Stefan Lehne
{
"authors": [
"Stefan Lehne"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [
"Europe’s Eastern Neighborhood",
"EU Integration and Enlargement"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Europe",
"Eastern Europe",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy",
"EU",
"Political Reform"
]
}Source: Getty
Global Insider: Envoy Exchange Part of Promising Shift in Serbia-Kosovo Relations
Serbia and Kosovo agreed last month to exchange envoys for the first time in response to a broader European Union push for the two to improve relations.
Source: World Politics Review

WPR: What were the factors that drove Serbia and Kosovo to exchange envoys for the first time?
Stefan Lehne: Whatever their differences on the status issue, Serbia and Kosovo will always be neighbors. Every day there will be problems to sort out between them and gains to be had through cooperation. Exchanging liaison officers will facilitate direct communication and allow this complex relationship to run more smoothly. Of course, this arrangement is only one achievement of the dialogue mediated by EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton. Other recent steps include the establishment of border controls in the north of Kosovo and a customs system. These measures make eminently good sense in themselves. However, they probably wouldn’t have happened without strong pushing by the EU, which has made progress toward a more normal relationship a condition for both parties to move toward participating in European integration.
WPR: From the EU’s perspective, do Serbia’s moves signal a viable path toward normalization and thereby EU membership for Serbia?
Stefan Lehne: When the new nationalist leaders of Serbia came to power, there was a good deal of skepticism regarding their willingness to move forward on Kosovo. However, since then significant progress has been achieved. Many observers think that this might be a case in which more nationalist leaders are capable of bolder action than moderate politicians who have to fear a nationalist backlash. The steps achieved so far are promising but will not by themselves convince the EU to open accession talks with Serbia. In order for the EU to make such a decision in the coming months, significant further progress in Serbia-Kosovo relations appears necessary.
WPR: What are the likely areas for compromise between Serbia and Kosovo, and what could derail the rapprochement?
Stefan Lehne: Progress should certainly be achievable in the areas of energy and telecommunications, where negotiations are already quite advanced. But the real key to success lies in defining a way forward for the northern part of Kosovo, where the Serbs are in the majority and where Pristina so far has not been able to extend its authority. Here a compromise needs to be struck between two legitimate interests: the need of the Serb population for assurances that they will be able to preserve their way of life and to maintain their ties with Serbia, and Pristina’s need for guarantees that the territorial integrity of Kosovo will not be called into question. These are undoubtedly difficult issues, which may give rise to strong passions that could in turn derail the process. However, with political will on both sides and skillful mediation by the EU, a solution can be found which would defuse one of the last dangerous hot spots in the region and remove a huge obstacle on the path to fuller European integration.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Stefan Lehne is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels, where his research focuses on the post–Lisbon Treaty development of the European Union’s foreign policy, with a specific focus on relations between the EU and member states.
- What Can the EU Do About Trump 2.0?Article
- Can the EU Meet the Trump Moment?Commentary
Stefan Lehne
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- Bombing Campaigns Do Not Bring About Democracy. Nor Does Regime Change Without a Plan.Commentary
Just look at Iraq in 1991.
Marwan Muasher
- Iran and the New Geopolitical MomentCommentary
A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.
Michael Young
- Baku Proceeds With Caution as Ethnic Azeris Join Protests in Neighboring IranCommentary
Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.
Bashir Kitachaev
- Iran’s Woes Aren’t Only DomesticCommentary
The country’s leadership is increasingly uneasy about multiple challenges from the Levant to the South Caucasus.
Armenak Tokmajyan
- The Tragedy of Middle Eastern PoliticsArticle
The countries of the region have engaged in sustained competition that has tested their capacities and limitations, while resisting domination by rivals. Can a more stable order emerge from this maelstrom, and what would it require?
Hamza Meddeb, Mohamed Ali Adraoui