Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić continues his propaganda and provocative statements against Kosovo.
Most recently, he stated that in the upcoming period, “two major countries, larger than Serbia, will withdraw their recognition of Kosovo.”
“Soon, there will be more withdrawals of Kosovo’s recognition. Two states, much larger than ours, will soon withdraw their recognition of Kosovo,” the Serbian president declared.
Although Vučić’s warnings are nothing new, one can raise various doubts about what truly lies behind this “announcement.” Naturally, this can be linked to internal political developments in Belgrade and the pressures facing the Serbian government.
Speaking to “Bota sot,” Serbian lawyer Cedomir Stojković addressed this issue.
He stated that Vučić’s warnings regarding the withdrawal of Kosovo’s recognition are merely his political marketing tactic aimed at diverting the Serbian public’s attention toward the Kosovo issue:
“The issue of withdrawing recognition of Kosovo’s independence is always part of political marketing in Serbia and serves to give audiences there the impression that the question of Kosovo’s status is something that is still not resolved. The President of Serbia does this to falsely present to his audience that he is achieving some sort of success in foreign policy regarding Kosovo’s status. However, in international public law, the status of a state is a unilateral matter—once a state’s independence is recognized, that recognition cannot be rescinded, just as a child, once born, cannot be declared ‘unborn.’”
In addition, Stojković believes that there will be no states that actually withdraw recognition of Kosovo, emphasizing that it is pure propaganda:
“Thus, the matter of withdrawing the recognition of independence—i.e., recognition of statehood—does not actually exist as a genuine legal question; therefore, certainly, no state will withdraw recognition of Kosovo. And think about how such a withdrawal would be done—who would such a declaration be addressed to and what would its significance be? No one in Belgrade influences Kosovo’s independence. Thus, we are dealing with propaganda spin, not a true withdrawal of recognition.”
Furthermore, the Serbian lawyer spoke about who might help Vučić in realizing his propaganda goals, specifically referencing Serbia’s ties to Russia:
“Therefore, withdrawing recognition is not really an issue. The only question is whether some countries will help Belgrade’s regime create this political marketing illusion. I do not exclude the possibility that this could happen in a few states that are heavily influenced by Russia. In that case, one could imagine governments in a few countries—without international clout—helping Vučić orchestrate this marketing tactic through an agreement with Russia, which is Vučić’s ally, all in order to once again deceive the public in Serbia by portraying a sort of external or international success for Vučić. He needs it now to calm the large daily protests against him,” concluded Cedomir Stojković for “Bota sot.”
Further Context and Insights
- Historical Tensions and Ongoing Dispute
The tense relations between Serbia and Kosovo trace back to the 1990s Balkan conflicts. Kosovo declared independence in 2008, and it has since been recognized by over 100 UN member states. However, Serbia continues to contest Kosovo’s status, leveraging diplomatic channels to prevent further international acceptance and recognition.
Claims about “withdrawals of recognition” often arise during periods of internal political strain in Serbia, as nationalistic rhetoric around Kosovo can rally political support.
- Political Marketing and Domestic Audience
In many instances, politicians facing pressure at home will redirect public attention to a contentious foreign policy matter. In this context, emphasizing potential reversals of Kosovo recognition can unite certain segments of the Serbian populace and momentarily divert focus from domestic issues such as protests, economic challenges, or corruption allegations.
These declarations also serve to demonstrate to Serbian nationalists and conservative voters that Belgrade’s leadership is persistently working to defend Serbian interests in Kosovo.
- International Law and State Recognition
As Stojković points out, recognition of statehood is largely a one-way process under international law. Once a sovereign state is recognized, the notion of “un-recognizing” it holds little legal weight; it is practically unheard of in contemporary international relations.
Even if a country makes a political statement claiming to withdraw recognition, it typically has no binding legal effect on the recognized state’s sovereignty. Kosovo’s status as an independent state remains intact, especially as it continues to hold and pursue bilateral relations with numerous other recognized countries and participates in international organizations where it is allowed.
- Geopolitical Influences: Russia’s Role
Russia has historically backed Serbia’s position on Kosovo, and by extension, fosters narratives that delegitimize Kosovo’s independence. Moscow has its own interests in limiting Western influence in the Balkans and maintaining leverage with Belgrade.
Smaller or more vulnerable states that rely on Russian aid or political support might be inclined to issue statements sympathetic to Serbia’s stance—though such statements frequently remain more symbolic than substantive.
As the lawyer notes, these gestures often serve the purpose of fueling local political propaganda rather than producing any meaningful change in Kosovo’s international standing.
- Current Political Climate in Serbia
Serbia has witnessed significant public demonstrations in recent months, reflecting citizens’ discontent over issues ranging from media freedom to governance. President Vučić has sought to consolidate power, employing various strategies that include nationalistic appeals on the Kosovo question.
By asserting that new withdrawals of recognition are imminent, Vučić may attempt to reinforce his image as a resolute defender of Serbian sovereignty—an image that resonates with portions of the electorate—and thus quell or overshadow domestic dissent.
- International Mediation Efforts
Efforts to normalize relations between Serbia and Kosovo have been ongoing under the auspices of the European Union (EU), with support from the United States and other international actors.
The EU-mediated Brussels Dialogue aims to pave the way for a lasting agreement that would eventually integrate both Serbia and Kosovo into European frameworks. In this context, repeated claims of prospective recognition withdrawals undermine trust in negotiation processes and hamper the prospects of long-term regional stability.
- Implications for Regional Stability
Heightened rhetoric on both sides can inflame tensions, potentially undermining dialogue efforts. Diplomatic maneuvers based on political marketing can delay constructive negotiations and risk escalating conflict if nationalist sentiments are stoked further.
Meanwhile, the international community continues to encourage de-escalation and constructive dialogue. Most actors—particularly within the EU—oppose any narrative suggesting a regression in Kosovo’s international standing, as it threatens the broader ambition of European integration for the Western Balkans.
Conclusion
President Aleksandar Vučić’s repeated claims that countries are poised to withdraw Kosovo’s recognition serve multiple functions in the Serbian political landscape—chiefly, as a diversion from domestic pressures and a strategy to maintain a nationalist narrative. From an international law standpoint, the withdrawal of state recognition is largely symbolic and legally toothless, reinforcing the idea that Vučić’s statements should be viewed through the lens of political marketing rather than as credible indicators of shifting diplomatic realities.
In a broader context, such declarations can temporarily rally certain nationalist elements at home but do little to alter Kosovo’s de facto standing. Instead, they underscore the continuing influence of external actors like Russia and highlight the persistent complexities in Serbia’s domestic political environment. Ultimately, genuine resolution of Serbia-Kosovo tensions depends on ongoing dialogue, diplomatic engagement, and a commitment to regional stability—an approach widely advocated by the EU, the United States, and other international stakeholders.
