Thewesternbalkans.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s confirmation in Belgrade that Kyiv has not changed its position on Kosovo has triggered criticism in Albania and Kosovo. Speaking at a joint news conference with Serbian President, Zelensky said Ukraine continued to respect what it considers the territorial integrity of its partners. He thanked Serbia for supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity, including Crimea, and said Kyiv’s position on Kosovo remained unchanged.
The first formal response came from Kosovo’s acting foreign minister, Glauk Konjufca, who expressed regret over Zelensky’s reaffirmation of Ukraine’s refusal to recognize Kosovo and placed Kyiv’s position against Kosovo’s record of support since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.
“We note with regret President Zelensky’s statements in Belgrade, where he reaffirmed Ukraine’s non-recognition of the Republic of Kosovo. From the first day of Russia’s full-scale aggression, Kosovo has stood unequivocally with Ukraine. We condemned the invasion, fully aligned with the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, imposed sanctions on Russia and Belarus, provided humanitarian assistance and shelter for Ukrainian journalists, and contributed aid and military training in support of Ukraine’s defence. We did so despite Ukraine’s non-recognition of our state, because solidarity with a people defending its freedom, sovereignty and territorial integrity is a matter of principle,” Konjufca wrote on X.
Konjufca’s intervention gave the dispute an official diplomatic dimension. The reaction in Pristina was also immediate and highly symbolic: municipal authorities removed a large Ukrainian flag and the “Free Ukraine” banner that had been displayed in the centre of the capital for about four years.
Pristina Mayor Perparim Rama announced the decision on social media, saying Kosovo’s statehood must be respected.
The removal of the banner did not amount to a change in Kosovo’s broader support for the Ukrainian people. It was instead a public expression of frustration with what many in Kosovo see as a lack of political reciprocity from Kyiv.
The Albanian government offered a more diplomatic response.
Albania’s Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs welcomed dialogue between Ukraine and Serbia but rejected any comparison between Kosovo’s independence and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.
The ministry argued that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was fundamentally different because it represented a violation of the United Nations Charter and of the international legal order.
The ministry said Albania would continue to stand firmly behind Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and European future. At the same time, it said Albania would defend Kosovo’s sovereignty, independence and rightful place in the Euro Atlantic community.
It also described Kosovo’s independence as an irreversible political reality and said lasting stability in the Western Balkans required its acceptance. Normalization between Kosovo and Serbia, should ultimately lead to mutual recognition and a shared European future.
At the same time, Tirana acknowledged that Zelensky’s visit to Serbia primarily served Ukraine’s national interests. Albania said any step that encouraged Serbia to distance itself from Russian influence and move closer to Europe should be viewed positively. But it also warned that engagement with Belgrade should not come at the expense of Kosovo’s international position.
Comments: Ukraine needs diplomatic support, military supplies, reconstruction partners and wider international engagement. Serbia offers Kyiv practical cooperation while continuing to maintain relations with Russia. For Zelensky, improving ties with Belgrade may serve the immediate interests of a country at war.
For Serbia, the visit offered international legitimacy and allowed Belgrade to reinforce the argument that support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity should be matched by Ukraine’s continued refusal to recognize Kosovo.
For Kosovo, the episode demonstrated that shared experiences of war and occupation do not automatically produce shared diplomatic positions. Kosovo’s political and public support for Ukraine has not yet translated into Ukrainian recognition.
Quite naturally, the Zelensky’s words in Belgrade about Kosovo’s independence are exposing a growing tension between moral solidarity with Ukraine and the political realities facing small states in the Balkans, especially Albania and Kosovo.
The large Ukrainian banners in Pristina and the grand summits organized in Tirana may have demonstrated solidarity with Ukraine. Konjufca’s statement that solidarity could not replace strategic clarity or political realism, became the most senior formal response from Kosovo’s government, while the removal of the banner remained the most visible public gesture. Together, the two reactions combined an official defence of Kosovo’s statehood with a symbolic expression of frustration over the lack of reciprocity from Kyiv.
For some political observers, the problem is also based on Kosovo’s own foreign policy and political leadership. The period after the start of the war, when Ukraine was more dependent on the United States and the administration of President Joe Biden, may have offered Kosovo a stronger opportunity to seek a change in Kyiv’s position. But Kosovo failed to invest enough political capital in building a direct and sustained relationship with Ukraine. That relations could have been developed through Albania, Turkey, Britain and other partners with influence in Kyiv.
Finally – sympathy for the Ukrainian people is likely to remain strong in both Albania and Kosovo. But Zelensky’s statement has made clear that solidarity without recognition can become politically difficult to sustain.
