Ukraine’s refusal to recognize Kosovo appears to be increasingly intertwined with Kyiv’s broader diplomatic interests, particularly its growing engagement with Serbia, analysts say.
The debate intensified following Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s first official visit to Belgrade, where he reiterated that Ukraine’s position on Kosovo’s declaration of independence “remains unchanged.”
While Ukraine and Serbia cannot be described as strategic partners, experts say their respective interests have brought them closer. For Kyiv, those interests include access to ammunition, maintaining communication with a traditionally pro-Russian state and encouraging Serbia to strengthen its ties with the European Union.
Kateryna Shymkevych, an expert at Ukraine’s Center for Balkan Studies, said Kyiv views cooperation with Belgrade as useful for securing ammunition, maintaining relations with the EU and encouraging Serbia, at least partially, to move closer to the West.
“Ukraine clearly understands that Serbia is a pro-Russian country, but telling Brussels that we will not cooperate with Serbia is not a viable option,” Shymkevych told Radio Free Europe.
Yevhen Mahda, executive director of the Institute for World Policy in Kyiv, similarly said the two countries should not be considered strategic partners. He argued that Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić had gained more politically from Zelensky’s visit, while Ukraine also had concrete interests at stake.
“In short, [Ukraine benefits from] ammunition supplies and the prospect of using Serbia as a channel for negotiations with Russia,” Mahda said.
That calculation also brings Kosovo into the equation.
During his visit to Belgrade, Zelensky reaffirmed Ukraine’s position that it does not recognize Kosovo’s independence. The statement triggered criticism in Prishtina and renewed debate over whether Ukraine’s position is increasingly being used as part of its diplomatic relationship with Serbia.
Why does Ukraine not recognize Kosovo?
Kyiv has traditionally justified its position by referring to the principle of territorial integrity and concerns that recognizing Kosovo could provide Russia with an additional precedent to use in its claims over occupied Ukrainian territories.
Kosovo, however, rejects that comparison.
In 2010, the International Court of Justice concluded that Kosovo’s declaration of independence did not violate international law.
In an analysis published this week by the Kosovo Centre for Security Studies, Ramadan Ilazi argued that Kosovo and the Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia are fundamentally different cases and that Ukraine should avoid creating “false parallels” between them.
Kosovo’s independence followed years of repression, an armed conflict, NATO intervention and a lengthy international process concerning its final status. Crimea, by contrast, was occupied and annexed by Russia through military force.
Professor Gëzim Visoka of Dublin City University also argues that there is no meaningful parallel between Kosovo and the Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia.
He said Ukraine would be better served by recognizing Kosovo rather than drawing comparisons that could ultimately benefit Russia’s attempts to justify its occupation of Ukrainian territory.
“In this context, I think Ukraine’s unnecessary and unfriendly comment on Kosovo’s independence not only gives legitimacy to Serbia’s obstructive approach, but also provides another justification for the five EU member states that still do not recognize Kosovo,” Visoka told Radio Free Europe.
Kosovo says it has supported Ukraine
Kosovo’s acting foreign minister, Glauk Konjufca, has emphasized the differences between the two cases, arguing that Kosovo emerged from a struggle for freedom following years of systematic repression and the war in 1999.
“What followed was not an act of annexation, occupation or territorial conquest, but a comprehensive international process under United Nations administration and international mediation over Kosovo’s final status,” Konjufca said.
Visoka also argues that Kosovo has done enough to warrant Ukrainian recognition, although he acknowledges that Kyiv’s decision could ultimately depend on how the war ends and the strategic direction Ukraine takes afterward.
“ Kosovo’s disappointment and reaction to Zelensky’s statement in Belgrade are measured and understandable. There is a limit to unilateral support for Ukraine, and Kosovo may have already reached that point,” Visoka said.
Kosovo has supported Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion, aligning itself with Western sanctions, providing assistance and shelter to Ukrainians and offering political support to Kyiv.
Shymkevych, however, described Prishtina’s reaction to Zelensky’s statement as unjustified.
“Ukrainian authorities have never promised to recognize Kosovo. That may be a bitter truth, but it is the truth,” she said.
Russia remains central to Kyiv’s calculation
According to Shymkevych, Ukraine’s position is not solely about its relationship with Serbia. Kyiv is also concerned about the way Moscow uses Kosovo as a political and legal precedent.
She said Russia has cited the International Court of Justice’s opinion on Kosovo when advancing its arguments concerning Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, which Russia claims to have annexed but which remain internationally recognized as part of Ukraine.
For Kyiv, she said, this creates a genuine dilemma: recognizing Kosovo may have limited direct consequences for Ukraine’s relations with most countries, but could give Russia another argument for its propaganda.
“This could create even greater chaos in the international system, potentially leading to civil wars, further erosion or even the complete destruction of the principles of international law,” Shymkevych said.
Mahda, however, believes the main consequence would be a deterioration in Ukraine’s relations with the EU member states that currently do not recognize Kosovo.
“Within Ukraine, recognition of Kosovo’s independence would have no negative consequences,” he said, adding that his visit to Kosovo last December reinforced that view.
Ukraine and Kosovo are still deepening ties
Despite Kyiv’s refusal to recognize Kosovo, Shymkevych noted that the position has not prevented the two sides from developing closer practical relations.
She pointed to Ukraine’s participation in KFOR peacekeeping until 2022, the recognition of Kosovo passports for humanitarian purposes, growing economic and trade links, and cooperation among experts working against propaganda and disinformation.
In 2025, Ukraine also appointed a representative of its Chamber of Commerce and Industry for Albania and Kosovo.
Meanwhile, Oleksandr Merezhko, head of the Ukrainian parliament’s Foreign Policy Committee, told Radio Free Europe on Monday that Kyiv’s position on Kosovo could change after the war in Ukraine ends, depending on “the position of the European Union and its member states.”
For now, however, Ukraine appears to be maintaining a delicate balance: strengthening practical cooperation with Kosovo while preserving its non-recognition policy and simultaneously expanding diplomatic ties with Serbia.
That balancing act suggests that Kosovo’s status is becoming not only a question of principle for Kyiv, but also part of a broader diplomatic calculation involving Belgrade, Brussels and Moscow.
