The approach of parliamentary elections in Serbia has been accompanied by the return of Kosovo to Belgrade’s nationalist discourse. Claims over territory, provocative statements and messages against the sovereignty of the Republic of Kosovo are once again being used in the political debate there.
Të lidhura
None found
Concerns have increased following promises to raise the Serbian flag in Prizren and the presence at an election rally of Milan Radoičić, described as a major criminal and linked to the terrorist attack in Banjska. These actions have raised questions about the signals Serbia’s political leadership is sending ahead of the vote.
Using Kosovo as part of the battle for votes is not an unfamiliar approach for Belgrade. The issue has repeatedly been exploited to mobilize the electorate, fuel nationalism and divert public attention from domestic political difficulties.
But the discussion does not stop at electoral gain. Political and security objectives may also lie behind this rhetoric, raising the question of whether this is merely a campaign strategy or a continuation of Serbia’s territorial ambitions toward Kosovo.
Security experts are drawing attention to the risk that nationalist messages may not remain mere words, but could become intertwined with disinformation, provocations and attempts to destabilize the situation on the ground.
In this situation, the institutional response is also important: whether Kosovo is implementing the necessary measures to address these developments and whether the international community should show greater resolve toward the language used by Belgrade.
Dashevci: Serbia’s claims over Kosovo’s territory remain present
Security expert Arben Dashevci, speaking to “Bota sot,” describes the inclusion of Kosovo in Serbian campaigns as a repeated mechanism for securing political support through nationalism.
According to his assessment, Belgrade does not use Kosovo only when parliamentary elections are approaching. The same practice, he explains, can also be seen during protests and domestic crises in Serbia, when the aim is to win votes, divert attention or achieve other political objectives.
Dashevci considers that inflammatory statements and nationalist messages are directed not only against the Republic of Kosovo, but also affect the Balkan region.
Referring to the promises to raise the Serbian flag in Prizren, he considers them futile. Meanwhile, he views Milan Radoičić’s participation in an electoral rally as a further provocation against Kosovo.
He notes that both these promises and Radoičić’s appearance have prompted numerous reactions and once again brought into question Serbia’s position toward Kosovo.
For Dashevci, the message behind the statements about the flag is linked to territorial claims. He recalls that the Republic of Kosovo has its own flag while also respecting the symbols of its communities.
The expert emphasizes Kosovo’s independence and sovereignty, while expressing the conviction that the country is on maximum alert and responds seriously to all those who make any kind of claim against it.
Dashevci links the continuation of this approach in Serbian politics to the survival of the nationalist mentality of the 1990s. According to him, Belgrade has still not freed itself from Slobodan Milošević’s way of thinking, whom he describes as the butcher of the Balkans.
In the expert’s assessment, that contaminated establishment remains present even today, seeking to secure votes by directing nationalist messages about Kosovo at the electorate.
He argues that the end of the war and the withdrawal of Serbian forces in June 1999 did not put an end to Serbia’s claims over Kosovo’s territory.
Referring to June 12, 1999, as the day Serbia finally capitulated, Dashevci says that its policies have not abandoned these claims since then. For this reason, he considers the inflammatory and provocative statements a threat to the security and stability of the region.
In the face of this situation, he calls on Kosovo’s institutions to move toward activity that is far more proactive than what they are currently demonstrating.
Dashevci also calls on the international community to adopt a tougher stance. Concluding his comments to “Bota sot,” he emphasizes the need for Serbia to be sanctioned for what he considers an extremely destructive and warmongering approach toward its neighbors in the Balkans.
Racaj: The issue of Kosovo cannot be used to serve nationalist campaigns
Professor and retired general Muhamet Racaj views Serbia’s electoral use of Kosovo as a recurring phenomenon whose consequences may extend beyond politics and directly affect security.
Speaking to “Bota sot,” he explains that electoral processes and the need to mobilize voters are repeatedly accompanied by the return of Kosovo to Belgrade’s nationalist language.
According to Racaj, nationalist statements, symbolic claims and political messages are intended to keep opposition to Kosovo’s statehood alive, calling into question the legal and political reality established after the war.
He calls for the promises to raise the Serbian flag in Prizren and Milan Radoičić’s appearance at an election event to also be assessed in terms of the impact they could have on security.
Although these may be used to gather electoral support, Racaj warns that they simultaneously strengthen the narrative denying Kosovo’s sovereignty and may pave the way for further tensions.
In his analysis, the problem is not limited to isolated statements by politicians. The risk becomes greater when this language is combined with propaganda, the spread of disinformation and the possibility of inciting provocations on the ground.
The professor emphasizes that the appearance on the political scene of individuals linked to serious security-related events requires careful institutional scrutiny, both because of the message conveyed and the consequences it may produce.
However, Racaj distinguishes between a provocative statement and a warning of military action. According to him, it cannot be taken for granted that every such statement will necessarily be followed by an action of this nature.
What concerns him is the possibility that this rhetoric could make territorial claims appear normal, deepen ethnic divisions and create a basis for deliberately organized incidents. He singles out northern Kosovo and other highly sensitive areas as spaces where this risk must be taken into consideration.
According to Racaj, the response of Kosovo’s institutions should be based simultaneously on restraint and determination, by strengthening security capacities and inter-institutional coordination.
In this context, he calls for improvements in intelligence and risk analysis, as well as coordination between the Kosovo Police, security institutions and justice bodies.
He adds that particular attention must be paid to tracking hybrid threats, monitoring the financing of illegal structures and observing disinformation campaigns.
Racaj emphasizes that concrete evidence and treatment in accordance with the law are required for every specific threat. At the same time, he advises avoiding impulsive reactions and statements that could be exploited to escalate the situation.
According to him, the most appropriate response is built by combining institutional readiness with clear communication with the public and the protection of the constitutional order.
He also expects a more engaged role from international partners, with the aim of preserving stability and preventing attempts to destabilize the region.
Racaj singles out the European Union, the United States and KFOR, calling for these developments to be examined in the context of regional security.
In his assessment, diplomacy should be used to counter language that fuels territorial claims. Meanwhile, every concrete breach of security requires documentation and a coordinated response.
The professor also addresses the Kosovo–Serbia dialogue, which he sees as a path toward resolving outstanding issues. He emphasizes that this process must not become a cover for political pressure or actions intended to destabilize the situation.
In conclusion, Racaj considers that regional peace cannot be based on threats and territorial claims. Its foundations, he says, are respect for sovereignty, political responsibility and agreements that can be implemented.
Speaking to “Bota sot,” he calls on Kosovo to remain prepared for every scenario, but without causing panic and without falling into the trap of provocations. He considers vigilance, professionalism and continued cooperation with strategic international partners to be the best guarantee for protecting security and stability.
