Trump's idea of territorial division: Could a solution for Ukraine be applied to Kosovo?

Border Change – For Donald Trump, a "quick solution" to end the war in Ukraine. For analysts focused on the Western Balkans, it's a signal that the same "recipe" could be applied to Kosovo. A scenario that can be imagined with the new American administration, but which will largely depend on the willingness of the European Union, as well as Belgrade and Pristina, to shift from Brussels' negotiations to "territorial solutions," as Kosovo Online's interlocutors are convinced.

Written by: Arsenije Vuckovic

"The logic behind Trump's stance on Ukraine leads to the division of Kosovo as a permanent solution to its unresolved status, possibly accompanied by the secession of the Presevo Valley from Serbia. This also points to a new political solution for Bosnia, which includes either greater autonomy for the Republic of Srpska or its independence and union with Serbia," claims Timothy Less, a leading researcher at the Center for Geopolitics at the University of Cambridge.

He is not alone in this view. Analysts in Kosovo argue that any potential changes in global politics and a deal on Ukraine could have a direct impact on the Balkans, particularly the relations between Kosovo and Serbia.

Former chief negotiator in the dialogue, Edita Tahiri, has gone even further.

She states that if such "speculations by pro-Russian and pro-Serb analysts" prove true, it would lead, through peace or war, to the unification of all Albanians.

"Trump knows very well that there is no change of borders in just one part of the Balkans, as it will change across the entire region, whether through peace or war. In this case, this is good for us Albanians, because the Albanian people, tragically divided for a century, will unite," said Tahiri.
Diplomatic Victories

Helena Ivanov, a research associate at the Henry Jackson Research Center, says in an interview with Kosovo Online that it is not controversial that U.S. President Donald Trump wants a "quick diplomatic victory" through the division of Ukraine, but that this would not automatically mean the same approach could be applied to Kosovo.

"The new American administration has only one goal, which is to reach an agreement for a big diplomatic victory for President Trump. In this sense, I believe they will push for Ukraine to be divided in some way in order to end the war as quickly as possible. However, on the other hand, there will be significant resistance from both Ukrainian officials and European representatives," Ivanov emphasizes.
She emphasizes that Trump’s idea of dividing Ukraine does not imply that he would necessarily apply the same scenario to Kosovo.

"As for Kosovo, I believe that President Trump is not someone who necessarily worries too much about consistency. In other words, if one scenario plays out in Ukraine, it doesn't mean he will necessarily apply the same principles and standards from that scenario to Kosovo. In this sense, Donald Trump is much more focused on achieving significant diplomatic points on one hand, and on the other hand, reaching an agreement with a very transactional approach to foreign policy," says Ivanov.

She is also confident that Trump will try to find the quickest and most practical solution for Kosovo, but that dividing the territory, she argues, would not be the most effective option at this moment.

"Dividing territory always sounds like something that could be quickly and easily implemented on paper, in theory. However, when it comes to practice, it is very difficult to decide where that line should be drawn, how it will function, and what will happen to all those who belong to 'the other entity,'" notes Ivanov.

In the case of Kosovo, the dilemma is not only how territorial division would be implemented, but also whether Belgrade and Pristina would even agree to such a possibility.

"On one hand, we know that the authorities in Pristina insist on full sovereignty and control over the territory of Kosovo, while on the other hand, we know that representatives of Belgrade consider Kosovo in its entirety as an integral part of the Republic of Serbia. So, I am not sure how this idea would be accepted, even by European officials, let alone by those living in Kosovo," she emphasizes.

The reason, she explains, lies in the fact that comparisons between Ukraine and Kosovo "only seem similar on paper."

"Ukraine and Kosovo may appear to someone observing from the outside as two similar stories, in the sense that both involve a question of how to position oneself when the territorial sovereignty and integrity of a country are in question. However, there are many other factors that differentiate Kosovo’s case from Ukraine's, and for this reason, I believe that the recipe that might be successful in Ukraine would not necessarily be successful in the case of Kosovo," says Ivanov. When asked how the

European Union might respond to the "American solution," or the division of Ukraine’s territory, Ivanov states that the Brussels administration is in a "very difficult situation," as no one expected to be completely excluded from the conflict happening on European soil.

"The European Union is really in a very difficult position. I think they expected that if Trump won the American elections, the EU's geopolitical position would change. However, I believe no one expected that it would collapse this quickly. Complete exclusion of the EU from a conflict happening on the European continent is something hardly anyone could have predicted before January 20 of this year when Trump officially became president," she emphasizes.

Therefore, there are two options before the EU, she points out, on how to find its new position and gain importance.

In the first option, this would be possible by aligning more closely with the American administration.

"That would be quite difficult. In this case, it would essentially mean changing everything the EU has been saying since 2022 and adapting to a completely different, opposing, and contradictory stance taken by the current American administration," says Ivanov.
As a second option, she sees the possibility of the EU going down an independent path and continuing to support the policy it has endorsed since 2022.

"And that will be very difficult because the EU is not independent in that sense. It is not militarily independent, it does not have the capacity to be a strong and independent actor at this moment, especially when it comes to NATO, financial and military aid to Ukraine. They likely lean towards that second scenario, but it remains a big question whether and to what extent they will succeed in being such an actor," concludes Ivanov.

“Ricochet” for the Balkans

Belgjzim Kamberi, a fellow at the "Musine Kokalari" Institute in Pristina, believes that a territorial solution for Ukraine could reflect on Kosovo only if Pristina and Belgrade decide not to implement the agreements reached in the Ohrid Agreement.

A lot will depend on the future relationship between the EU, the US, and Russia regarding open issues in the Western Balkans, this analyst says.

"It remains to be seen how the problem of Ukraine will be solved. Whether it will be resolved with or without the European Union, and more importantly, whether it will be resolved through border changes or by maintaining Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Secondly, we need to see if that will have any consequences, a 'ricochet,' for the Balkans and the problems in the former Yugoslavia space, whether in Kosovo or Bosnia and Herzegovina. In that case, the possibility of such a scenario would be the non-implementation of the Ohrid Agreement, the European plan that President Vucic and Prime Minister Kurti agreed upon," Kamberi says for Kosovo Online.

In the case of non-implementation of the Ohrid Agreement, Kamberi emphasizes, it is not impossible that space could open up for alternative solutions.

"One of the scenarios could be the change of borders or the exchange of territories. But first, it needs to be seen whether this region will be within the scope of the European Union's resolution, or if a solution will be reached with the influence of the US and Russia in this area," says Kamberi.

The key question, he points out, is whether the EU or the US will take the lead in resolving open issues in the Western Balkans.

"Will it remain under the jurisdiction of the European Union, or will the US intervene?" clarifies this analyst.

He believes the EU is not in favor of border changes but recalls that the US has held that position as well.

"First, we need to see if the US would accept such a solution for Ukraine. This would mean the US changing its stance on this criterion. Secondly, it remains to be seen whether the EU would accept such a solution for Ukraine, and then whether such a solution would be accepted for the Balkans, which is part of the European continent," emphasizes Kamberi.

Another uncertainty is what the new American strategy for the Balkans will be.

"The US and EU have not yet started the conversation about what Trump's administration's vision for the Balkans is. We are more focused on Ukraine, but in the coming months, we will see what Trump's administration's vision is and whether the US and Russia will reach some kind of agreement for the Balkans," says Kamberi.

Implications of a Precedent

Political scientist Ognjen Gogic warns that even though both Pristina and Belgrade reject any similarity between Ukraine’s situation and Kosovo’s, a territorial solution to the conflict in Eastern Europe could generate new ideas around territorial exchanges or demarcation, which could spread across the entire Western Balkans.

"Since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine and the open question of the status of those Ukrainian regions, both Belgrade and Pristina have rejected any similarity with the Kosovo situation. Neither side has invoked this as a precedent for different reasons. However, if a territorial solution were to be reached, it could perhaps provide some basis for ideas of territorial exchange or demarcation between Serbia and Kosovo as a solution for the status and a way out of the open status question. This could, not necessarily for Belgrade and Pristina, but for certain actors on both sides, serve as a precedent they would refer to," says Gogic for Kosovo Online.

Gogic further emphasizes that a territorial solution to end the war in Ukraine could set a precedent that would have broader implications, affecting global issues and likely influencing Kosovo as well. However, he argues that this would not be a case of Americans pushing for border changes, but rather a situation where Russia might change its stance on Kosovo, especially if it recognizes Donbas as a separate republic or annexes part of Ukraine.

"This could lead to Russia changing its approach to Kosovo, and this would alter the strategic situation for Belgrade and Pristina. Belgrade might no longer be able to count on the possibility of a Russian veto in the UN Security Council. This is not something that concerns the Americans as much as it does the Russians," claims Gogic.

He comments on the speculation that Kosovo could be "part of a package" of quick American solutions to conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, stating that these conflicts are very different from the Kosovo issue.

"In Gaza and Ukraine, armed conflicts are ongoing with tremendous human casualties. In Kosovo, there is no armed conflict. It’s an unresolved issue. There is no consensus on the status of Kosovo, but it is not an armed conflict," he emphasizes.

Another important distinction, according to Gogic, is the economic aspect, as the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine involve significant financial support from the US, which is not the case with Kosovo.
This brings up the question of why the US would have an interest in finding a quick solution for Kosovo.

"Trump, both during his campaign and when he took office, never mentioned Kosovo. There is nothing to suggest that Kosovo would be on the agenda because he wants to resolve the other two hotspots first, so he can focus on his main priority: relations with China. However, it should also be noted that Trump didn’t focus on Kosovo during his first year in office. Kosovo came onto the agenda later in his mandate. Perhaps in a few years, under changed circumstances, this issue could resurface," Gogic says.

Regarding potential US involvement in resolving Kosovo’s status, he primarily sees it through the reaffirmation of the Washington Agreement.

"What could be expected is that Trump’s administration might at some point reactivate the provisions of the agreement, which included American financial support for infrastructure and economic projects. This might be the extent of American involvement in resolving the issue," he concludes.