On March 23, 2025, the EU-mediated dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia remains at a standstill, with no high-level meetings for the past 18 months. Both countries are grappling with internal challenges, and the final agreement seems increasingly distant. Analysts argue that the international community must push for mutual recognition between Kosovo and Serbia, rather than just normalization of relations, and should have a Plan B in case the dialogue fails.
Peter Sorensen’s first visit to Pristina as the EU Special Representative for the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue came at a time when the process seemed absent from anyone’s agenda. In Kosovo, attention is focused on post-election issues, while Serbia is dealing with protests and internal unrest. Despite this, Sorensen’s message was clear: the dialogue must continue. “The dialogue is to ensure that meetings take place. Whether it involves compromise or not, that’s up to the parties to determine. This is what we’ve been doing since 2011,” Sorensen stated on March 17 in Pristina.
The first rounds of negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia, mediated by the EU, began 14 years ago. Over the years, these discussions have ebbed and flowed, with dozens of agreements and commitments made, though many have not been implemented. Leaders have changed in Brussels, Pristina, and Belgrade, but the narrative has also shifted. What was once focused on mutual recognition as the main goal is now framed as the normalization of relations.
After meeting with Kosovo’s leaders, Sorensen stressed the need to continue the dialogue but mentioned that he would also meet with both sides before deciding on the next steps. “The goal is for the process to continue and move forward. I have discussions here in Pristina, but I need to go to Belgrade as well. After these conversations, I will sit down and assess where we stand,” said Sorensen.
The two sides do not appear to be anywhere near an agreement. High-level talks have not taken place since September 2023, when Kosovo’s Prime Minister, Albin Kurti, and Serbian President, Aleksandar Vučić, met in Brussels, mediated by then-EU leaders Josep Borrell and Miroslav Lajčak. Ten days after that meeting, the armed attack in Banjska occurred, where armed Serbian groups killed a Kosovo police officer.
Subsequent EU efforts to bring the leaders together have failed, largely due to conditions set by one side that the other opposed. After meeting with Sorensen, both Kurti and Kosovo’s President, Vjosa Osmani, made several demands: from lifting EU sanctions against Kosovo to handing over the group responsible for the Banjska attack to Kosovo authorities.
For observers of the dialogue, the ball is in the EU’s court. They argue that it is time for the EU to focus on a specific goal: mutual recognition between the two countries. According to them, this is the heart of the issue and must be addressed directly.
Leon Hartwell, a senior fellow at LSE IDEAS, emphasizes in an interview with Radio Free Europe’s Expose program: “It’s really important that mutual recognition is put at the forefront of this dialogue because the idea of normalization is very undefined. If you don’t have a clear goal, you’re not really trying to achieve anything specific.”
Serbian President Vučić insists that Serbia will never recognize Kosovo’s independence. His focus is on the establishment of the Association of Serbian Municipalities in Kosovo, often presented as a precondition for continuing the dialogue. A 2013 agreement on this association exists, but Kosovo has never implemented it, fearing that such a mechanism, with broad powers, could impact the functionality of the state.
Kosovo has had a draft from the EU regarding the statute of the association, but that now seems off the table. President Osmani stated this week that the draft, as it stands, would not receive approval from Kosovo’s Constitutional Court. “Personally, I believe that it’s not in line with the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, nor with the values and norms of the European Union and the standards of the Council of Europe, nor with the 2015 Constitutional Court ruling,” said Osmani.
Hartwell warns that a broad Association with significant executive powers could lead to the creation of something akin to Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a Serbian entity with legislative power. “There is a strong perception that the Association would help advance the dialogue, but I am very skeptical about that,” he said. “Perhaps a softened version of the Association could be presented and implemented just to silence the critics, but implementing an Association with strong executive powers would be highly problematic for Kosovo.”
Kurt Bassuener, from the Council for the Policy of Democratization in Berlin, suggests that the situation between Kosovo and Serbia may remain unresolved for decades, similar to Bosnia and Herzegovina’s internal issues. He proposes that all parties should return to the initial goal: mutual recognition. “No one talks about mutual recognition anymore. Everyone talks about normalization, and this is not in Kosovo’s interest, and I would say it’s not in the interest of a democratic Serbia either,” Bassuener said.
In light of the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape, Bassuener believes that the Western Balkans remains a region where the EU has significant potential to stabilize the situation, and the Kosovo-Serbia issue is central to that stability. “I hope there will be a reassessment and reorganization of EU policies. I don’t see any evidence of this yet—either in EU institutions or in the member states—but it will take time to turn the ship in a different direction.”
Analysts believe the EU still holds leverage over Kosovo and Serbia to push them toward an agreement, even though the conditioning of their European integration with the normalization of relations has so far yielded no results. Hartwell argues that the West must have a clear Plan B if the dialogue fails. “One possible solution might be for the five countries that have not yet recognized Kosovo to do so. Because in that case, Serbia could no longer claim that Kosovo’s recognition is still in the air. It would have to deal with a Kosovo recognized by all EU member states. And if it really wants to join the EU, Serbia would need to work within that framework,” he said.
However, some have speculated that under President Donald Trump, Serbia may have more maneuvering room due to its closer ties with people in Trump’s orbit. Therefore, analysts suggest that Kosovo should focus on maintaining bipartisan support in Washington, positioning itself as a trusted partner, particularly in security and economic matters, and increasing cooperation with the US in energy and defense sectors.
In recent years, Kosovo’s government, led by Albin Kurti, has faced intermittent criticism from US officials for some actions in the north of the country, which they have described as poorly coordinated and detrimental to the Serb community. The last known contact between Kosovo and the White House was a letter President Trump sent to President Osmani on Kosovo’s 17th independence anniversary in February, pledging to expand ties with Kosovo but not mentioning the dialogue for normalizing relations between Pristina and Belgrade.
The EU has not responded to Radio Free Europe’s inquiry about plans to call a meeting between the leaders of both countries soon, and it is unclear if they would respond to any invitation. With Kosovo still without a new government after the February elections and ongoing protests in Serbia, the only thing moving forward with certainty is the calendar.
