In Pristina, a three-meter statue of Bill Clinton, sculpted by Izeir Mustafa, has been waving at pedestrians since 2009. Commissioned by the “Friends of America, Friends of Bill Clinton” organization, the sculpture symbolizes the friendly and trustful relationship between Kosovo and the United States, which was solidified after the 1999 NATO intervention against the Milosević regime. The statue is hardly alone. Many streets and boulevards are in fact named after Clinton. However, with the advent of the Trump administration, this relationship appears to have made a significant – if not dramatic – shift.

In December, Kosovo’s Prime Minister, Albin Kurti, expressed his ambition to develop Kosovo’s Security Force (KSF) into a full-fledged army by 2028.
The rush and need for this significant development could presumably derive from the pressures of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and a military build-up across the Balkans. Furthermore, Mimoza Ahmetaj, Kosovo’s former Minister of EU Integration, stated during an interview with Euronews that military force is a fundamental aspect of statehood, still actively challenged by countries that do not recognize it. Serbia on the borders, for instance, poses a persistent threat to its sovereignty to this day. Nonetheless, while Serbia has joined the EU in condemning Russia’s invasion, its reluctance to impose economic sanctions raises concerns about its alignment and the broader regional security implications.
To develop Kosovo’s Security Force (KSF) into a full-fledged army by 2028, plans call for equipping 5,000 active troops and 3,000 reservists with combat helicopters, anti-aircraft rocket systems, and anti-tank systems. These will complement the already acquired Turkish Bayraktar drones and ordered US-made Javelin missiles and Black Hawk helicopters. A domestic ammunition factory will also be established to modernize the KSF and bolster its security capabilities.
Due to the great expenses such a maneuver inevitably implies, the continued support of the West and the United States appears both crucial and realistic as the U.S. had previously provided funding through USAID for various projects aimed at socio-economic development in Kosovo. However, within hours of taking office on January 20, President Donald Trump announced an immediate 90-day freeze on all U.S. foreign assistance, including over $40 billion allocated for international projects through USAID.

Trump has repeatedly criticized this system of foreign aid, calling it a “scam.” This shift in U.S. policy adds significant pressure on Kosovo, where forming a military force is seen as a fundamental step toward statehood. Moscow — Serbian “Big Brother” — is in a priority lane with no counterpart in the negotiation on Ukraine (not even Ukraine itself) with Washington, putting on the negotiation plate the demand for a withdrawal of NATO troops that could imply a potential withdrawal of U.S. troops from Kosovo (This would justify Kosovo’s need for a more independent army rather than relying solely on NATO).
Kosovo will then have no other means to advance its state recognition interests, and it will be pressured by forces that do not recognize it and are increasingly applying pressure. Meanwhile, Serbia will have a polished and clear path ahead.

Sweet talks occurred between the U.S. and Serbia through the voices of United States Secretary of State and acting administrator of USAID, Marco Rubio, and Serbia’s Foreign Minister Marko Đurić. Rubio expressed a desire to “further strengthen the ties of friendship between the American and Serbian people and bring increased security and prosperity to both our nations.” Đurić seemed to find common ground, remarking that the U.S. president was “unjustly accused and found guilty without being guilty.”
Yet, for all this supposed common ground, the irony is striking. On one side, the tycoon was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records related to hush money payments. On the other, Serbia continues to deny responsibility for the genocide in Srebrenica and the multiple massacres carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. If anything, their “shared grievances” seem to be less about truth and more about rewriting history.

Nonetheless, when evaluating the situation, one must consider the numerous unprecedented protests that since November 2024 developed into a real threat to the survival of the Serbian government. From the deadly train station roof collapse in Novi Sad that killed 15 people, the protests have evolved into a broader movement against government corruption, nepotism, and President Aleksandar Vučić’s increasingly authoritarian rule. The protests have already spurred the resignation of high-ranking officials, including Prime Minister Milos Vucevic. Further pressure could lead to additional resignations and a radical change in the government keeping open the issue of ties with the United States which seem to be deeply tied and biased by the personal preferences of the involved actors.

But what about other actors possibly involved? Both the EU and NATO stipulate that the KSF can only evolve into a formal army within the framework of dialogue with Serbia, as outlined in the Brussels Agreement of 2013. Realistically, however, an agreement is far from benign reached and the EU is now in a precautious position with both hands tied and incapable of putting their feet down on the matter. This of course underlines the existential threat posed to Kosovo since, as previously mentioned, it finds itself increasingly vulnerable in a shifting geopolitical landscape.

As Kosovo attempts to solidify its sovereignty through military development, complications continue to build unexpectedly. The relationship with the USA, which found its roots in a past of such relevance that seemed to leave no room for sudden upheavals, now appears to have been violently eradicated by the abrupt change of course of the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Europe’s ability to collectively respond to recent geopolitical crises teeters, leaving Kosovo with the urgent need for greater self-reliance.

Kosovo’s struggle to adapt quickly to these sudden shifts in global dynamics seems to underscore the fragility of the global structures that have so far been taken for granted. Moreover, it further highlights how, in this new era of realpolitik, alliances are increasingly transactional. The race among power-hungry actors – at times seemingly taking on the tones of children throwing tantrums – becomes ever more personalistic, subjective, and unpredictable.

Federica Siena

More Posts