Sljuka: There Might Even Be a Washington Agreement 2

Aleksandar Sljuka, a collaborator with the NGO "New Social Initiative," suggests that Donald Trump’s new U.S. administration might attempt to revive some form of the Washington Agreement from 2020 and initiate a process that would run parallel to the European Union-led efforts.

However, he notes that the Washington Agreement will initially be sidelined due to other, much more pressing issues facing the United States and may only be addressed later.

As he points out, many provisions of the Washington Agreement remain unimplemented, as it was signed near the end of Trump’s first term.

“A DFC office was established in Belgrade, but its work has essentially stagnated. It is currently completely inactive, but there might be an effort to revive it since it was supposed to serve as a hub for American investments in the Balkans. Perhaps the story of the Peace Highway will also be revived. Trump is likely to push for projects that bring economic benefits. Whether this will involve a direct reference to the Washington Agreement, the adoption of specific parts of it, or perhaps the creation of a new Washington Agreement 2, I’m not sure. It remains to be seen how much of it will be revived, but I think it’s something Trump will insist on,” Sljuka told Kosovo Online.

Regarding the dialogue and relations between Belgrade and Pristina, Sljuka believes that Trump will attempt to pursue swift, creative, and alternative solutions that could entirely resolve the issue. He explains that this aligns with Trump’s general approach as someone who frames himself as a problem-solver, aiming to resolve issues with grand agreements that completely close a chapter and can be presented as having achieved peace and a permanent solution.

“The Washington Agreement is not such a solution; it’s about economic normalization between Serbia and Kosovo. However, we know that this is something Trump insists on as a businessman and someone deeply engaged in economics, which is a significant aspect of his work. He will likely aim to establish the best possible relations not only in economic terms between Serbia and Kosovo but also in the broader economic relations of the Western Balkans. We might also see the revival of the Open Balkan initiative, which gained momentum near the end of Trump’s first term,” Sljuka said.

On the possibility of reviving the idea of territorial exchange during Trump’s administration, Sljuka says that even if the idea resurfaces, its realization will take a long time.

“If this idea gains traction again, the question is how much attention it will receive in Washington and when it will be addressed, possibly only after resolving issues like Ukraine and the Middle East. The U.S. has much bigger problems, and we still don’t know who will handle the Balkans. It was expected that Richard Grenell might take this role, but he hasn’t been given any major appointments recently. Perhaps he’ll take on a role that leads him back to the Balkans, and he might attempt to revive this idea.

Resistance in Kosovo will certainly exist, at least with the current government. Unless we see a change in the February elections, I would say significant pressure will be necessary—either to make this government more constructive or to see it replaced, bringing new actors ready for this kind of compromise. The Serbian side has not expressed a clear stance on this issue during this period, but Belgrade is somewhat open to it; the question is how realistic it is,” Sljuka said.

He adds that Trump might recognize that the EU lacks the capability, strength, and capacity to compel Belgrade and Pristina to take decisive steps in implementing the latest or earlier agreements. He predicts that the EU-led dialogue will continue to “simmer,” with attempts to make some breakthroughs, given its connection to the European integration processes of Kosovo and Serbia.

“I’m not sure the dialogue will be entirely redefined unless we see a final resolution to the Kosovo issue, which is unlikely in the next four years. There will be some progress, and we’ll likely see two parallel processes. If the U.S. decides to take a more active role in addressing this issue, it will probably yield better results, as was the case with the Washington Agreement during the years when the EU-led dialogue was in crisis,” Sljuka concluded.