Gashi: PDK and AAK should put institutional interests above party calculations over Sejdiu

Six deputies from the Democratic League of Kosovo, together with the Democratic Party of Kosovo and the Alliance for the Future of Kosovo, have declared that they will not support presidential candidate Bekim Sejdiu, who was nominated through the agreement between LVV and LDK.

Avdullah Hoti, Hykmete Bajrami, Kujtim Shala, Arben Gashi, Armend Zemaj and Janina Ymeri are the six LDK deputies who oppose the agreement on the election of the president. They have justified their position as opposition to cooperation with LVV and to the “extension of Albin Kurti’s rule.”

PDK and AAK, meanwhile, made their opposition clear from the outset, regardless of the name of the proposed candidate.

PDK, which has 22 deputies in the Assembly of Kosovo, has rejected cooperation with Kurti both on forming the government and on electing the president. The party has declared that it will remain in opposition during this term.

AAK, with seven deputies, has set six conditions for supporting the institutions and has refused to meet with Kurti until those demands are met.

Political analyst Lirim Gashi was asked in a statement to “Bota sot” whether PDK and AAK should reconsider their position and vote for Bekim Sejdiu. According to him, both parties should seriously consider this possibility.

Gashi stresses that a vote for Sejdiu should not automatically be viewed as support for the Kurti-Abdixhiku agreement, as it could primarily represent an effort to make the institutions functional.

“I think PDK and AAK should seriously reconsider their position. This would not be a favor to Albin Kurti, Lumir Abdixhiku or any other political entity, but a decision in the interest of Kosovo and its citizens.

If it has long been demanded that the country be freed from institutional deadlock, then a concrete opportunity to overcome it should be addressed with state responsibility and not solely through party calculations.

Support for Bekim Sejdiu should not necessarily be interpreted as a vote in favor of the Kurti-Abdixhiku agreement. Above all, it may be a vote for the functioning of the state. An opposition party should not fear making the institutions functional simply because a political agreement has created this opportunity,” Gashi declared.

According to the analyst, the opposition has the right not to support every agreement reached by the majority. However, it must distinguish between political opposition and the obligation to protect the institutional interest.

“It is PDK and AAK’s right not to support the candidacy. Democracy gives them the opportunity to oppose, disagree and propose alternatives.

But this right also comes with responsibility. If these parties have specific objections to Bekim Sejdiu, concerning his integrity, competence, experience or suitability for the office of president, they should make them clear to the public.

If, on the other hand, the main reason for the rejection is simply the fact that Sejdiu is the result of an agreement between LVV and LDK, then the party agreement is being placed above the needs of the institutions.

The president of Kosovo is not the president of LVV, LDK, PDK or AAK. He must be the President of the Republic of Kosovo,” Gashi told “Bota sot.”

He warned that the country could once again become caught in a cycle of political deadlock. According to Gashi, Kosovo cannot continually return to the same vicious circle, in which parties demand functioning institutions when they are in opposition but regard compromise as a political loss when it becomes possible.

Gashi called on PDK and AAK not to treat the situation as a competition to determine which entity is gaining points against the other, but as an opportunity to end the institutional deadlock.

“The risk is real and should not be underestimated. Kosovo cannot afford to remain stuck in the same cycle, in which the functioning of institutions is demanded only by the opposition, while a concrete compromise is viewed as a loss as soon as it emerges.

Such an approach does not serve democracy, much less the state. Politics also involves compromise. In a healthy democracy, the side that gets everything it demands does not always win. In some cases, the state wins precisely when the parties agree to give up part of their demands.

It would be more useful for PDK and AAK to view this moment as an opportunity to close a long chapter of deadlock, rather than as a confrontation to measure who is benefiting politically.

A political agreement should not be judged solely by the benefit to one party, but also by what society and the state gain,” he said.

Asked whether the rejection of Sejdiu stemmed from a political principle or from a clash with the new majority, Gashi said that PDK and AAK themselves should determine this.

However, he assessed that the debate should move away from who nominated Sejdiu and focus on the question of what kind of president he could be for the Republic of Kosovo.

“I would not attribute motives to PDK and AAK that they themselves have not stated. But a principled position must be supported by equally principled arguments.

If the reason is that Sejdiu is the candidate of the Kurti-Abdixhiku agreement, then we are dealing with political opposition. If the rejection is related to his personality, professionalism, experience or vision for the institution of the president, then we have an argument that should be seriously discussed.

Therefore, attention should shift from the question of who nominated Bekim Sejdiu to what role he could play and what kind of president he could be for the Republic of Kosovo. This would elevate the debate from party calculations to the level of institutional interest,” the analyst stressed.

Gashi considers Sejdiu a candidate emerging from an interparty agreement and views this as a positive development. He says that LVV and LDK have shown a willingness to compromise on an issue important to the functioning of the institutions.

“I would be cautious about using the term ‘consensus candidate.’ In the fullest sense, a consensus candidate would be one who enjoys significantly broader political support.

Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that Bekim Sejdiu is the result of an interparty agreement, and that in itself is positive. LVV and LDK have shown that they are willing to compromise on an issue of particular importance to the functioning of the institutions.

Now the opposition must also show whether it is willing to take a step toward compromise if it believes this serves the Republic. Consensus is not created simply by asking the other side to move. It is built when each side agrees to change its own position,” Gashi added.

The analyst called on PDK and AAK, if they consider Sejdiu unsuitable for the post, to explain the reasons to citizens using concrete arguments.

“My message would be simple: do not vote for Kurti and do not vote for Abdixhiku, but vote for the person you consider best for the Republic of Kosovo.

If you believe that Bekim Sejdiu is worthy and suitable for this duty, then support him. If you believe the opposite, citizens should be clearly informed, with arguments, why he should not be voted for.

What must be avoided is turning Kosovo into a hostage of an endless conflict between the parties. Citizens do not view the state through party trenches. They want to know whether the institutions are working, whether the country is progressing and whether politics is capable of finding solutions.

The main question should not be who won, LVV or PDK. The question should be whether the institutions are functional, whether the state is acting and whether Kosovo is moving forward. This should guide every political decision,” he underlined.

In conclusion, Gashi said that Kosovo does not need another party winner, but a result that strengthens the institutions.

“If Bekim Sejdiu is a worthy candidate, PDK and AAK should not be afraid to vote for him merely out of fear that such an action could strengthen Kurti.

A functioning state strengthens not only the government but also the opposition. To be strong, the opposition does not need blocked institutions. It should challenge the government within functioning institutions, through arguments, alternatives and better policies.

If PDK and AAK have continually demanded that the institutions be made functional, now is the time to prove that this position was not merely a tool for criticizing the majority, but a sincere belief in the interest of the Republic.

Parties and governments change, as do majorities. Institutions remain, and the state must always stand above any party,” Gashi concluded.