Gogic: Reaching an agreement on Serbian institutions is unlikely while Pristina pursues a populist policy

Political analyst Ognjen Gogic has assessed that the closure of Serbian institutions in Kosovo is part of Pristina's populist policy, making it extremely difficult at this moment to reach an agreement on their continued existence. He noted that the only viable option may be for these institutions to be “recognized” within the Kosovo system.

“It’s all very difficult now because Pristina is adamant about shutting them down. But this could actually be a way to protect them—by granting them some form of recognition within Kosovo’s legal framework, similar to how the University in Mitrovica, and even certain schools and healthcare institutions, have been informally acknowledged by certain structures of the Kosovo government. This subtle recognition offers them a degree of protection. But in the current climate, where Kosovo is theatrically shutting down Serbian institutions with unnecessary police involvement, it’s very hard to reach any agreement,” Gogic told Kosovo Online.

He sees potential in licensing but believes the process was not pursued in time.

“When it comes to Serbian institutions in Kosovo, many opportunities were missed—especially in calmer times—to license certain public enterprises or formally recognize Serbian institutions within Kosovo’s legal order. That could have been done, and in some cases, it actually was. For instance, the post office in Gracanica held a license. These things were possible when Serbs were participating in Kosovo institutions in the north and when the central government in Pristina was more open to such initiatives,” Gogic explained.

He believes the key issue now is identifying which institutions can be part of a future agreement.

“When it comes to all Serbian institutions still operating in Kosovo or those recently closed, those in the best position are likely public utility companies, simply because they are the only service providers in those communities,” the analyst stated.

He cited the example of the public utility company in Strpce, which survived because it also served the interests of local Albanians.

“During the dinar-payment dialogue, one of the Serbian proposals was to license Postanska stedionica. Although even Albanians were affected by the issue, the Kosovo side had no willingness to engage. So compromise is possible, but very selective. Where Kosovo sees an interest in allowing certain institutions to operate, it may issue licenses or integrate them into the Kosovo legal framework. Where it doesn’t, their operation will not be permitted,” Gogic asserted.

He clarified that, in practice, this would mean the institutions could either be formally recognized as part of the Kosovo institutional system or operate as private entities under a license.

“Depending on the status, this would likely vary from one enterprise to another, but it would mean that their activities are legally aligned with the Kosovo legal framework,” Gogic said.

He outlined two possible pathways for continuing the operations of such services. Using the example of the water utility, employees could either be integrated into Kosovo's system or, alternatively, work for a private company that receives a license and thereby gains official service provider status.
“Serbia’s system is generally invisible to Kosovo. Serbian institutions simply don’t exist in the eyes of Kosovo’s legal order. But in practice, some of those enterprises—including even Trepca—have Serbian management structures,” Gogic concluded.