LDK conditions its vote for president on a candidate from the party, analysts comment on the names of Abdixhiku and Haziri

The stance of the Democratic League of Kosovo on the post of president is entering an even more complicated phase, especially after statements by deputy leader Lutfi Haziri, who said the party’s 18 votes in the Assembly could come together only if the candidate for president is from the LDK.

As possible names, Haziri mentioned the party chairman, Lumir Abdixhiku, but also himself, implying that the full support of the MPs would depend on a candidacy emerging from the party’s own structures.

“If that name is Lumiri or my name, then we can unite. Lumiri should be first, by virtue of his official duty, because he is chairman. After Lumiri, I have the broader consensus [within the LDK],” Haziri said.

This statement carries particular weight when viewed in relation to the political formula with which the LDK entered the June 7 elections, when Vjosa Osmani was presented as the candidate for president, while Lumir Abdixhiku was the candidate for prime minister.

According to Haziri, Osmani’s name would not secure the unified vote of all LDK MPs, suggesting that strong differences still exist within the party over the figure who should take the post of president.

“It could be like last time, so two or three votes could split off, but in the case of Lumiri or in my case we can unite,” he said.

In these circumstances, the demand that the president come from the LDK itself raises dilemmas over whether this party is moving away from its earlier approach of a consensual, non-partisan president.

This also makes the issue of a possible agreement with Vetëvendosje more delicate, as the current positions give the impression of post-election political calculations more than the continuation of an unchanged principled line.

Jakupi: The shift from a “non-partisan president” to a “president from the LDK” requires a political explanation

Regarding this development, in a statement to “Bota sot,” analyst Zejnulla Jakupi described the LDK’s demand as a political move that does not align with its earlier declarations.

He recalled that LDK officials had previously insisted on the idea of a non-partisan president, while now, according to him, a clear change in approach is evident.

“The LDK’s demand for the post of president can be seen as a political move aimed at securing an institutional role in a possible agreement with Vetëvendosje, but at the same time it raises questions about its consistency with its earlier positions. When the LDK asked for a non-partisan president, the main argument was that the figure of the president should stand above political parties, a unifying figure beyond party interests. If it is now being demanded that the president be from the ranks of the LDK — even with names such as the party chairman or one of its leading figures being mentioned — then critics may interpret this as a change in approach.”

According to Jakupi, the fact that a political figure is being sought for president is not in itself a problem, since there have been such cases before; however, the essence lies in the political message being conveyed and in the lack of a clear explanation.

“However, the LDK can argue this change by pointing to the fact that in parliamentary politics, agreements are made on the basis of the balance of power and political trust. So, a party that gives votes for the formation of institutions may seek a high institutional responsibility as part of the agreement. From this point of view, the demand is not necessarily contradictory legally or politically, because even a party figure, once elected president, may declare that they will exercise the function in the interest of all citizens.

But the main dilemma is the political message. If a few months ago the LDK opposed the idea of a partisan president and asked for a consensual figure, then the shift from a ‘non-partisan president’ to a ‘president from the LDK’ requires a political explanation. Otherwise, opponents may see it as a condition for power more than as an institutional principle.

On the other hand, the mention of names such as Lumir Abdixhiku or Lutfi Haziri shows that the LDK is not simply seeking a formal post, but a position that would carry weight in the future political architecture. This makes the issue even more a negotiation over political influence than just a debate over the president’s profile,” he stressed.

Jakupi further singled out two aspects related to the LDK’s demand for the post of president and to the way it is building its political strategy.

He underlined that the election of the president in Kosovo requires a majority that usually cannot be secured by a single party, therefore cooperation and political agreements remain necessary.

“So, the main question is not only ‘Is the LDK changing its position?’ but also ‘Was the demand for a non-partisan president a lasting principle or a position dependent on political circumstances?’. If political conditions have changed, parties often change strategy as well — but this may come at a cost to credibility if it is not clearly explained.

If this LDK demand is seen as serving the creation of institutions and overcoming a possible political deadlock, then it takes on another dimension. The election of the president in Kosovo requires a majority that a single party usually cannot secure, therefore inter-party agreements are almost unavoidable. In this sense, the involvement of the LDK and securing its votes can be seen as a stabilizing element that would enable the completion of institutions.”

The analyst also commented on the possibility of LVV accepting the LDK’s offer, as well as the chances of a compromise or coalition between the two entities.

“For the Vetëvendosje Movement, although a president from the ranks of another party may not be its first choice, this would not necessarily be an unacceptable demand, because without a broader parliamentary agreement the election of the president would be difficult. A compromise with the LDK would give LVV the opportunity to ensure the functioning of institutions and avoid a new political crisis.

From this perspective, the issue is not only who gets the post of president, but the political price of an agreement that creates a functional majority. The LDK would secure an important institutional role, while LVV would gain governing stability. However, the debate remains over the LDK’s coherence with its earlier positions on a non-partisan president: such an agreement may be justified as a compromise for institutional unblocking, but it requires a clear public explanation so that it is not perceived merely as a search for posts,” Zejnulla Jakupi concluded for “Bota sot.”

Kapiti: Haziri and Abdixhiku, together with Vjosa Osmani, are the main authors of the LDK’s political failure

On the other hand, commentator Skënder Kapiti reacted sharply to Haziri’s statement on the post of president.

In his statement to “Bota sot,” he said the latest declarations show that Abdixhiku and Haziri are focused on personal interests in positions rather than on the party’s interest. For this reason, according to him, none of the current LDK leaders deserves to be in those positions.

“The LDK deputy leader, Lutfi Haziri, declared that the MPs of his party can come out united only if the presidential candidate comes from the ranks of the LDK and not from outside it, and also: ‘If that name is Lumiri [Abdixhiku, the party chairman] or my name, then we can unite.’

This declaration is the clearest proof that the LDK is a political crutch, the property of individuals, its owners and usurpers, who, despite the fact that both Haziri and Abdixhiku, who together with Vjosa Osmani are the main authors of the LDK’s political failure, want to exploit the LDK to the end for personal interests and ambitions. They have always used the LDK as human material, simply for votes and personal benefit. In today’s LDK, none of those at its head deserves not only to be an MP, but should also be removed from party posts in the LDK.”

Kapiti broadened his criticism of the LDK leadership further, also speaking about what he considers the betrayal of the party by some figures.

“The LDK is a political crutch, which stands only as political inertia, because it has nothing either as a Rugovist legacy nor does it represent an opposition alternative. It has shown insincerity and political betrayal toward its membership, but also extreme servility toward governing partners in coalition. These two, Haziri and Abdixhiku, also betrayed Vjosa Osmani, whom they named as a candidate for President and placed at the top of the list of MPs in the parliamentary elections, and even this political acrobatics did not serve them. From these two and from the political acrobat Vjosa Osmani, this was the LDK’s maximum political failure,” he said.

In the end, the commentator stressed that in the event of a coalition between LVV and the LDK, the latter should, in his view, propose a non-partisan figure, since he believes the party does not have in its ranks an acceptable name for president.

“If any LVV–LDK coalition agreement is to be realized, it would be politically and morally proper for the LDK to propose for President of Kosovo a personality from outside politics.

A personality from outside politics who meets the criterion of a president of national unity, because the LDK has no individual in its ranks who is either likable or acceptable for president, proof of which comes from the disappointment, disloyalty, betrayal and selfishness shown by former president Osmani,” Skënder Kapiti concluded for “Bota sot.”