American expert Daniel Serwer assesses that the dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, mediated by the European Union with the support of the United States, practically does not exist and is a dysfunctional process. He emphasizes that there is no strategic interest from either side to continue the dialogue, and the West treats Kosovo more strictly than Serbia. Serwer believes the US should redefine its priorities in the region, with the ultimate goal being mutual recognition and exchange of ambassadors. He also points to a lack of political will in Belgrade to implement key points of the agreement, while the EU does not exert enough pressure on Serbia.
Political Perspectives:
Left: Left-leaning sources emphasize the failure of the EU and Western powers to effectively mediate the dialogue, highlighting the lack of political will on both sides and criticizing the West’s inconsistent approach, especially the perceived harsher stance towards Kosovo. They call for renewed diplomatic efforts and pressure on Serbia to comply with agreements.
Center: Center-leaning sources report the situation factually, noting the stagnation and dysfunction of the Kosovo-Serbia dialogue. They highlight the lack of strategic interest from both parties and the challenges in achieving mutual recognition, while acknowledging the role of the EU and US in mediation without strong optimism about near-term progress.
Right: Right-leaning sources focus on Serbia’s reluctance to implement key agreements and criticize the EU and US for not applying sufficient pressure on Kosovo. They emphasize Serbia’s sovereignty and the need for the West to respect Serbia’s position, often portraying Kosovo’s actions as provocative and the dialogue as skewed against Serbia.
