A declaration on defense cooperation between Kosovo, Albania, and Croatia has angered Serbia, which considers it a threat. What does NATO say about this new Balkan initiative, and how is it viewed by security experts in Pristina and Belgrade?
Kosovo and the two other Western Balkan countries that are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Albania and Croatia, signed this week a declaration to deepen cooperation in defense and security.
Without providing specific details, the defense ministers of the three countries said they would increase military interoperability through education, training, and joint exercises, engage in combating hybrid threats, and coordinate policies for Euro-Atlantic integration.
Serbia sees this as a step that “undermines regional stability” and as a threat to its “territorial integrity,” while Kosovo stated that the initiative should not be seen as a threat to anyone, but as a message that the three countries will be united against any challenge or threat.
Security experts in Pristina and Belgrade do not view the declaration as a step toward forming a formal defense alliance, such as NATO’s.
What Unites the Three Countries?
For Ramadan Ilazi, head of research at the Kosovo Center for Security Studies (KCSS), the importance of the declaration lies in the fact that it comes at a time when the predictability of existing security alliances in the world has increased.
He views the initiative as a step toward strengthening alternatives or strategic alliances for Kosovo to advance in defense, as it still does not have a clear path to NATO membership.
“I am not optimistic that this alliance marks the beginning of a formal defense bloc, but rather a new group of countries in Europe that share the same concern or interpretation of the security situation in Southeastern Europe,” Ilazi said to Radio Free Europe.
Ilazi believes that NATO’s peacekeeping mission in Kosovo, KFOR, and the alliance itself will be an umbrella for these cooperations, as he does not think Albania and Croatia would act against NATO’s interests in the region.
A NATO official told Radio Free Europe that Albania and Croatia have long contributed to regional stability, also through the KFOR framework. When asked about the new initiative, the official said the alliance “is aware” but that it is up to the signing parties to say more.
Although it does not have the form of an international agreement, the initiative, with the political will of the parties, could lead to “soft political actions,” according to security expert Vuk Vuksanovic from the Belgrade Center for Security Policy.
He told Radio Free Europe that Balkan cooperation has been partly encouraged by warnings of a possible reduction in “U.S. involvement in NATO if Europeans do not invest more in their defense.”
According to Vuksanovic, in an environment where NATO does not leave but “weakens,” it is possible that certain countries will form informal groupings to cooperate.
Kosovo, Albania, and Croatia warned that the initiative could expand to include new members, though no countries were named. However, Serbia hinted that one of these countries might be Bulgaria. The Bulgarian government did not respond to Radio Free Europe’s request for comment.
Even if other countries join, Ilazi does not believe this group is moving toward creating a military alliance embodying NATO’s principles, such as collective defense.
Why Is Serbia Opposing the Initiative?
Belgrade has requested an explanation from Tirana and Zagreb regarding the goals of the initiative, while stating that it “will not allow unilateral actions that may threaten our territorial integrity, the security of our citizens, and peace in the region.”
Kosovo’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Diaspora responded, stating that Serbia’s behavior represents a new violation of the Brussels Agreement, “which clearly stipulates that Serbia will not block Kosovo’s international relations.”
Meanwhile, Croatia stated that the time has passed when Zagreb had to ask Belgrade for permission on how to act and with whom to cooperate.
For Vuksanovic, Serbia is more likely to view this initiative as a “political provocation from Zagreb.”
According to him, the government in Belgrade might use this development to divert attention from the political situation in Serbia and the ongoing protests there.
Ilazi also believes that Serbia’s strong reaction is mainly due to the involvement of Croatia, which fought for independence from the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
However, he considers the three-way cooperation to be driven by a shared belief that Russia exerts harmful influence in the region, and that autocratic regimes in the region pose a threat to the stability of the Balkans—an accusation that has often been made by Kosovo’s authorities.
While he believes Kosovo would greatly benefit from the experiences of the two NATO countries, as well as from various training, Ilazi expresses skepticism about the implementation of the initiative, recalling the low level of implementation of previous agreements between Pristina and Tirana. /REL
