By Sydney Booker, MA Media and Strategic Communication, 2021
Kosovo and Serbia have been engaged in a battle of narratives for hundreds of years. In recent years, that battle has entered the world stage. While Serbia holds onto their narrative that Kosovo belongs to Serbia, Kosovo has evolved their narrative from that of a separatist movement to one of peace. To understand the battle of narratives between Kosovo and Serbia, we must first go back to the year 1389 and the origin of the Kosovo myth. The Kosovo myth is the idea that Kosovo is destined to be a part of Serbia due to a divine sacrifice. This originates from the battle of Kosovo between the Ottoman Empire and Christian forces which resulted in the defeat of the Serb-led Christian army and paved the way for the Ottoman empire to take over the Balkans. This was viewed by the Serbs as sacrificing their mortal land in order to gain heavenly entrance.
Serbian President with Bishop Teodosije near Mitrovica, Kosovo
Today, this narrative makes it difficult for Serbia to recognize Kosovo as an independent country. The Kosovo myth has been an underlying part of Serbian narratives for centuries and has not developed through time to meet Kosovo in the present.
Kosovo Serbia War
In the 1990’s, Kosovo and Serbia tensions escalated and ethnic Albanians were opposed to the ethnic Serbs and the Yugoslavian government in Kosovo. In 1996 the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) attacked Serbian police and politicians. By 1998, violence had escalated to an armed uprising and Serbian and Yugoslav forces attempted to reassert control over the region. This conflict led to intervention from the US, Germany, Britain, Italy and Russia. They demanded a cease-fire but the KLA rearmed. Eventually the UN intervened but tensions continued and riots happened into the 21st century. Kosovo narratives during this period were that the independence of Kosovo was the will of the people.
Kosovo Independence Narratives from Kosovo
Kosovoans used the “will of the people” identity narrative to support their master narrative of Kosovo independence. This was demonstrated by Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci in his speech declaring the independence of Kosovo by elected leaders which reflected the will of the people in 2008. Further demonstrating this narrative is a quote in the New York Times that said, “Independence is a catharsis…Things won’t change overnight and we cannot forget the past…” This quote is representative of citizens voicing the narratives of the countries they identify with. The quote represents the hope of a future in a sovereign Kosovo held by the people of an independent Kosovo.
Kosovo Independence Narratives from Serbia
Serbia continued the narrative that Kosovo was a part of Serbia and not independent even after normalization talks led by the UN in 2012. The New York Times quoted a Serbian living in northern Kosovo , “I will stay here forever. This will always be Serbia.” We can again see the continuation of these narratives through statements made by former Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, where he asserted Serbia’s stance on not admitting Kosovo is an independent state ahead of a trip to the mainly Serbian northern Kosovo.
The battling narratives regarding independence of Kosovo can be broken down to Independence is the ‘Will of the people of Kosovo” versus the rights of Serbia to land that they claim is a part of Serbia and will always be. But, we can see that the Kosovo narrative has been more effective on the world stage, as many countries, including the US, also subscribe to the will of the people narrative and have recognized Kosovo as an independent nation.
Role of the US in the Narrative Battle
The US plays an important role in the current narrative battle between Serbia and Kosovo. As a leader of the Western world, the US showed support for Kosovo in 2008 by recognizing the country. During UN proceedings to decide the legality of Kosovo’s independence, US support was necessary as other western nations like Spain refused to support Kosovo’s independence. That support was also crucial for future assistance due to the weak economic conditions in Kosovo that required help from stronger nations.
Recent issues bringing the US into the Serbia-Kosovo narrative battle include President Biden’s letters to Serbia and Kosovo, which used the phrase “mutual recognition”. Furthering these narrative issues between the US and Serbia, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that reaching an agreement between Kosovo and Serbia, focused on mutual recognition, will require flexibility and willingness to compromise. Kosovo agrees with this sentiment but mutual recognition for Serbia would imply that Kosovo was an independent state. Serbia and Kosovo signed economic agreements in 2020 and have continued to follow these agreements but Serbia will not formally recognize Kosovo so as not to legitimize their sovereignty. Despite US statements on wanting more formalized relations and pushing hard steps are necessary to gain European integration, Serbia has not wavered.
Narrative Mistakes
Many of the narrative mistakes between the two countries can be seen on the Serbian side. Serbia has not updated their narratives in order to join in the modern conversation. They have held onto their narrative that Kosovo is destined to be a part of Serbia, while the people of Kosovo have demonstrated that the “will of the people” narrative is far more effective, especially on the world stage. The US has been used by both countries to further their issue narratives but the US has continued to keep their narrative of peace between the countries as the best way to move forward, both for stability in the Balkans and for EU membership. But, this narrative has required the US to play both sides of the issue and has led to some mistakes, as was seen in President Biden’s letter to Serbia. Kosovo has evolved their narratives from a separatist movement before independence to a country that is fighting for sovereignty and an entrance to the world stage, while being bullied by Serbia and its ally, Russia. This narrative has played effectively and played into larger issues between the US and Russia.
In the narrative battle between Kosovo and Serbia, there is no clear victor. But, we can evaluate the effectiveness of some narratives and the failures of others that have been used. Kosovo has been more successful in the narrative battle because of their ability to adapt their narrative to target the strongest allies. If a country is to win the battle, they will have to make sacrifices that will go against what they have presented and what each country believes is in their best interest.
For an in-depth analysis by the author on the subject, Click Here.
The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.
Sydney: You did a great job boiling down this very complicated issue. I was personally fascinated by this concept of the “Kosovo myth.” It clearly demonstrates the power of a well-established master narrative, even if it’s deemed a myth! I also appreciated the dichotomy you presented between this old, ingrained narrative and Kosovo’s evolving one. It really illustrates for other countries that narratives can and should change to fit our increasingly globalized world.
This was a good presentation and analysis of a long, complex problem. I think it was important you showcased and contrasted both narratives because it contextualizad the issue of mutual recognitions. Based on your article, it seems clear that the narrative of Serbia will not be changing anytime soon. Interesting article!
Sydney,
I found your analysis of a very complex issue to be extremely well written, and a clear and concise explanation of the historical perspective of both sides. You were able to convey the information in a way that it was easily understood without imposing your own perspective. The impact of the narrative supported by the opposing sides is even more relevant today and is critical to any political communication strategies for the future of this area of the world.
Adaptation of narratives is critical to their success over time. I appreciate that you pointed out the evolution of the Kosovo (Albanian) narrative over time as they changed from a insurgent group to the rulers of a new state. Serbia has a far more moderate tone and restrained narrative compared to what the Milosevic government was putting out in the 1990s, but it has not evolved to the same degree as the Kosovars. Perhaps the US policy of not fully endorsing either narrative will help preserve stability on the ground.
I was previously not very familiar with the narrative history behind the Serbia and Kosovo relationship, but upon reading your blog I can now see so many similarities within the Israeli/Palestinian issue (my blog’s focus) and the deep-rooted history (even if some of it is mythical in the case of Kosovo/Serbia) that informs present-day relationships. I thought the images you utilized helped to advance your battle of narratives theme, specifically the one with the Serbian President and Bishop walking defiantly towards the camera, through the snow, almost as if they were walking into what would be a difficult battle.
I found your analysis of Kosovo’s changing independence narratives and the positive impact of that shift interesting, as it demonstrates the power of tapping into identity and system narratives. As Kosovo demonstrated its willingness to support democratic processes like elections, the U.S., which values democracy domestically and supports democratization within the global system, provided Kosovo with crucial support. However, as you focus on how Kosovo’s narratives have evolved and garnered support from the U.S. and international allies, I’d be interested to hear more about your thoughts on how Serbia should be evolving its narratives to bolster its standing in time for inevitable negotiations and compromise.
Firstly, thanks for the insight into such a difficult dispute. It is the first time that I understand where the Serbian claim comes from. I found it interesting how a country that still upholds some sort of monarchy (which used the “God-given right” narrative to establish it) supports the country that also gets its claims from a “divine” narrative. Furthermore, the blog did a great job to present how the United States pushes for the recognition of Kosovo as a sovereign country, aligning its master and identity narratives with its system narratives. Nonetheless, it made me think about how the United States still having territories not incorporated, denying the people’s will in said territories.
It would be nice to further explore how is justified the support for the Serbian claim in countries like Russia and Spain.
As someone unfamiliar with this area of the world, you did a great job explaining the issue at hand. It’s fascinating to see master narratives that stem so far back in history. The evolution of Kosovo’s narrative is very interesting and I can see how being tied to the Kosovo myth has hampered the evolution of the Serbian narrative.
Reading Ms. Booker’s blog reminded me of a quote by George Orwell in his novel, 1984, “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” The history of the world is filled with concept of controlling the narrative and the information provided certainly attests to that view. The blog lays out in concise manner who the Kosovo/Serbian control of information has been imperative to motivating initiatives, public opinion, and their success or failure over the centuries. For those interested in a brief history of the conflict, I would recommend the blog without reservation. Juan B.
Sydney, thanks for writing this superb piece. You provided perhaps the best evidence as to how powerful and long-lasting master narratives are, as exemplified by the Kosovo myth. What do you think each side will have to do and what kind of narratives they will have to deploy to decisively tilt the scale in their favor? What new narratives or master narratives can Serbia deploy to turn the tide? Can Serbia draw upon Russia and its narratives to work in Serbia’s favor?
Interesting that Kosovo has evolved their narrative and has been more strategic in focusing on strong allies whereas Servia has clung to their traditional view. Woodrow Wilson advocated self-determination the Balkans in his 11th point and apparently the U.S. is still struggling to actualize the concept.
Great analysis! I see many similar narrative challenges between Kosovo and Palestine (although Kosovo’s approach proved much more effective), especially being reliant on international support and tailoring their narratives accordingly. However, I think Serbia benefits from the “both-sides” narratives which indirectly frames Kosovo and Serbia as equal parties who are both blamed for historical atrocities. I think this makes it harder for Kosovo to frame this as a “David vs Goliath” to the international community.
I appreciate your focus on historical context at the beginning. Often times, important historical context is sacrificed or framed in certain ways that skew the direction of the piece. I think the splintering of Yugoslavia and the NATO bombings are also important historical context. While the US may have recognized Kosovo’s sovereignty and given aid, this is not done out of the goodness of the US government’s heart. There is a geopolitical goal in mind. The US was a part of the NATO bombings which killed civilians and there is a big debate about whether or not this intervention was necessary in the first place. I’d be interested to read more about the battle of narratives between pro-intervention and anti-intervention. This has major implications for the current battle of narratives you lay out.