Three years since the Washington Agreement: Why was a good opportunity for normalization missed?

Exactly three years ago today, in the White House, in the presence of the then US President Donald Trump, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic and the then Kosovo Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti signed the Washington Agreement, which was then seen as a new chance to build permanent peace and long-term stability, not only when it comes to relations between Belgrade and Pristina, but also in the context of the entire region of the Western Balkans. Today, three years later, the Washington Agreement is almost forgotten, and little of what was predicted has been achieved.

Analysts from Belgrade and Pristina indicate for Kosovo Online that after three years, it is clear that a good opportunity that could have led to significant progress in the normalization of relations between the Serbs and the Albanians was missed.

The initial optimism died down very quickly, especially after the arrival of Albin Kurti as the head of the Government in Pristina.

With the Washington Agreement, Kosovo agreed to observe a one-year moratorium on the campaign for membership in international organizations, and Serbia agreed to stop lobbying for the withdrawal of recognition of Kosovo's independence. The moratorium was extended even after the deadline from the agreement, until the spring of last year when Pristina applied for the Council of Europe.

It is also planned that the Agreement for the Belgrade-Pristina highway, signed on February 14, 2020, as well as the railway agreement, will be implemented on both sides. In addition, both sides have committed to devote themselves to a feasibility study on the possibilities of connecting the railway infrastructure of Belgrade-Pristina with the port on the Adriatic.

In the Washington Agreement, it was stated that Kosovo and Serbia would cooperate with the US International Development Finance Corporation and in memorandums of understanding, on the operationalization of the "Peace Highway", the Pristina-Merdare railway, and the Nis-Pristina railway.

The agreement provided for Kosovo to join the "Mini Schengen", which was initiated by Serbia, Albania, and North Macedonia, later the "Open Balkan", but this did not happen.

Both sides agreed to cooperate with the US Department of Energy and other entities of the US Government on a feasibility study for the joint use of Lake Gazivode, which is still a matter of dispute between Belgrade and Pristina.

The Agreement also included the obligation to protect and promote religious freedom, including the restoration of interfaith communication, the protection of religious buildings, and the implementation of court decisions related to the SOC, as well as the continuation of the return of disinherited property, which Pristina has not complied with yet.

They also pledged to accelerate efforts to locate and identify the remains of missing persons and to be committed to identifying and implementing long-term and sustainable solutions for refugees and internally displaced persons. At a round of high-level dialogue in Brussels, in May of this year, the Declaration on the Disappeared was adopted, but the two sides are still accused of not implementing it.

In the Agreement, Kosovo agreed to open an Embassy in Jerusalem, and in return for Israel to recognize Kosovo's independence.

Milan Krstic, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences, tells Kosovo Online that the Washington Agreement was a good opportunity for progress in the normalization of relations between Belgrade and Pristina, which was missed, and that the greatest responsibility for the non-implementation of the Agreement from this document lies on the Albanian side, especially since the arrival of the current of Kosovo Prime Minister Albin Kurti to power.

"The key political point of the Agreement was the moratorium on Pristina's application for membership in international organizations, on the one hand, and the moratorium on Belgrade's campaign to withdraw recognitions. It was a one-year moratorium, but it was later extended, that is, the State Department stated that it should be extended, and both Belgrade and Pristina actually agreed to it. And as long as this type of behavior was applied in practice, that essential political aspect of the Agreement actually worked. The moment Pristina decided to apply for membership in the Council of Europe, that provision died. This was followed by the reaction of Belgrade, which announced new withdrawals of recognitions," Krstic said.

He points out that one of the important provisions of the Washington Agreement, which was "removed" from the agenda very quickly, was Kosovo's entry into the then "Mini Schengen", that is, the "Open Balkan", which he thinks was a missed opportunity.

"The moment when Albin Kurti, a few months after the signing of the Agreement, won the Kosovo elections, it was clear that the implementation of the Washington Agreement will not happen. Few things have been implemented and they are mostly technical, such as, for example, building a facility at the Merdare crossing. Some things were implemented independently of this Agreement, with the mediation of the EU, such as the construction of the Nis-Pristina highway, the section to Merosina. Or certain things happened within some other processes, such as work on diversification energy sources," he points out, and reminds that according to some interpretations of the Agreement, Serbia should have transferred the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which did not happen, but Belgrade opened the office of the Chamber of Commerce there.

Those economic provisions of the Agreement from the White House that are still being implemented today, says Krstic, mostly go beyond the Washington Agreement.

"I think there is a mistake by Washington because it was announced that much more money would be involved in the implementation of all these agreements; the office of the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) in Belgrade is open, but it is actually now in a state of hibernation, the huge amount of money that was announced to be invested in these projects is not there yet. So for that economic development part of the Agreement, I think there was a lack of continuity in relation to what was promised in the White House three years ago. And there was a lack of continuity because Donald Trump promised it, and it should be noted, also in the context of his current campaign for the presidency. And after the change of government, even though the DFC is a bipartisan institution, founded with the support of both Democrats and Republicans, it is obvious that the new administration in Washington did not consider that we should equally invest in this region in the way that the Republicans announced and planned," Krstic explains.

He reminds that when there was a change of Government in Washington, both US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the Envoy for the Western Balkans, Gabriel Escobar, said that the Washington Agreement was still valid for the US.

"But it obviously referred to a narrower part of that Agreement, primarily to its political essence, to two mutual moratoriums. And that is what Washington was trying to maintain. They are still working on some points, for example, those related to reducing the influence of Russia and China, especially through the diversification of energy sources. There is some discontinuity between the old and new US administrations when it comes to the Washington Agreement, but there is also a lot of continuity between Trump's and Biden's policies towards the region," Krstic points out.

Krstic says that the Washington Agreement at the time it was reached was also a positive impulse in the direction of strengthening relations between Serbia and the USA.

"The very fact that it was the first meeting in the White House between the Serbian and American presidents, the first time since Kostunica and Djindjic was symbolically a step forward. It was a part of the continuity of relations with the Trump administration that started a little earlier and continued, it seems to me, even today with the Biden administration, despite occasional oscillations and turbulence in relations. However, the impact of this Agreement should not be exaggerated, it was more symbolically important than it changed something operationally. And we see even today that it actually, politically, is no longer relevant," Krstic concludes.

Lawyer and human rights expert Milan Antonijevic tells Kosovo Online that the Washington Agreement had several points that are very significant, especially in the economic part of connecting Belgrade and Pristina, when it comes to infrastructure, roads, railways, and energy.

"I think that certain things have been done in those fields. Pristina has committed to consider entering the 'Mini Schengen', that is, the 'Open Balkan', and that is something we have not seen yet. Unfortunately, it became clear very quickly that parts of the Agreement were rejected by Pristina, including that part concerning the 'Open Balkan'. However, the behavior of Pristina does not invalidate that Agreement, on the contrary, any US administration can return to it. We will see what the next presidential election in the US will look like and whether some of these issues will return to the focus of the US administration. But obviously, the current administration was not overly interested in implementing all those points," Antonijevic says.

When it comes to the behavior of the Albanian authorities, Antonijevic drew a parallel between the Washington and Brussels Agreements, in which, as he says, there are points that Pristina is not ready to implement even 10 years after its signing.

"Probably, in both cases, Pristina was just buying time within the negotiation process. But I would not reject any of the points in either the Brussels or Washington Agreements, nor would I diminish their importance, but they can really be used in our diplomatic communication with Washington, to be constantly reminded of the obligations that Pristina has undertaken. I believe that the Ambassador of Serbia to the USA knows all this very well and refers to this Agreement, indicating what Pristina has not implemented. This agreement is valid, it has not been repealed and gives us some diplomatic advantage when it comes to the normalization of relations with Pristina," Antonijevic says.

And he believes that the signing of the Washington Agreement three years ago gave additional impetus to the strengthening of relations between Serbia and the USA.

"That is the effect of this Agreement. It can also be seen from some earlier, really high-quality communication between Serbia and the US, which, it seems to me, was only confirmed by such an agreement. But even after that, after the change of the US administration, with the Biden administration, the trend of improving relations between Serbia and the US continued. I think that this Agreement also sends a clear signal to some other 'players' in our region that Serbia has clearly chosen the path by which it wants to solve all open and major issues, and that is, above all, the EU, the Brussels Agreement, the Berlin process. And of course, the USA, which, when you look at the experience in 1995 and the signing of the Dayton Agreement, is perhaps the closest support to solving the big and painful issues in the region. I believe that in that experience lies the trust of President Vucic and everyone who participated in this process, the US will neutrally help the most to reach certain solutions that suit everyone living in Kosovo, that the minorities will be protected," our interlocutor is convinced.

He reminds that with this Agreement, Pristina has committed itself to implement everything that was previously agreed in the Brussels agreement.

"There is also the issue of religious rights, property, above all of the Serbian Orthodox Church, which Pristina has committed to resolve with the Washington Agreement. Three years after that, we still don't have it, so the anniversary of the Washington Agreement should be used to return to Pristina's commitments and show that Serbia was constructive at the table and that we agreed to things that bring us closer to solutions, but that Pristina, even though it signed the Agreement at the time, did not even try to implement many of those things. On the contrary, their politicians, above all Albin Kurti, refuse to solve certain issues. If Pristina wants any respect in international relations and diplomacy, it really has to implement everything it has undertaken as an obligation," he points out.

Antonijevic believes that the Biden administration has not given up on the Washington Agreement and that the US officials have repeatedly sent messages that it is still in force and that none of the points of the Agreement have been changed since the arrival of Biden.

"They speak very clearly about Pristina's assumed obligations, what they have not implemented, and sanctions have been introduced against Kosovo. This all speaks to the seriousness of each signature on a certain document. The party that understands this will be at an advantage, I think that Serbia, at this moment, understood and resolved many of those issues, so it has the right to demand the resolution of everything that Pristina signed," Antonijevic concludes.

Speaking about whether viewed from a distance of three years, the Washington Agreement contributed to the normalization of relations between Pristina and Belgrade, and to what extent, journalist and excellent expert on international affairs Ljiljana Smajlovic indicates for Kosovo Online that of the three signatories, today only Aleksandar Vucic is still in power.

"Trump's successor in the White House ignored Trump's signature, and today few people even remember who Mr. Hoti from Pristina was. Partly because of this, since September 2020, there has been a greater normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel than between Pristina and Belgrade I mention those two mutually hostile countries because in September 2020 they also signed an agreement that was also sponsored by Trump, but the difference is that President Biden later pushed their agreement, the so-called Abraham Accords, as his own," Smajlovic points out.

When asked if the idea from the Washington Agreement that the economic normalization of relations between Belgrade and Pristina had been a good starting point for solving the problem at the political level at that moment, Smajlovic said that it might have been if, as she indicated, Kurti had not come to power and Washington had kept his word.

"Serbia benefited rather than it was harmed from the Agreement anyway, and the fact that the Americans did nothing to implement it at least saved us from moving the Serbian Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. We improved relations with Washington but did not spoil relations with Moscow and Beijing,” Smajlovic states.

Analyst Nexhmedin Spahiu pointed out that the Washington Agreement was still in force, but had not been implemented.

"All that remained of the Washington Agreement was the recognition of Israel for Kosovo and the establishment of an Embassy in Jerusalem, not in Tel Aviv. Everything else is a dead letter. Serbia has not moved its Embassy, and the economic agreements concerning Kosovo and Serbia are also not in force. So the Agreement is in force, but it has not been implemented," Spahiu said.

According to him, if the Washington Agreement had been implemented to the end, relations between Kosovo and Serbia would have been much better.

"Many things would not be on the agenda today," Spahiu added.

As he emphasized, even three years ago when the Washington Agreement had been reached, he had considered it good, but with doubts about its implementation.

"And it turned out that way. Now we can say that the Agreement was reached on the eve of the US elections, when Trump wanted to show that he is a man who makes peace. However, he did not achieve anything substantial, because a good agreement is one that is implemented, not the one that remains a dead letter on paper," Spahiu pointed out.

Regarding the new elections in the USA next year, and how this will affect the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, as well as whether it is possible to reach a new agreement from Washington, Spahiu says that Kosovo hopes that an agreement will be reached before those elections, both due to visa liberalization and other issues.

"We hope that an agreement will be reached before the elections in the USA, that is, this year. The European Community decided on visa liberalization at the beginning of next year, because it counted on the fact that the conflict between Kosovo and Serbia would be over by then. But as things are going, it seems that visa liberalization will also be postponed because a substantive agreement is not even in sight," Spahiu concluded.