Serbia is considering the possibility of changing the course of the Ibar River within its territory, an idea put forward by President Aleksandar Vučić.
Të lidhura
None found
According to him, the authorities in Belgrade have already engaged construction experts, engineers and other specialists to analyze this possibility.
Vučić made the statement to Serbian media on Sunday, accompanying it with a warning to Albanians regarding how they would react to such a decision.
“We have already called in experts who deal with this—the construction sector, engineers and everyone else. Since they are mistreating our people so much, let us see. We have various reasons for changing the course of the Ibar, and then we will see what the Albanians will do and how they will behave,” Vučić said.
This is not the first time the Serbian president has spoken about such a plan. He also mentioned the same idea in 2024, immediately after the attack on critical infrastructure at Ibër-Lepenc, for which Serbs have been accused.
At the time, Vučić said that Serbia had a plan to divert the Ibar River within its territory.
Serbian publicist Zlatoje Martinov described the latest statement as reckless and an empty threat, while calling the project an absurdity that would impose extraordinary costs on Serbia.
“This is one of a series of Vučić’s statements that have no connection with reality. It is another reckless statement and an empty threat. The idea of ‘changing the course of the Ibar River’ is pure absurdity, since such an infrastructure project is technically extremely complex and would cost Serbia several billion euros,” Martinov told “Bota sot.”
He added that Belgrade would be forced to take out large loans from foreign banks to finance such an undertaking at a time when Serbia is barely managing the costs of the “EXPO 2027” project. According to him, work on that project is being delayed, and Vučić is concerned about whether all the buildings will be completed by next summer.
Martinov also emphasized that implementing the plan would require the approval of Europe and the international community, which the Serbian president does not have.
“To relocate the Ibar riverbed and ‘destroy Gazivoda Lake,’ in addition to enormous sums of money and years of technical work, the approval of Europe and the world would also be needed. Vučić does not have this approval, and no one could ever obtain it, because such an action would constitute a kind of crime against the people of Kosovo and, of course, against the Serbs in Kosovo as well, whom Vučić swears by and supposedly supports,” the publicist asserted.
According to him, the Serbian president’s idea is more laughable than threatening, because putting it into practice would be extremely difficult, even almost impossible.
“In a state of helplessness and anger, people often make the wrong moves. Such a statement by Vučić, intended as a threat against Kosovo, is in fact more laughable than frightening, because in practice it would be difficult, even almost impossible, to carry out. Therefore, I would simply call it Aleksandar Vučić’s ‘daydreaming,’” Martinov added.
The course of the Ibar is of direct importance to Kosovo because it is connected to the Gazivoda/Ujman water system and the Ibër-Lepenc canal.
Such an intervention would not merely be a technical change to the river’s course. It would have direct consequences for Kosovo’s water and electricity supply, including the operation of the two major power plants, Kosovo A and Kosovo B.
The European Union has also reacted to Vučić’s statements. The EU said that both statements about a possible change to the course of the Ibar and any actions that do not contribute to the normalization of relations between Kosovo and Serbia should be avoided.
“Progress in normalizing relations between Kosovo and Serbia can be achieved only through dialogue,” a European Commission spokesperson said on August 11.
In a response to Radio Free Europe, the European Commission emphasized that “statements, including those about possible changes to the river’s course, and actions that do not support this objective should be avoided.”
