Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić’s suggestion that Serbia could consider changing the course of the Ibar River has triggered strong reactions in Kosovo, warnings from the European Union and the United States, and a political dispute between officials in Belgrade and Tirana.
While Vučić has presented the idea as an issue concerning Serbia’s management of its own water resources, critics in Kosovo and analysts in Serbia say the proposal could have serious consequences for Kosovo’s water and energy supply and risks further escalating tensions between the two countries.
The European Union warned that statements about potentially altering the course of the Ibar, as well as actions that do not contribute to the normalization of relations between Kosovo and Serbia, should be avoided.
“Statements, including those regarding possible changes to the course of rivers, as well as actions that are not in line with this objective, should be avoided,” a European Commission spokesperson told Radio Free Europe.
The U.S. State Department also responded, telling Radio Free Europe that peace and stability in the Western Balkans remain U.S. priorities.
“Normalization of relations between Serbia and Kosovo is an indispensable part of this process,” a State Department spokesperson said.
The Ibar is around 270 kilometers long. It originates in Montenegro, flows through Serbia and enters Kosovo, where it runs for approximately 82 kilometers before returning to Serbia.
The river feeds Lake Gazivoda/Ujman, a strategically important reservoir located along the Kosovo-Serbia border. Around two-thirds of the lake lies within Kosovo.
Any major reduction in the Ibar’s inflow into the reservoir could therefore have consequences for Kosovo’s water supply, agriculture and energy system.
Alban Kuriqi, a professor of hydraulics and water resources at Kosovo’s University for Business and Technology, said that diverting the river would not mean an immediate interruption of Kosovo’s water supply.
“This is not a scenario in which the water supply would be immediately cut off,” Kuriqi told Radio Free Europe.
However, he said a partial diversion or significant withdrawal of water upstream is technically possible in the long term and should not simply be dismissed as impossible.
Such a project would require major hydraulic infrastructure, including a diversion dam, water-intake facilities and a large canal, pipeline or tunnel to transport the water toward another basin or reservoir.
“If transportation by gravity were not possible, substantial pumping infrastructure would also be required, together with energy for its operation,” Kuriqi said.
He added that such a project would require extensive topographical, geological, hydrological and environmental studies, substantial financial resources and many years of construction.
Serious consequences for Kosovo
Lake Gazivoda/Ujman is a key component of the Ibër-Lepenc water system, which supplies water for industrial facilities and agricultural irrigation and provides water to several municipalities in Kosovo.
The reservoir is also used for hydropower generation, while Kosovo Energy Corporation relies on its water for cooling its thermal power plants.
“Ujman depends heavily on these inflows from upstream. World Bank estimates indicate that almost all of the water entering Ujman through the Ibar originates from Montenegro and Serbia,” Kuriqi said.
He estimated the reservoir’s long-term average inflow at around 11 cubic meters per second, although flows vary considerably depending on rainfall, drought conditions and the season.
Kuriqi stressed that the reservoir has significant storage capacity, meaning a reduction in inflows would not immediately leave Kosovo without water.
However, a major and prolonged reduction could have serious consequences.
“It would reduce hydropower production and, over time, require increasingly difficult decisions about allocating water between public supply, electricity generation, industry, agriculture and maintaining ecological flows,” he said.
The extent of the consequences would depend largely on the scale and duration of any reduction in inflows and the level of water in the reservoir when such a reduction began.
Janjić: Vučić is seeking political gains
Dušan Janjić, from the Forum for Ethnic Relations, described Vučić’s rhetoric as dangerous, arguing that it could create a hostile atmosphere and potentially affect the position of Serbs living in northern Kosovo.
“He is now using this to somehow prolong his rule or gain something in the elections, but the risk is great. Using this as an ideological-propaganda mantra is dangerous,” Janjić said.
Vučić’s remarks come as he faces criticism from parts of the Serbian public over what they describe as insufficient efforts to protect the property and interests of Serbs in northern Kosovo.
Kosovo authorities began demolishing unauthorized houses near Lake Ujman in the north of the country on July 21. The area is predominantly inhabited by Kosovo Serbs.
Prishtina has described Vučić’s statements as political blackmail and a threat, while Belgrade has rejected those accusations.
Janjić also pointed out the irony of any attempt to use the Ibar and Gazivoda as leverage against Kosovo given that Serbs themselves live in the area around the reservoir.
“How do we explain to him [Vučić] that there are also Serbs living in northern Kosovo?” Janjić said.
Lake Ujman is located mainly in the municipality of Zubin Potok in northern Kosovo, while a smaller section extends into the municipality of Tutin in Serbia.
Dispute between Albanian and Serbian officials
Vučić’s proposal also triggered a public dispute between the foreign ministers of Albania and Serbia on social media.
Albanian Foreign Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Ferit Hoxha said water resources should not be used as an instrument of political pressure or as a means of punishing another country or population.
Albania, he said, strongly supports Kosovo’s right to security, sustainable development and protection of its water resources.
Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Đurić responded that Serbia would decide how to manage its natural resources.
He accused Tirana of becoming involved in the issue while ignoring what he described as systematic pressure on Kosovo’s Serb population and attacks on Serbian property.
Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama also entered the dispute, describing Belgrade’s position as “political folklore.”
“The Ibar River, completely unaware of all our historical cartographies, will continue to flow according to geography and not according to folklore,” Rama said.
Kosovo officials have meanwhile described the proposal as “absurd,” threatening and chauvinistic.
Acting Kosovo President Albulena Haxhiu warned that the Ibër-Lepenc system and Lake Ujman form part of a vital infrastructure network for water supply, energy, agriculture and the lives of hundreds of thousands of people.
Former acting Environment Minister Fitore Pacolli also described Vučić’s statement as concerning, arguing that water resources cannot be used as an instrument of threat, pressure or destabilization against another state.
Vučić has rejected the accusations, saying he is not threatening anyone and is merely dealing with water flows within Serbian territory.
“Since they are treating our people so badly, let us see — we have various reasons for changing the course of the Ibar, and then we will see what the Albanians will do and how they will behave,” he said.
Not a new idea
The idea of altering the Ibar’s course is not new.
In December 2024, following an explosion that damaged the Ibër-Lepenc canal in Zubin Potok, Vučić said that an idea to change the river’s course for Serbia’s needs had existed since 1985.
At the time, however, he said he opposed the proposal, arguing that he did not want nature to be used for political purposes.
Janjić said similar proposals had been considered in Serbia as far back as the 1980s, including discussions within the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, but were ultimately abandoned.
“This in itself is therefore not something new. Such projects exist and fall within what is called geopolitics,” Janjić said.
He argued that the proposal reflects a broader political mindset in which a leader believes that power can be used to reshape strategic realities.
“This is Vučić’s dream — that when you have power, you can change the course of a river and even the movement of the land,” Janjić said.
The unresolved Gazivoda/Ujman agreement
Kosovo and Serbia signed the Washington Agreement on economic normalization on September 4, 2020, in the presence of then-U.S. President Donald Trump.
The agreement included a provision concerning Lake Ujman/Gazivoda.
In 2021, the United States provided Kosovo and Serbia with a feasibility study on jointly managing the reservoir, based on the model of the Columbia River Treaty between the United States and Canada.
The Columbia River agreement, reached in 1961, provided the framework for the construction and operation of four major dams, three in Canada and one in the U.S. state of Montana.
The U.S.-backed study proposed, among other measures, the creation of an Ibar River commission to facilitate discussions between Kosovo and Serbia on the management of shared water resources.
That proposal, however, has not been implemented.
The U.S. State Department had not responded by the time of publication to Radio Free Europe’s questions about what happened to the plan and whether it remains under consideration.
For now, experts say that while diverting the Ibar is technically conceivable over the long term, the scale, cost, environmental impact and geopolitical consequences would make such a project extraordinarily difficult. Politically, however, the proposal has already demonstrated its potential to intensify tensions between Kosovo and Serbia.
