externally driven suggestions and plans against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of small states or those seeking international recognition. Recent developments suggest a return to an era where the old order is weakening and new rules are being rewritten. If the government of Kosovo and states with limited capacity fail to grasp this, the consequences will be long-lasting, potentially leaving them as governments or states facing a high risk to their very survival.
This article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. Publication rights belong solely to Portalb.mk and the author, in accordance with the agreement between them.
(The article has been adapted and edited for clarity)