Region: Serbia

Peaceful Change initiative is pleased to present new research, jointly undertaken by the Universities of Belgrade and Prishtina, which explores the current landscape of cross-community initiatives in Serbia and Kosovo. 

The research – which was undertaken as part of the UK-government funded project, ‘Amplifying local voices for equitable development’ – sought to explore two key dimensions. First, the standing of civil society organizations (CSOs) amongst the very constituencies and communities that they claim to represent. Second, the new issues which have mobilized citizens who had not previously been civically engaged, the reasons for why such mobilizations have been successful.

One of the key recommendations deriving from the research is that civil society should continue to promote equality, solidarity, and reciprocity, and to counteract divisive and ethnicized narratives on identity and dealing with the past. As such, civil society organisations should be encouraged to engage with difficult topics and issues that concern communities, and not only foster issues deemed less political in their cross-community initiatives.

As Dr. Jelena Loncar, an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Political Science, University of Belgrade, and one of the research leads, concluded, ‘in Kosovo civil society is more forward looking, more optimistic than in Serbia, with more developed intra- and inter-community co-operation at the local level. On the other hand, in Serbia, the main impression is a lack of hope and motivation for activism, with participants insisting on the lack of expertise, resources and visions of the future. At the same time, we noticed there are emerging youth organisations that give hope that grassroots activism is possible.’

Dr. Vjollca Krasniqi, a Profesor of Sociology, at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Prishtina, who also spearheaded the research, emphasized that, ‘the history of conflict has left a difficult legacy, both in Kosovo and in Serbia, and also for civil society organisations. They have to restore trust – promote tolerance and co-operation – between communities. One important finding is that civil society organisations believe cross-community initiatives are important and relevant to foster inter-ethnic relations, even despite the fact the main narratives remain divided.’

Dr. Orli Fridman, head of the Center for Comparative Conflict Studies at the Faculty of Media and Communications (FMK), Singidunum University, and an advisor on the researcher, added that ‘the strength – even the beauty – of the research is its rich empirical data. There are some excellent quotes from participants demonstrating the presence of the fieldwork itself. As a result, the report reflects a complex and more nuanced reality on the ground, which challenges what is out there in terms of daily discourses.’

The research is available to download from the PCi website by visiting:

For further information about the research, please contact Ian Bancroft (ian.bancroft@peacefulchange.org).

PCi hereby presents in full a joint statement issued by civil society organisations and activists from Serbia and Kosovo laying out a series of calls and commitments that respond to the present context of relations in the region.

Joint Statement of Kosovo and Serbia Civil Society Actors

Witnessing that Kosovo-Serbia relations are not improving despite the ongoing dialogue process, we express our deep concern for the deterioration of the situation on the ground and in the daily lives of citizens. There is a need to safeguard and protect the human rights of minority groups in Serbia and Kosovo.

Concerned that the dialogue is being used to distract from important issues such as the deterioration of the rule of law, corruption, and human rights challenges.

Recognizing contextual differences regarding the levels of democracy, the rule of law, and separation of power, which influence the process of normalisation of relations between Serbia and Kosovo:

We call on the governments of Serbia and Kosovo to:

• continue the dialogue in a substantial and sustainable manner;
• promptly implement already reached agreements;
• refrain from inflammatory rhetoric against minority communities and populist narratives regarding mutual relations and history;
• commit to transparency and ensure civic participation;  
• take prompt measures to develop internal processes of integration;
• respect the rights of minorities; and,
• work on confidence-building measures to bring communities together. 

We call on the International Community:

• to support dialogue and the normalisation agreements that not are not at the expense of democracy in Kosovo and Serbia;
• to focus on substantial solutions instead of resolving daily disputes among the parties in dialogue;
• to support civil society in the wider sense (CSOs, academia, cultural institutions, media, trade unions, etc.);
• to work on normalization and sustainable relations between two parties;
• to foster a wider inter and intra-societal debate  on  possible solutions and priorities in the dialogue.

We commit to:

• further impel substantial and continuous debate between civil society in Serbia and Kosovo;
• exchange information about issues, context and developments in both societies in a timely manner;
• have joint reactions on the alarming issues that deteriorate the situation on the ground and have a detrimental impact on relations between communities;
• keep in focus on-going challenges not being resolved, which are marginalized due to current issues or incidents;
• maintain a space for civil society proactive leadership in creating better relations and improvements in human rights and the everyday lives of citizens;
• recognize differences among processes in Serbia and Kosovo and react in line with those processes asking for steps in the right direction;
• involve other civil society actors for a continuing dialogue among civil societies actors and enable substantial involvement for each and everyone.

Signatories:

1. Advocacy Center for Democratic Culture (ACDC)
2. Advocacy Training and Resource Center (ATRC)
3. Assist Kosovo Center – ASSIST, Prishtinë
4. Belgrade Fund for Political Excellence (BFPE)
5. Belgrade Centre for Security Policy
6. Balkan Policy Research Group
7. Crno-beli svet, Mitrovica North
8. Center for Advocacy and Democratic Development (CADD)
9. Center for Peace and Tolerance (CPT)
10. Centar za regionalizam, Mitrovica
11. Civic Initiatives
12. Council for Human Rights – Bujanovac
13. Democracy Plus (D+)
14. Drita Dibrani, civil society activist
15. European Fund for the Balkans
16. Forum for Development and Multiethnic Collaboration (FDMC)
17. HANDIKOS, Kosovo
18. Independent Initiative for Blind People, Kosovo
19. Institute for Development and Integration (IZHI)
20. Institute for Territorial Economic Development (InTER)
21. Jelena Lončar, Academic, University of Belgrade
22. Kosovo Law Institute (KLI)
23. Kosovo Center for Security Studies (KCSS)
24. Kosovo Democratic Institute (KDI)
25. Leadership and Development (LAD)
26. Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights (YUCOM)
27. Mitrovica Women Association for Human Rights (MWAHR)
28. NGO Advocacy for Society Development (AFSD)
29. NVO “PLEJADA” Prizren
30. NVO Communication for the development of society CSD, Gračanica
31. NGO Aktiv
32. New Social Initiative (Mitrovica)
33. OJQ “Drugëza”
34. OJQ “VISION 02” Istog
35. OJQ Aureola
36. OJQ Qendra e Gruas “ATO” Vushtrri
37. OJQ Roma in Action Gjakovë
38. Open Society Foundation, Novi Sad-Beograd
39. Rahim Salihi, civil society activist, Bujanovac.
40. The Balkan Forum
41. Unioni i Punëtorëve Social të Kosovës
42. Valon Arifi, civil society activist
43. Vjollca Krasniqi, Academic, University of Prishtina
44. Voice of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians (VoRAE)
45. Xhejrane Lokaj, civil society activist
46. Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR) Kosovo
47. Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR) Serbia

PCi’s Amplifying Local Voices for Equitable Development (ALVED) project has been gathering media experts, journalists, editors, civil society and institutions from Kosovo and Serbia in what will eventually be a cycle of eight Media Consultation Dialogues (MCD). Their goal is to bring together media related experts from Kosovo and Serbia who would not normally have a chance to meet and discuss their respective media scenes. The overarching goal is to try and galvanize change in a rather toxic media pool of division and hate speech. The project is funded by the UK Government’s Conflict, Stability and Security Fund (CSSF).

Having tackled a PCi commissioned comprehensive study of the media scenes in Kosovo and Serbia during the first MCD, the second one looked into the media regulatory bodies. The third Media Consultation Dialogue was held online on March 3 2021, and titled “Unpleasant Truths and Unfounded Beliefs”.  The discussion focused on a universally acknowledged belief by all participants that empathy for “the other” is very conspicuous by its absence. Three questions were discussed in detail:

• Why is it so difficult to see the suffering of “the other”?
• What could the Media and the Civil Society do to facilitate reconciling with the past, including reporting on unpleasant truths?
• How could the Media (and possibly the Civil Society) change the current state of affairs?

Just like after every other Media Consultation Dialogue, together with its participants, PCi will draft a set of conclusions and recommendations to be shared with media outlets, civil society and state and international institutions. To access the document entailing the Conclusions and Recommendations click here in English, Albanian and Serbian.

The second Media Consultation Dialogue (MCD) looked closely at the work of the media regulatory bodies in in Kosovo and Serbia since one of the conclusions of the first Media Consultation Dialogue was that their work does not contribute enough to the elimination of hate speech and “othering” in the media.

The Media Consultation Dialogues are an integral part of PCi’s Amplifying Local Voices for Equitable Development – ALVED project. The Dialogues bring together media experts, journalists, editors, civil society representatives and also some institutions that do not usually communicate with each other. Their goal is to engage in constrictive dialogues in areas important for the media in both Kosovo and Serbia.

The Media Consultation Dialogue 2 was held online on February 24 2021 and the focus was on the Media Regulatory Bodies – specifically on the difference between their work as laid down by the law and the difference between the theory and practice of their work. The discussion revolved primarily around:

• How media regulators ensure that public interest is served and what does public interest actually mean?
• What exactly are the differences between the theory and practice?
• How to narrow down those differences and improve the overall media scene in Kosovo and Serbia and help the media play a more constructive part in creating a cohesive and constructive relationship between the two societies?

Further to the Dialogue and consultations with all participants, a set of Conclusions and Recommendations was compiled and in the next few weeks will be shared with local, national, and international institutions that work in strengthening the independence of media in Kosovo and Serbia.

The Conclusions and Recommendations are available in English, Albanian and Serbian language

Peaceful Change initiative held the first of a series of Media Consultation Dialogue, conducted as part of the project: Amplifying Local Voices for Equitable Development. Media Consultation Dialogues look to engage media experts and professionals from a range of backgrounds and who hold different perspectives, to assess different elements of the media scene and propose new approaches to tackling conflict-generating narratives.

The first Dialogue took place over two separate online sessions on 17 November and 1 December 2020. It reflected on findings of a recent study on divisive narratives in the media in Kosovo and Serbia and discussed critical factors that enable unhealthy portrayals of Kosovo and Serbia in one another’s informational space. The discussions proposed:

• Finding ways to give media outlets more and more diverse information about their neighbouring country, to help journalists move past worn-out narratives that dominate the present media space.
• Finding ways to incentivise journalists and media outlets to research, produce and publish different types of stories.
• Pooling resources, so that media representatives receive more information about one another’s societies on a more regular basis.

A summary of the discussions can be found here