Walker and DioGuardi support Bislimi’s candidacy for president, analysts urge Kurti and Abdixhiku to consider the scenario

Albin Kurti and Lumir Abdixhiku have confirmed that they discussed specific names for Kosovo’s next president during their meeting, but they have not disclosed who those names are.

According to the two leaders, the names were not made public because of the sensitive nature of the negotiations. Meanwhile, the election of the president has become one of the key issues in the political debate over resolving the institutional deadlock.

Against this backdrop, former US congressman Joseph DioGuardi has called on Kosovo’s political leaders to consider Faton Bislimi for the post of president of the Republic. This follows a similar position expressed by former US ambassador William Walker.

DioGuardi’s proposal comes at a time when Kurti and Abdixhiku have acknowledged that their discussions have moved from defining criteria to considering specific names for head of state.

The support of the two American figures has prompted renewed debate over whether Faton Bislimi could serve as a figure capable of bridging party divisions and whether he could become a meeting point for Kosovo’s political parties.

However, Walker and DioGuardi’s support does not automatically make Bislimi a consensus candidate and does not represent the official position of the US administration.

Walker and DioGuardi do not speak on behalf of the United States administration. But given the strategic importance of Kosovo’s relations with its allies, particularly the United States, a candidate’s strong ties in Washington could influence how his candidacy is viewed.

The question that remains is whether the public support of the two American personalities can become a genuine political opportunity for compromise among Kosovo’s parties.

Gashi: American support strengthens Bislimi’s candidacy, but support within Kosovo is decisive

Diaspora analyst Eduard Gashi told “Bota sot” that the statements by William Walker and Joseph DioGuardi should be analyzed not only in relation to Faton Bislimi’s name, but also in light of the weight carried by the two American figures themselves, who have been associated with the Kosovo issue for decades.

According to Gashi, the fact that both have publicly proposed the same name, precisely when Albin Kurti and Lumir Abdixhiku have begun discussing specific candidates, gives Bislimi’s candidacy greater political weight. He stresses that this does not mean Bislimi has automatically become a consensus candidate, nor that the proposal comes from official Washington.

Gashi believes that Walker and DioGuardi’s credibility in relation to Kosovo means the proposal for Bislimi should not be viewed simply as a name put forward in the public arena.

He lists several elements that, in his view, work in Bislimi’s favor: a strong academic background, parliamentary experience, knowledge of Kosovo’s reality, strong ties with the diaspora and an important network in the United States.

Gashi emphasizes that at a time when relations with allies, especially the United States, are of strategic importance to Kosovo, these ties constitute political capital that should not be underestimated.

However, the analyst points out that support from abroad is not enough to declare a candidate consensual. According to him, the main criterion is whether the candidate can build trust among political parties and citizens within Kosovo.

He argues that the president should be neither the majority’s trophy nor the opposition’s symbolic victory. The candidate should enter the Presidency without being perceived as an instrument of Kurti, Abdixhiku, the PDK or any other party.

Gashi notes that parliamentary arithmetic also demonstrates the need for broader cooperation. LVV and LDK together have a strong basis for an agreement, but the constitutional procedure requires broader political involvement.

For this reason, he believes the candidate should be assessed not only in relation to Albin Kurti and Lumir Abdixhiku, but also against the PDK, AAK and representatives of the communities. Only in this way, he says, can there truly be talk of a consensus president.

Gashi does not limit the debate to Faton Bislimi. He proposes that Dr. Nikë Gjeloshi also be included in the discussions, describing him as a highly serious profile under the current political circumstances.

According to him, Nikë Gjeloshi is a political scientist with decades of experience, knowledge of political systems and Kosovo’s state-building processes, as well as someone who was part of the country’s political history long before the creation of today’s institutions.

Gashi sees Gjeloshi’s understanding of the state, the Constitution, political history and the complicated relationship among institutions as a particular advantage. He adds that Kosovo needs not only a president with international contacts, but also a figure with deep institutional knowledge.

If the criteria are political experience, a background in political science, institutional memory and sufficient distance from the daily clashes among LVV, LDK and PDK, Gashi believes Nikë Gjeloshi should be included on the list of names under consideration.

He describes Gjeloshi as an exceptionally serious choice for president of the Republic, while adding that Walker and DioGuardi’s support has elevated Bislimi’s candidacy to another level. However, he says, this should not close the competition of ideas and personalities, but rather broaden it.

In conclusion, Gashi emphasizes that the choice should be guided by the interests of the Republic, not by party calculations. According to him, Kosovo should choose a figure capable of addressing all parties with the message that he is not the president of a political force, but the president of the Republic.

Hyseni: Bislimi could unite the parties and strengthen the Presidency’s ties with the United States

Analyst Nehat Hyseni considers the process of electing the president a moment of particular political and institutional importance for Kosovo.

For Hyseni, the delay in this process is no longer merely an ordinary disagreement among the parties. It has become a test of institutional culture, the political class’s ability to reach a compromise and its responsibility toward Kosovo’s strategic partners.

Speaking to “Bota sot,” he said the discussion should not focus only on the question of who will be elected president, but also on what kind of president Kosovo needs at this time.

Hyseni stresses that the head of state must be a unifying factor, not a party trophy. According to him, the president cannot be a reward for the winner of the election or an instrument of a political party, but must represent the state, its citizens and the Republic’s strategic interests beyond party differences.

In this context, he considers the proposal of Faton Bislimi important, particularly because of the support expressed by Joseph DioGuardi and former ambassador William G. Walker.

Hyseni believes Bislimi’s candidacy has not been presented merely as the name of a local politician. It has been brought into the public debate by American figures with a long history of involvement in the Albanian cause and Kosovo–US relations.

According to him, the fact that DioGuardi is not the only American voice calling for Bislimi to be considered, since William G. Walker has also spoken in his favor, gives the candidacy a broader dimension as a proposal for consensus and a Euro-Atlantic orientation.

Hyseni says Bislimi’s academic background, political experience and international ties make him different from the traditional model of a Kosovar politician.

He adds that Kosovo needs not only a president who understands domestic politics, but also a figure who understands Washington, Brussels, international diplomacy and how decision-making functions in Western democracies.

The analyst also links this aspect to the importance of US engagement in securing the rights of Albanians in Serbia for the Albanians of the Preševo Valley.

According to Hyseni, Faton Bislimi’s contribution, based on his public engagement, should be seen as part of efforts to keep the issue of the Albanians of the Preševo Valley on the agenda of US institutions.

However, Hyseni also emphasizes that support from outside Kosovo does not by itself make a candidate consensual. For him, the fundamental criterion is the ability to secure votes beyond the political camp where he may initially enjoy support.

He recalls that Joseph DioGuardi, in his letter to Kosovo’s leaders, identified this as a condition: the president must be able to win the trust of more than one political camp and must not become an instrument of either side.

If Bislimi were to secure support from more than one political camp, then his candidacy could, according to Hyseni, become a real opportunity for compromise. But he stresses that Bislimi may be viewed as a potential compromise candidate, not automatically as a consensus candidate, since the final decision rests with the deputies.

Hyseni warns that electing the president solely on the basis of party affiliation—as an LVV, LDK, PDK or other group’s candidate—would begin the presidential mandate with a political deficit.

By contrast, a candidate who could be voted for by more than one political camp would create a different institutional atmosphere.

In closing, Hyseni called on Kurti, Abdixhiku, the PDK and the AAK to use this moment to reach an agreement and not turn the Presidency into a continuation of the electoral conflict.

He emphasizes that the president should be an institution of the Republic, not the property of whichever majority happens to be in power.

Hyseni believes that if Faton Bislimi’s name enters the negotiating table, it should be considered on the basis of merit, integrity, political independence, state experience and the ability to represent Kosovo abroad.

Although Walker and DioGuardi cannot elect Kosovo’s president, he said, they can remind Kosovo’s leaders that the Presidency is not a party trophy, but a high state responsibility, Nehat Hyseni concluded to “Bota sot.”