The Brussels Dialogue and EU Expectations: What is a sustainable solution for Serbs in Kosovo?

The EU Ambassador in Pristina, Aivo Orav, stated that the Union wants to see a sustainable solution for the Serbs in Kosovo. He just did not explain how that would be practically achievable. This is not surprising, since even interlocutors of Kosovo Online are not clear about it, twelve years after the signing of the Brussels Agreement. For some, a sustainable solution means respecting existing Kosovo laws, while for others it means substantial autonomy and taking into account the changed circumstances on the ground before forming the Community of Serb-majority Municipalities (CSM).

Written by: Djordje Barovic

"The EU wants to see a sustainable solution for the situation of the Serbian community in Kosovo — one that adequately addresses the long-standing challenges faced by the population in accessing public services, and one that guarantees security, safety, and participatory democracy for all citizens. We in the EU are committed to working closely with all partners to ensure that Kosovo’s obligations towards all communities are fully respected," Orav said in an interview with Kosovo Online.

However, the Director of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija, Petar Petkovic, points out that a great deal of responsibility lies precisely with Brussels, which for the past 12 years has failed to pressure Pristina into "honoring its obligations." One of those obligations is the formation of the CSM.

"Instead of the CSM, today we are faced, due to escalatory, unlawful, unilateral, and violent actions by Pristina, with a wave of persecution and displacement of Serbs, and part of our people was forced to leave northern Kosovo and Metohija in the past two years under Albin Kurti’s terror," Petkovic said, marking the 12th anniversary of the Brussels Agreement.

Belgzim Kamberi, associate of the "Musine Kokalari" Institute, has a different view.

He sees the key problem in the fact that neither Brussels nor Washington "know how the normalization dialogue should proceed."

"We are now in a situation where neither the EU nor the US knows how the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia will continue in the future. They themselves have said that they are looking for some 'new instrument' regarding relations between Pristina and Belgrade," Kamberi explained.

The CSM and "Some Additional Concessions"

Thus, Aleksandar Sljuka, associate of the NGO "New Social Initiative," offers a simple solution: ask the Serbs in Kosovo what would be a sustainable solution for them to stay and survive.

"The most appropriate thing would be to ask the Serbian community in Kosovo what a sustainable solution means for them. We have seen that the entire Brussels dialogue was conducted at a high level between Belgrade and Pristina representatives, while the Serbian community on the ground was largely neglected. Today, this sustainable solution is, let's say, a very complex issue," Sljuka told Kosovo Online.

Commenting on Ambassador Orav's statement that the EU "wants to see a sustainable solution for the Serbian community in Kosovo," Sljuka assumes that this would most likely be the formation of the CSM, along with some additional concessions, such as the status of the Serbian Orthodox Church.

"However, the situation has changed significantly in recent years. The dialogue no longer has the same momentum; many circumstances have changed compared to the year when the CSM was agreed upon. Especially when it comes to northern Kosovo, many negative developments have occurred. We have seen numerous negative decisions by the Pristina government. The Serbian community has come to see itself as vulnerable — both in terms of security and in accessing basic everyday services," Sljuka pointed out.

He explains this by the closure of numerous institutions.

Thus, he believes that the Serbian community in Kosovo now sees a sustainable solution primarily through stronger guarantees than those previously offered through the CSM.

"I believe that it must include clear, let’s call it, autonomy — especially in the security sector, the police. We know that something similar was envisaged by the Brussels Agreement, but I believe that now the guarantees must be stronger. On the other hand, access to everyday services, documents... People today are most afraid of the closure of health and educational institutions," Sljuka explained.

The only way forward, he emphasizes, lies in clear guarantees for the Serbian community.

"Guarantees that the Serbian community would be able to live and exercise its autonomy within the Kosovo system, where the system would not be able, at any moment, to abolish or usurp that autonomy in the way previous governments tried. I think we must enter new negotiations to define what a sustainable solution means and what would guarantee the survival of the Serbian community, especially as we see it decreasing day by day," Sljuka specified.

Asked why the EU, after 12 years of negotiations, has been unable to implement a sustainable solution for the Serbian community, Sljuka offered several explanations.

"Some would say that the EU is not interested; I would say that it lacks the strength to do so. At the beginning, when both sides wanted to negotiate and saw some benefit in the process, the EU could achieve results through the so-called 'carrot and stick' policy. But after the Brussels Agreement, it was mainly the 'carrot' that remained. Serbia began accession talks with the EU, and Kosovo signed the Stabilization and Association Agreement in the years that followed. Thus, there were tangible rewards the EU could offer in exchange for engagement in the Brussels dialogue. Over the years, this incentive faded, and the sides no longer saw any reason to engage seriously," Sljuka argued.

Another problem, he said, lies in the EU’s inability to impose itself as an actor that would use not only the "carrot" but also the "stick" to sanction those who violate agreements.

"We saw that they tried in 2023. Those measures against Kosovo are still in place, but we also saw that they were not sufficient to significantly change Pristina’s policies. The EU has the capacities, but we must bear in mind that it is composed of numerous actors with different interests, and it is very difficult to coordinate all of that," the analyst noted.

When it comes to EU-mediated negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina, he pointed out an additional problem — that five EU member states do not recognize Kosovo.

"The EU does not have a coherent, clear voice among its members to act more actively. I believe that is the main problem," Sljuka concluded.

"Sustainable Policies"

Professor of Constitutional Law, Mazlum Baraliu, believes that the standards for minority communities in Kosovo are higher than those in the EU, but the problem is that "sustainable policies" are not consistently or adequately implemented for all citizens.

He argues that Ambassador Orav, as an EU representative, should be familiar with Kosovo’s standards: its laws and Constitution.

"For minority communities in Kosovo, the standards are higher than in any other country in Europe, even beyond. The issue is not the legal framework but that sustainable policies are not implemented consistently and adequately for both the majority and the minority," Baraliu told Kosovo Online.

He attributes the failures of implementation also to the consequences of hybrid warfare and attempts by political parties and informal groups to prevent citizens from becoming an integral part of democratic and integration processes.

"There is nothing more to be added; what exists simply needs to be implemented. We already have a solution through decentralization — municipalities with a Serb majority have greater competencies compared to municipalities with an Albanian majority. Furthermore, the Kosovo Constitution reserves seats and gives minority communities the power to block constitutional changes," Baraliu explained.

He noted that to amend constitutional provisions regarding minority rights, not only the support of 80 MPs is needed, but also a majority of the 20 MPs representing minority communities — where Serbs hold a majority.

"Nothing can be changed — not even the most important laws concerning minority communities — without their consent, and they were adopted to suit them best. Therefore, it is not accurate to say otherwise, and I believe that (Aivo Orav) did not properly study the laws and the Constitution. According to the law and the Constitution, all citizens are equal, and Kosovo’s legal framework is considered among the most democratic in Europe. The real question is how much it is implemented. It is obvious that it is not properly implemented even for other citizens," Baraliu emphasized.

Asked why these laws are not implemented, he pointed to economic conditions.

"Kosovo was the least developed region of the former Yugoslavia. Today, we are the least developed country in Europe. Thus, even others are lacking, and there is no ability to resolve basic issues. But Serbia is there — it helps, and under our laws, it can provide assistance and financing without any problem. Those are the standards," Baraliu said.

He stressed that investments must be proportionally directed to all parts of Kosovo, with priority given to the most underdeveloped areas.

"But no matter how much is invested, you know what the politicians have done — but that is not a question for me or for you," Baraliu concluded.

New Situation and "Limbo"

Historian Stefan Radojkovic believes that the only sustainable solution for the Serbian community in Kosovo would be the preservation of Serbian institutions.

He explains that Pristina’s actions have created a "new situation" in which the extent to which the agreements reached can be implemented, including the functioning of the Community of Serb-majority Municipalities (CSM), has become questionable.

"A sustainable solution is the continued existence of Serbian institutions in Kosovo and Metohija. That is absolutely the number one priority, particularly regarding education, culture, healthcare, and other social and public institutions that have been present there. Allegedly, the goal and plan were for these institutions to be included within the framework of the association of Serbian municipalities, but all of that was part of the Brussels agreements of 2013 and 2015, which are now dead letters. Thus, Kurti’s actions on the ground seem to have led to a new situation where it is simply a question of to what extent that agreement can now be implemented," Radojkovic said in an interview for Kosovo Online.

He added that for the Serbian community in Kosovo, an even more ideal solution to guarantee their survival would be the observance of United Nations Security Council decisions.

"The most ideal situation would be adherence to UN Security Council Resolution 1244," Radojkovic specified.

He sees Ambassador Orav's statement as an "introduction" to the second part of the "Balkan tour" of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas.

It is expected that Kallas will insist, both in Belgrade and in Pristina, on compliance with the agreements signed from 2013 up to the latest ones that detail the implementation path of the Brussels Agreement.

"However, it seems that this is 'too little — too late.' There have always been too few such statements, and we see that during Kurti’s administration there has effectively been a collapse of relations between the Serbian community and Pristina, especially in northern Kosovo. However, Serbs south of the Ibar River have also felt that they are not regarded as a welcome community in Kosovo by the majority Albanian population. Now, this list of good intentions is supposed to potentially revitalize the Brussels dialogue, which at the very least is stuck in a deadlock, and at worst could be said to be clinically dead," Radojkovic emphasized.

Therefore, he interprets Kallas’s visit as the EU’s attempt to exit the "limbo" it found itself in following new geopolitical upheavals.

"Kaja Kallas is coming essentially to reaffirm that the Western Balkans is the backyard of the European Union, especially now during this phase of reshuffling on the global stage between Russia, the United States, and China, where Europe has found itself in a kind of limbo and is now trying to reassert itself at least as a major regional actor," Radojkovic believes.

He is convinced that the EU will attempt to do this by offering the region a kind of "carrot" through the Financial Growth Plan and new funding programs.

An additional problem for the EU, particularly regarding Pristina, he sees in its growing closeness to Turkey.

"As for Pristina, the EU will try to exert some pressure with the sanctions it imposed and by withholding support for Kosovo’s membership in the Council of Europe. We will see whether this will have any decisive impact, but it seems that Kaja Kallas’s visit was somewhat forced by global events. Frankly speaking, we should also take into account that the President of the Pristina administration, Vjosa Osmani, visited Ankara and is likely expecting greater support from Turkey than from the EU," Radojkovic explained.