DOCSLIB.ORG

Special Edition – Series of Espresso Insights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Special Edition – Series of Espresso Insights No.24/2020 December 25, 2020 SPECIAL EDITION – SERIES OF ESPRESSO INSIGHTS The dialogue with Serbia _ Arbër Fetahu 1 Group for Legal and Political Studies is an independent, non-partisan and non-profit public policy organization based in Prishtina, Kosovo. Our mission is to conduct credible policy research in the fields of politics, law and economics and to push forward policy solutions that address the failures and/or tackle the problems in the said policy fields. legalpoliticalstudies.org 2 SPECIAL EDITION – SERIES OF ESPRESSO INSIGHTS 2020 has been a year to remember, especially in Kosovo. In this Espresso.Insights series, GLPS recaps and analyses the main events in the fields of politics, law and society that have affected the country this year and identifies the challenges ahead of 2021. In part 8, Arbër Fetahu explores the political relations between Kosovo and Serbia throughout the year, and evaluates the progress made in their bilateral dialogue. #KOSOVOin2020: The dialogue with Serbia By: Arbër Fetahu – Research Fellow at Group for Legal and Political Studies The dialogue for the normalization of relations between Kosovo and Serbia is marking its first decade. Throughout these years, the dialogue has experienced almost everything from blockades, changes of delegations, and renewals of European Union (EU) High Representatives and mediators, to controversial topics such as border correction between Kosovo and Serbia. However, the results and outcomes have not been satisfying and, in most occasions, have been vague. Indeed, the dialogue was constructed as a sensational event rather than as a process that should produce tangible results towards full normalization of relations. From the start, the general tone of the meetings had been progressively acrimonious, with threats to pull out from the talks coming from both sides. The domestic issues outweighed the incentives for EU integration, in which light several meetings were cancelled or delayed—a proof that the dialogue was driven by anger and fury rather than by rationality. The resumption of the dialogue and transatlantic competition This year, the newly-elected Albin Kurti administration was overthrown in late March through a no-confidence vote, arguably to prevent the stagnation of the dialogue with Serbia. Therefore, after twenty months of diplomatic blockade due to the 100-percent tariffs imposed by Kosovo in 2018 over Serbian and Bosnian goods, the dialogue between Prishtina and Belgrade resumed in July, following the inauguration of Avdullah Hoti’s executive. This resumption had its price, since the tariffs, as well as the reciprocity put in place by Kurti’s Vetëvendosje (VV) government, were lifted. The international pressure to resume the negotiations were high, especially from the United States (US) and President’s Trump Special Representative in the dialogue, Richard Grenell. A flawed yet remarkable event that showcased Washington’s rising interest in the dialogue was the cancellation of the high-level Washington meeting between Kosovo and Serbia, organized by Grenell and scheduled for the 27th of June. The failure to finally convene occurred due to the indictments of the Specialist Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) against Kosovo’s President Hashim Thaçi, who was meant to lead the Kosovar delegation at the White House. Arguably, this was a cold shower for the US administration, who had been pushing unconventionally for the resumption of the dialogue in Washington—in this way neglecting the EU’s traditional role as mediator. In this light, two competing narratives arose throughout the first half of the year: Washington’s narrative, supportive of a fast deal embroiled with economic aspects, and Brussels’ narrative, which envisaged the importance of a structural process ending with a comprehensive legally-binding agreement between Kosovo and Serbia. Following the Washington fiasco in June, better circumstances were created for the EU to take up its role as broker. A new government had been formed in Kosovo, and the first virtual meeting between incoming Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti and Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić took place the 10th of July, at the so-called Paris Summit. Among the attendees were French 3 President Emanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Notwithstanding the summit’s poor outcome and the sides’ rigid stances, the holding of a virtual meeting after twenty months of standstill was a success in itself. Once the first virtual meeting had broken the ice, Hoti and Vučić finally met face to face the16th of July. Held under EU auspices, the meeting aimed to continue the process of the normalization of relations and restate Brussels’ upper hand in the mediation tasks. Despite the resumption, the dialogue was facing old problems, seeing both delegations remain entrenched in their positions. While Prime Minister Hoti posited that the only worthwhile solution was the mutual recognition, Vučić opposed this approach by stating that “Kosovo wanted everything solved overnight and make Serbia unconditionally accept”. Under the mediation of EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, and EU Special Representative for the Dialogue, Miroslav Lajčak, both parties focused their negotiations on the issue of missing persons, displaced persons and economic cooperation. Kosovo and Serbia agreed to form national diplomatic teams of experts and set another meeting in September. Towards the end of the summer, in August, the diplomatic teams of experts of Kosovo and Serbia met in Brussels. The outcomes of these negotiations were not promising, as both sides threw accusations at each other over previous political blockades. There were almost no tangible results, despite the modest agreement reached on the topics of missing persons, displaced persons, and other economic aspects. While Brussels was preparing for the next high-level meeting on the 7th of September, the US administration also made its move. Following the failed June meeting, Trump managed to strike back with a new summit between Prime Minister Hoti and President Vučić, scheduled for the 4th of September and held at the White House. The result of this meeting was nothing more than a vaguely-defined economic deal between Kosovo and Serbia, which ultimately failed to tackle the issue of mutual recognition. It also did not contribute to normalize the relations between the two. The Washington agreement, described by the US as ‘historic’, was nothing groundbreaking—if anything, it was used as an electoral tool for Trump’s campaign ahead of the presidential polls in November. Only three days after the Washington meeting, leaders of both countries met again in Brussels with the facilitation of EU High Representative Borrell. The encounter felt like a repetitive scene, either side holding a different stance. However, they were more optimistic to cooperate and negotiate. Borrell depicted the process as hard but he appreciated the willingness of both leaders to commit to the dialogue. From September to December, despite more (mostly technical) meetings and twisted rhetoric, the negotiations did not produce fruitful results—not least after the re-emergence of the establishment of the Association of Serbian Municipalities (ASM) in Kosovo as a highly-contested topic of discussion. The Serbian delegation insisted that no agreement could be reached without the formation of the ASM while, on the other hand, Kosovo considered the ASM as a closed chapter, arguing that the verdict of its Constitutional Court around the topic was undisputed. The formation of the ASM was the highlight of the talks towards the end of the year, stalling the negotiations to very considerable extent. Special Representative Lajčak, in an attempt to reconcile the views around the establishment of the ASM, visited Prishtina and Belgrade in mid-October. In Prishtina, Lajčak posited that, without the formation of the ASM, no final agreement between Kosovo and Serbia would be reached. This statement was met with resistance and criticism from Kosovo’s political establishment and the public alike. In Belgrade, Lajčak stated that the ASM agreement should be implemented—indicating that Kosovo’s constitution was not a Bible and could thus be changed to accommodate the ASM’s establishment. In the same regard, Vučić declared that Serbia was 4 determined to the implementation of the ASM, and that no other agreement should be reached without its formation. On the 10thof December, a new expert-level meeting was held in Brussels. The expected topics were pensions and cadasters, while no information was given regarding the ASM. A challenging year ahead Despite its resumption, in all, the dialogue did not achieve too many tangible results in 2020. On the one hand, Kosovo and Serbia were entrenched in their rigid positions, while the EU failed to push forward any viable solution which would be acceptable for both. The vast interference of external actors, such as the US, further undermined the EU’s role in the process, whom often did not do enough to stand its ground as mediator. 2021 seems to be a challenging year. We can expect an increasing momentum in the rounds of negotiation, though a comprehensive legally-binding agreement that would normalize the relations between the two countries still seems out of reach. With this new pulse, the ASM will occupy the headlines of the process and will most likely contribute to future situations of impasse. Furthermore, Kosovo’s unstable political context could affect the dialogue if new elections would take place in 2021—a hypothesis that should not be discarded. Espresso.Insights 5 Espresso.Insights are aimed at decoding the policy research of our Fellows to a broader audience. Espresso.Insights present short summary of analysis and information that help readers and policy-makers in particular, to understand the relevant research, as they suggest possible policy options and argue for certain path of action. Aiming to intensify the debate about policy issues and general public concerns, Espresso.Insights will, in addition, serve as gears to aid an informed decision-making process.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kosovo: Background and U.S
    Kosovo: Background and U.S. Policy Updated March 11, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46175 SUMMARY R46175 Kosovo: Background and U.S. Policy March 11, 2021 Kosovo, a country in the Western Balkans with a predominantly Albanian-speaking population, declared independence from Serbia in 2008, less than a decade after a brief but lethal war. It has Sarah E. Garding since been recognized by about 100 countries. The United States and most European Union (EU) Analyst in European Affairs member states recognize Kosovo. Serbia, Russia, China, and various other countries (including five EU member states) do not. Key issues for Kosovo include the following: New Leadership. Albin Kurti is poised to become prime minister for the second time after his left-leaning Self-Determination Party (Vetëvendosje) won a landslide victory in early parliamentary elections in February 2021. The poll was Kosovo’s second snap parliamentary election in less than two years. Once of the new parliament’s initial responsibilities is to elect the country’s next president. Acting President Vjosa Osmani, whose candidacy is backed by Vetëvendosje, is heavily favored to win. Parliament’s failure to elect a president could trigger early parliamentary elections, however. Dialogue with Serbia. The unresolved dispute between Kosovo and Serbia is one of the main threats to regional stability in the Western Balkans. Since 2011, the EU has facilitated a dialogue aimed at normalizing their relations. In July 2020, Kosovo and Serbia returned to EU-led talks after a 20-month suspension. Shortly thereafter, the two parties agreed to new measures on economic cooperation at talks hosted by the White House.
    [Show full text]
  • Publication13370 En.Pdf
    EUROPEAN ECONOMY Economic Papers 346| November 2008 Adjustment capacity of labour markets of the Western Balkan countries (Countries studies - Volume II) Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs and the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies EUROPEAN COMMISSION Economic Papers are written by the Staff of the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, or by experts working in association with them. The Papers are intended to increase awareness of the technical work being done by staff and to seek comments and suggestions for further analysis. The views expressed are the author’s alone and do not necessarily correspond to those of the European Commission. Comments and enquiries should be addressed to: European Commission Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs Publications B-1049 Brussels Belgium E-mail: [email protected] This paper exists in English only and can be downloaded from the website http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications A great deal of additional information is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu ) ISBN 978-92-79-08271-9 doi: 10.2765/17422 © European Communities, 2008 Adjustment capacity to external shocks of EU candidate and potential EU candidate countries of the Western Balkans, with a focus on labour markets Volume II 1 Adjustment capacity to external shocks of EU candidate and potential EU candidate countries of the Western Balkans, with a focus on labour markets Volume II This study is based on the final report of a study by The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, carried out within the contract ECFIN/169/2007/473194.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia and Kosovo Good Works in Progress
    Data di pubblicazione: 22 settembre 2020 Serbia and Kosovo good works in progress The resumption of relations between Kosovo and Serbia is central to the overall development of the Western Balkans and to the eventual (but necessary) entry into the European Union. Two events of varying importance have occurred over the past few months. During the Munich Security Conference on February 14, 2020, in the presence of the Presidents of Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic, and of Kosovo, Hashim Thaci, as well as the United States Special Envoy for Serbia and Kosovo Richard Grenell, who is also the Ambassador of the States United in Germany, Serbian and Kosovar officials signed an agreement to restore a rail link between Belgrade and Pristina and to connect the two capitals with a highway in a step towards normalization of bilateral relations. This signing follows another agreement on the resumption of commercial flights between Serbia and Kosovo, which were interrupted about twenty years ago during the hottest phase of the war. Furthermore, another event favored the meeting between the two countries. On 4 September 2020 at the White House between Kosovo Prime Minister Avdullah Hoti and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic participated in a meeting, which had Israel as its main object, paving the way for an economic commitment between the two countries. It is worth Euro-Balkan Law and Economics Review- n. 2/2020 ISSN: 2612-6583 pp. 1-2 NW Serbia and Kosovo good works in progress considering the positive aspects of the meeting between the two Balkan leaders, even considering the many limits of the event, due to the political choices of President Trump who does not seem to look to the good of the two countries but following his interventionist policy involves other subjects on a bad route.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement by the President Regarding Economic Normalization Between Serbia and Kosovo
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 09/17/2020 3:55:41 PM STATEMENTS & RELEASES Statement by the President Regarding Economic Normalization between Serbia and Kosovo ------- FOREIGN POLICY Issued on: September 4,2020 = ★ ★ ★ = Today, I am pleased to announce yet another historic commitment. Serbia and Kosovo have each committed to economic normalization. After a violent and tragic history and years of failed negotiations, my Administration proposed a new way of bridging the divide. By focusing on job creation and economic growth, the two countries were able to reach a real breakthrough on economic cooperation across a broad range of issues. We have also made additional progress on reaching peace in the Middle East. Kosovo and Israel have agreed to normalization of ties and the establishment of diplomatic relations. Serbia has committed to opening a commercial office in Jerusalem this month and to move its embassy to Jerusalem by July. It has taken tremendous bravery by President Vucic of Serbia and Prime Minister Hoti of Kosovo to embark on these talks and to come to Washington to finalize these commitments. By doing so, they have made their countries, the Balkans, and the world safer. I look forward to seeing Serbia and Kosovo prosper as we work together on economic cooperation in the region going forward. Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 09/17/2020 3:55:41 PM Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 09/17/2020 3:55:41 PM © Q Login You have 10 free articles left this month. Get your free Basic subscription now and gain instant access to more.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision on Notification of the Referral and Request for Information
    KSC-CC-2020-11/F00004/1 of 7 PUBLIC 05/10/2020 12:26:00 File number: KSC-CC-2020-11 Before: The Specialist Chamber of the Constitutional Court Judge Vidar Stensland, Presiding Judge Antonio Balsamo Judge Roumen Nenkov Registrar: Fidelma Donlon Date: 5 October 2020 Language: English File name: Referral on proposed amendments to the Constitution of Kosovo Classification: Public Decision on Notification of the Referral and Request for Information President of Kosovo Ombudsperson of the High Representative of the Hashim Thaçi Specialist Chambers Union for Foreign Affairs Pietro Spera and Security Policy/ Vice-President of the Prime Minister of Kosovo European Commission Avdullah Hoti Josep Borrell Fontelles Head of the European President of the Assembly Union Rule of Law Mission of Kosovo in Kosovo (EULEX Kosovo) Vjosa Osmani – Sadriu Lars-Gunnar Wigemark KSC-CC-2020-11/F00004/2 of 7 PUBLIC 05/10/2020 12:26:00 I. BACKGROUND TO THE REFERRAL A. EXCHANGE OF LETTERS 1. On 14 April 2014, the President of Kosovo and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission exchanged letters with regard to the mandate of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX Kosovo), and the establishment and operation of a “specialist court” and a “specialist prosecutor’s office” for any proceedings arising from the investigations of the Special Investigative Task Force (SITF) (the “Exchange of Letters”). 2. The Exchange of Letters provided that Kosovo would adopt all legal measures in accordance with its law to establish a “specialist court” and a “specialist prosecutor’s office” in connection with SITF, including any constitutional amendment as needed.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 6.10.2020 SWD(2020) 356 Final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Kosovo* 2020 Report Accompany
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 6.10.2020 SWD(2020) 356 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Kosovo* 2020 Report Accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2020 Communication on EU Enlargement Policy {COM(2020) 660 final} - {SWD(2020) 350 final} - {SWD(2020) 351 final} - {SWD(2020) 352 final} - {SWD(2020) 353 final} - {SWD(2020) 354 final} - {SWD(2020) 355 final} *This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244(1999) and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. EN EN Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3 1.1. Context ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Summary of the report ................................................................................................. 4 2. FUNDAMENTALS FIRST: POLITICAL CRITERIA AND THE RULE OF LAW ............................ 7 2.1 Functioning of democratic institutions and public administration reform ................... 7 2.2.1 Democracy ................................................................................................................... 7 2.1.2 Public administration reform ...................................................................................... 13 2.2 Rule of law and fundamental rights
    [Show full text]
  • KOSOVO-SERBIA DIALOGUE: PATH to the AGREEMENT Make the Framework Clear for Mutual Recognition, and Simultaneously Build Bridges to Advance Normalisation
    Policy Article KOSOVO-SERBIA DIALOGUE: PATH TO THE AGREEMENT Make the framework clear for mutual recognition, and simultaneously build bridges to advance normalisation. The dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia has entered process. A set of rules for communications between a new phase in the search for a final and comprehensive parties should become an integral part of the framework agreement. The EU’s efforts and support of the Member for the dialogue; to support that, a multi-track locally- States have instilled some hope. Yet, the new trial in driven dialogue will help counter the wrong narrative progress is happening because the mediators have and encourage a healthier outreach. Communications pursued the agenda, not that parties have prepared or also need to urgently be developed within and between are willing to compromise. the countries as well as the societies of the negotiating parties, Kosovo and Serbia. Old obstacles remain, and the dialogue will soon encounter new roadblocks, some of which are already An agreement that involves recognition and resolution happening. All parties involved believe they are doing of all open issues between Kosovo and Serbia should the right thing. Looking at deeper, all parties, looking not be compromised. It will unlock the perspectives of inward, are failing to act on central issues. Kosovo the two countries and will have an enormous impact and Serbia are not wholeheartedly committed to the in the whole region. To achieve this, Belgrade and dialogue, and domestic dynamics are preventing Prishtina need to engage in major concessions which any forward-looking solutions. The EU’s framework of are still seen as controversial by many in Kosovo and “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” sounds Serbia.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Court Paves the Way
    May 2020 Country Office Kosovo Change of Government in Kosovo: Constitutional Court Paves the Way According to the Constitutional Court ruling, a new government led by Avdullah Hoti of the LDK is expected to be formed swiftly Norbert Beckmann-Dierkes, Granit J. Tërnava, Florian C. Feyerabend Following the overthrow of the previous government by a vote of no confidence on 25 March 2020 initiated by the coalition partner Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK), there has long been uncertainly about further political developments on the Kosovo field. Although on 30 April President Hashim Thaçi had mandated Avdullah Hoti of the LDK to form a government, the legitimacy of the mandate was however called into question and brought before the Constitutional Court by members of the Vetëvendosje (VV), the party belonging to the toppled Prime Minister Albin Kurti. The legal blockade for the formation of a new government has now been eliminated with the final decision taken by the Constitutional Court: late in the evening on 28 May, the Constitutional Court ruled that President Thaçi acted lawfully when he gave Hoti the task of forming the government. Unanimous Judgement parliamentary elections of 6 October 2019, argues on the basis of previous precedent cases Following the vote of no confidence and and selected articles from the constitution overthrow of government, conflict erupted about stipulating that re-elections should be held whether the constitution dictates that this would following a motion of no-confidence. The same have to entail re-elections, or whether the perspective was shared by Vjosa Osmani, President is authorised to mandate another Chairwoman of the Assembly and lead LDK candidate with forming a government who holds candidate during the last parliamentary elections.
    [Show full text]
  • A Kosovo Drama in Five Acts 
    ANALYSIS Since the last parliamentary elections in October 2019, Kosovo has had three govern- ments and — with upcoming elections scheduled for Febru- ary 14, 2021 — is currently ex- DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS pecting yet another reshuffle. A KOSOVO DRAMA What happened during this time? How could the voice for change that was expres - IN FIVE ACTS sed so vociferously have been diverted? And how did the old ruling elite manage to claw its way back to power? Donika Emini February 2021 »A Drama in Five Acts« re­­ports on one of the deep - est and most complex crises of the young country. The cause can be found, apart from the Kosovo-Serbia dilemma and the COVID-19 pandemic, above all in domestic power issues. DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS A KOSOVO DRAMA IN FIVE ACTS Contents ACT I: THE KURTI GOVERNMENT AND HOPE FOR CHANGE 2 ACT II: TRIGGER EVENTS BEFORE THE OVERTHROW 4 ACT III: A POLITICAL PANDEMIC AND THE OVERTHROW OF THE KURTI GOVERNMENT 5 ACT IV: THE OLD PARTIES STRIKE BACK – THAÇI BRINGS HOTI TO POWER 6 ACT V: THE RETURN OF KURTI? 7 References .................................................................................... 8 FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG – A KOSOVO DRAMA IN FIVE ACTS ACT I: THE KURTI GOVERNMENT Consequently, the hope for change gradually started to AND HOPE FOR CHANGE fade away as the old problems remained. The turbulent ne- gotiations between Vetëvendosje and LDK over the forma- The snap elections held on October 6 saw leftist Vetëven- tion of a coalition government prolonged the anticipated dosje — a more unconventional political movement — change. The challenges — mainly driven by internal fissures come out ahead of the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) between the old and new generations within LDK — had a — a party that has previously twice governed in coalition detrimental effect on the negotiation process between with Hashim Thaçi’s Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK).
    [Show full text]
  • BIOGRAPHY Name and Surname: Avdullah Hoti Birthday: 04.02.1976
    BIOGRAPHY Name and surname: Avdullah Hoti Birthday: 04.02.1976 1. EDUCATION 2003-2007 Doctoral studies University: Staffordshire University Country: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom Field: PhD in Economics 2004 Certificate in postgraduate studies for research methods University: Staffordshire University Country: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom Description: 60 ECTS in postgraduate courses in research methods in economics 2001-2002 Master studies University: Staffordshire University Country: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom Field: Master of Arts in Economics January- Graduate courses in MACROECONOMICS, MICROECONOMICS and LABOUR March 2001 ECONOMICS University: Staffordshire University Country: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom Field: Graduate courses in Macroeconomics, Microeconomics and Labour Economics during one semester April- May Intensive courses in MICROECONOMICS and ECONOMETRICS 2000 University: Staffordshire University and University of Tirana Country: Tirana, Albania Description: Specialised intensive courses 1994-1998 Undergraduate studies (Bachelor) University: University of Prishtina, Faculty of Economy Country: Prishtina, Kosova Field: Economy, Management and Informatics 1990-1994 Secondary School School: Gymnasium “Hajdar Dushi” Country: Gjakova, Kosova 1982-1990 Primary School School: Primary School in Ratkoc, Municipality of Rahovec Country: Rahovec, Kosova 2. ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE UNIVERSITY OF PRISHTINA 2017-cont. Full Professor – Faculty of Economy, University of Prishtina (engagement Courses: paused while Bachelor: Macroeconomics,
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Down Hoti's New Government
    GLPS | BREAKING DOWN HOTI’S NEW GOVERNMENT: FORMATION AND THE 2020-2023 PLAN Policy Analysis No. 04/2020 Breaking Down Hoti’s New Government: Formation and the 2020-2023 Plan July 2020 1 GLPS | BREAKING DOWN HOTI’S NEW GOVERNMENT: FORMATION AND THE 2020-2023 PLAN Group for Legal and Political Studies is an independent, non-partisan and non-profit public policy organization based in Prishtina, Kosovo. Our mission is to conduct credible policy research in the fields of politics, law and economics and to push forward policy solutions that address the failures and/or tackle the problems in the said policy fields. legalpoliticalstudies.org 2 GLPS | BREAKING DOWN HOTI’S NEW GOVERNMENT: FORMATION AND THE 2020-2023 PLAN Policy Analysis 04/2020 Breaking Down Hoti’s New Government: Formation and 2020-2023 Plan Author: *Barbara Matias July 2020 © Group for Legal and Political Studies, July, 2020. The opinions expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect those of Group for Legal and Political Studies donors, their staff, associates or Board(s). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any mean without the permission. Contact the administrative office of the Group for Legal and Political Studies for such requests. Group for Legal and Political Studies “Rexhep Luci‟ str. 16/1 Prishtina 10 000, Kosovo Website: www.legalpoliticalstudies.org E-mail: [email protected] Tel/fax.: +381 38 234 456 *Non-resident /Affiliated Research Fellows, Group for Legal and Political Studies 3 GLPS | BREAKING DOWN HOTI’S NEW GOVERNMENT: FORMATION AND THE 2020-2023 PLAN BREAKING DOWN HOTI’S NEW GOVERNMENT: FORMATION AND THE 2020- 2023 PLAN I.
    [Show full text]
  • Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue the Rocky Road Towards a Comprehensive Normalisation Agreement
    BRIEFING Belgrade-Pristina dialogue The rocky road towards a comprehensive normalisation agreement SUMMARY Regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations are key elements in the EU accession process for all western Balkan countries. Serbia and Kosovo have both declared their intention to join the EU. However, despite some initial successes, such as the Brussels Agreement of 2013, the dialogue facilitated by the EU and initiated in 2011 has stalled. In 2020, the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue was relaunched and supported by the international community. The appointment of United States (US) special presidential envoy Richard Grenell and special EU representative Miroslav Lajčák reflected the importance of the normalisation process. However, a lack of coordination and communication between the US and the EU means that no real progress has yet been made. The reasons for the very limited results are multiple, ranging from the internal political situation in both countries, to ambiguous and asymmetrical expectations of the normalisation agreement. Whereas for Kosovo the final goal is clear – recognition by Serbia of its statehood – for Serbia, normalisation of relations is interpreted in economic terms as an 'economic normalisation' and there is only limited space to go beyond those terms. Serbia also stresses that the process must remain within the framework defined by the Serbian Constitution, which considers Kosovo to be an integral part of the Serbian territory, and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. Currently, the most sensitive issue, the setting-up of the association/community of Serbian municipalities in Kosovo, agreed in 2013, shows that the challenges are rooted deeply in history and have a much broader regional context.
    [Show full text]