Kosovo Serbia in one room - What do people really think?

The normalization process between Kosovo and Serbia has long been stalled due to deep-seated mutual distrust, a lack of goodwill, and recurring tensions, which have hindered political dialogue and cooperation at the community level. In both countries, the process is viewed as opaque and elite driven, with civil society and citizens largely sidelined from meaningful participation or influence.

This report is based on focus group discussions held in Prishtina and Belgrade. Their aim was to engage citizens in developing proposals for normalising Kosovo–Serbia relations. Inspired by citizens' assemblies, participants first received expert input and then discussed potential solutions within the broader context of EU integration. In Kosovo, discussions focused on options such as establishing the Association of Serb-Majority Municipalities (ASM), exploring territorial compromises, or continuing without a resolution. In Serbia, scenarios included de facto or de jure recognition of Kosovo, or maintaining the status quo (not resolving the issue). While the conversations offered valuable insights, methodological limitations of the use of snowball sampling mean the findings are indicative rather than representative and require further research.

The results of the discussion groups reveal the differing expectations each society holds regarding the dialogue process. In Kosovo, participants emphasised the importance of transitional justice and Serbia's acknowledgement of war crimes—issues that were notably absent from the conversations in Belgrade. A shared positive outcome from both groups was the rejection of maintaining the status quo or avoiding dialogue altogether. However, the most desirable outcomes identified—implementing the Association of Serb-Majority Municipalities (ASM) in Kosovo and de facto recognition of Kosovo in Serbia (implementing the Brussels agreement)—were each contingent upon specific guarantees, reflecting ongoing mutual distrust. Kosovo participants called for security assurances such as NATO membership or Serbia’s recognition of Kosovo’s territorial integrity, while Serbian participants emphasised the need to protect the Serbian Orthodox Church and the Serb community in Kosovo, regardless of ASM implementation. A perhaps surprising outcome of the Belgrade focus group (de facto recognition) can be explained by the expert input, which had a particularly strong influence on the discussion, underscoring the future importance of informing citizens before involving them in any decision-making on Kosovo.

This report is produced by Adelina Hasani and Katarina Tadić in the framework of the OSF-WB Alumni Network, funded by Open Society Foundations—Western Balkans. Views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the Open Society Foundations—Western Balkans.