The final deadline for the constitution of Kosovo’s Assembly expires tonight. However, the third attempt also failed to produce a political agreement between LVV leader Albin Kurti and LDK leader Lumir Abdixhiku.
Të lidhura
None found
Following the meeting, Kurti, who is also acting prime minister, said that a democratic balance must be ensured and that the will expressed by citizens in the June 7 elections must be taken into account.
He assessed that the main obstacle to reaching an agreement so far has been the significant difference between each party’s result and its concrete objectives. Nevertheless, Kurti said that hope must not be lost and that optimism for a political agreement must be maintained.
Referring to the election of Vjosa Osmani as president, Kurti recalled that at the time the race had been designed so that the candidate with the number 1 would become prime minister, while the candidate with the number 2 would assume the post of president.
According to him, this time the head of state should be elected through consensus and should not be a party representative. Kurti said he knows a number of people with the values and principles needed to carry out this duty, but does not want to mention specific individuals so that it would not later be said that the candidacy had been determined by him.
Kurti also declared that he was doing everything possible to resolve the situation that had arisen.
On the other hand, following the meeting, Lumir Abdixhiku said that, in the event of a coalition with LVV, the LDK is demanding the right to nominate the president.
The LDK leader described December’s offer, under which his party would receive only the post of deputy prime minister and several ministries, as insufficient and unworthy. He stressed that the LDK cannot accept such treatment and that, if its involvement is being sought, it must have genuine representation.
Abdixhiku explained that the post of prime minister does not belong to the LDK, while that of Assembly speaker belongs to LVV under the Constitution. According to him, the only possibility for representation is the right to make a proposal, but not a blank-check proposal, since the president must represent all of Kosovo.
It remains to be seen whether the session on the constitution of the Assembly will be held tonight. So far, Prime Minister Albin Kurti has held meetings only with the Democratic League of Kosovo, as the Democratic Party of Kosovo has declared that it will remain in opposition, while the Alliance for the Future of Kosovo has set conditions and opposed any meeting with him.
Commenting to “Bota sot” on the positions of the PDK and AAK, political analyst Lirim Gashi said that these parties have the right to disagree with LVV’s program, but emphasized that democracy is not limited to electoral competition alone.
Gashi distinguished between the opposition’s right not to form a coalition with LVV and its political responsibility to communicate when the functioning of the state is at risk. According to him, it is entirely normal for the PDK and AAK to have programmatic differences, not to want to share government with LVV, and to set the conditions under which they would or would not support a particular solution.
However, the analyst stressed that democracy also means the ability to compromise whenever the institutional interest requires it. He noted that Kosovo is not facing an ordinary party dispute, but an institutional blockade, the need to establish functioning institutions, and the necessity of electing a president.
For this reason, Gashi does not consider refusing dialogue to be a good political solution, regardless of which side it comes from. According to him, the most responsible course would be for all parties to sit down at a common table without prejudging the outcome of the talks.
He explained that taking part in a meeting does not mean accepting the opponent’s program, but accepting the principle that the state stands above party interests. Indeed, according to Gashi, such a meeting would also serve the opposition, which could clearly demonstrate which issues it does not accept and on which it is prepared to discuss.
In his assessment, refusing to communicate with someone solely because of disagreements produces political conflict. By contrast, dialogue with an opponent to find a way out in the state’s interest represents institutional democracy.
Gashi added that the burden of responsibility cannot be left solely to the PDK and AAK. LVV, he said, must also demonstrate a willingness for genuine compromise, rather than merely engaging in consultations that are used publicly to identify the guilty party. A serious agreement, he said, requires each side to give something up.
The analyst summarized his position by saying that the opposition is not obliged to enter government if it does not wish to, but it must accept dialogue when the aim is to unblock the institutions. He directed the same demand at LVV: it should not be satisfied with seeking opposition support, but should offer the compromise that would make such support possible.
Asked whether new elections, triggered by the failure to form institutions and the lack of consensus on a president, would significantly change the election result or leave the current political balance almost unchanged, Gashi said there could be shifts, but not necessarily an identical result.
He avoided making a categorical prediction, arguing that elections do not function like a poll that is mechanically repeated. According to him, changes are possible, especially when citizens vote after a prolonged period of institutional crisis.
Taking the result of the June 7 elections as his starting point, Gashi said that he currently sees no strong reason to expect that holding new elections alone would produce a spectacular reversal in the balance of forces. LVV came convincingly first with 53 seats, the PDK secured 22, the LDK 18, while the AAK won 7.
Nevertheless, he stressed that a new vote would take place under completely different circumstances, because citizens have now seen the consequences of the parties’ inability to build compromise. For this reason, the question facing each party would not concern only the number of votes it might receive, but also how it would use them.
Gashi warned that, if voters face the same deadlock again after the elections, they could punish not only the parties that lost, but also the way political entities exercised the mandate given to them by citizens. For this reason, he expects more of a shift in votes within the existing political landscape than an inevitable overturning of the political system.
According to the analyst, some parties may gain several points while others may lose them, and the electorate may become more or less mobilized. However, without a major political development, he considers it very difficult to predict a radical change.
Gashi also highlighted a paradox: if the opposition believes that new elections would significantly improve its political position, it must also consider the possibility that they could further strengthen LVV. On the other hand, if LVV believes it can easily achieve an absolute majority, there is no guarantee that this will happen.
For this reason, he described new elections as a gamble for everyone. According to Gashi, the main risk is not only the question of who will secure more seats, but whether Kosovo will emerge from them with functioning institutions or once again become caught in a new cycle of blockades.
In conclusion, Gashi said he would like the parties to use every remaining opportunity for an agreement before sending the country back to elections. He stressed that elections are a democratic means of resolving political disputes, but should not be used to avoid compromise. According to him, citizens do not vote only to determine the winner, but also so that someone assumes responsibility for governing the country.
