THE RECOGNITION DILEMMA OF KOSOVO: WHY DO STATES FAIL TO REACH A CONSENSUS ON STATEHOOD?
THE RECOGNITION DILEMMA OF KOSOVO: WHY DO STATES FAIL TO REACH A CONSENSUS ON STATEHOOD?

Summary/Abstract: The recognition of Kosovo is one of the most debated issues in contemporary international relations. Since declaring independence in 2008, Kosovo has gained more than 100 recognitions, over half of which are United Nations member states, but it still struggles in its ongoing efforts to consolidate its statehood and achieve full international recognition. Therefore, this paper analyses the dilemma of Kosovo’s recognition and explains why states still fail to reach a consensus on its statehood, focusing on political, geopolitical and strategic factors. The research methodology is based on a qualitative approach, including academic literature, official state positions and other relevant international documents on the issue. What emerges from the analysis is that great powers tend to shape the dynamics of recognition, while smaller states often follow the positions of their main strategic partners. In the case of Kosovo, concerns about territorial integrity and the fear of creating a potential precedent for other separatist movements remain key factors in states’ willingness to recognize Kosovo. The study shows that Kosovo has pursued an active approach through bilateral recognitions and engagement in multilateral forums, focusing initially on international partners and countries with strong relations with Kosovo. On the other hand, states that have not yet taken positive decisions for recognition remain influenced by internal prejudices and insecurities. For this reason, some of them have misinterpreted the case of Kosovo and the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Some regional powers around the world have not recognised independence not because of Kosovo itself, but due to geopolitical rivalry with Western aligned countries. In addition, due to geographical distance, there are countries that lack focus and interest in foreign policy issues, which means that they are completely unaware of the circumstances of what Kosovo is and whether or not to make a decision is not a concern for them. Of course, it has often been the American and European partners, but there are also small countries in the world that have in some cases been influential in lobbying for recognition. This process has also involved well known and influential personalities lobbying for Kosovo, while the active participation of Kosovo’s diplomacy in multilateral forums around the world has been particularly decisive, as these forums have provided opportunities to meet with political leaders and decision making diplomats from targeted states, from whom recognition of Kosovo has been sought. In conclusion, the paper finds that Kosovo’s recognition has been shaped more by political interests than by normative legal principles, proving that recognition is often treated as a political instrument rather than merely a legal act. As a recommendation, it is reaffirmed that Kosovo should continue strengthening its diplomacy and expanding international cooperation to gain further recognitions. This study contributes to a better understanding of recognition as a political instrument and may serve as a useful reference for readers, students, and the academic community.

• Details
• Contents